Townhall.com posted an article on April 15 (2012) titled, “The Truth About Mormonism.” The article is a basic rehash covering some social aspects of Mormonism that are sometimes misunderstood/misrepresented in the media. Nothing much in the article caught my attention, but as I skimmed through the comments one jumped out at me.
For longtime Mormon Coffee readers this topic might bring a yawn. But because many folks are newer readers, and others are just passing through, this is a topic (in my opinion) worth binging up from time to time.
Last week I spoke with many Mormons as I handed out literature in front of the Kansas City Mormon temple during its public open house. One criticism I heard often from the Latter-day Saints was, “We don’t stand in front of your church and hand out critical literature.” Whenever I hear this complaint, my first thought is, “In light of the missionary movements of the early Christians as chronicled in the book of Acts, why don’t you?” But I don’t usually express this out loud. I usually answer with a recounting of Joseph Smith’s First Vision, which often leaves my LDS friend in quiet contemplation.
It should come as no surprise to me after all these years, yet I’m still astounded when I hear or read something like what Townhall.com commenter philbryson wrote.
“Thank you, Mr. Smoot [the Townhall.com journalist], for a fair article not based on motives to condemn an important, rapidly growing religion. The rapid growth has stimulated a lot of opposition from the insecure. Our growth is not based on attacking other religions, but on the desire to share our beliefs with others.”
Okay. Let’s talk about Joseph Smith’s First Vision. According to Joseph Smith, in answer to a prayer, God the Father and His Son appeared to Joseph:
“My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
“I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.’” (Joseph Smith—History 1:18-19)
Mr. philbryson (and others) believe that Mormonism is persecuted by “insecure” people of other faiths who are somehow less virtuous than members of the Mormon faith who would not dream of challenging or criticizing (“attacking”) other religions. Apart from the fact that challenging false religions and beliefs is biblical, the idea that Mormonism/Mormons do not criticize other churches is just plain wrong.
Mormonism’s very existence is predicated upon the LDS teaching that all non-Mormon churches are wrong; all non-Mormon creeds are an abomination before God; and all people who profess these beliefs are corrupt. That is talking about my church. That is talking about your church. That is talking about my faith and your faith. Unless, of course, you belong to “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth” (Doctrine and Covenants 1:30), identified by the Mormon religion as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Somehow, Mormons have gotten it into their heads that Christians who stand up and say, “Wait a minute,” are “insecure” and are lashing out at the LDS Church without reason. These Mormons do not recognize the historic and ongoing LDS criticism of all other faiths that emanates from Mormonism: brought door-to-door by Mormon missionaries; declared unabashedly in LDS scripture; taught from Mormon pulpits; and proclaimed in Church magazines and manuals. As much as Mormons would like to think otherwise, LDS Church growth is “based on attacking other religions.” Mormons cannot share the heart of their religion without attacking others. It is at the very foundation–the very formation–of the Mormon Church. Those who are the targets of these flaming darts are both obligated and justified to respond with truth (Ephesians 6:14-20; Jude 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:24-26; Ephesians 4:14-15).
WOW fred!
You are sure a scholar!
fred who calls General Conference? Some mere man sitting in a very expensive office, on a very expensive chair, with a very expensive conference room, in a very tall expensive building in downtown Salt Lake City. From his lofty perch this Emperor of Mormonism receives his fellow leaders who have no understanding of the Scripture but trust their immortal souls to the teachings of a man with a magic rock in his hat. Yea this is soooooooo much better. This Emperor of Mormonism holds sway not only on the false religious cult he leads, but also the political and economic state of affairs of his realm. The mother’s milk of Mormonism is $$$$$$$$$$$. It’s all about power and money!
Yup and I can tell you are a real student of the Bible. So what does the Bible teach us about who Jesus is and what does it mean that we will be like Him? I think you need to study hard to find the truth fred. I could tell you but I think it’s better if you learn this on your own. Hint: stay away from Mormon sources they’ll just regurgitate what you already want to believe.
Hi Fred,
I read your post where you quoted Irenaeus. How much time have you spent reading Irenaeus or any of the other Christian church fathers? I would point your attention to the title of Irenaeus’ work: “Against Heresies.” Any cursory amount of time reading Irenaeus will clearly reveal that what Mormonism teaches is what Irenaeus condemns. I could give you quote after quote after quote from Irenaeus where his teachings from Scripture would have Mormons screaming in horror because of their teachings received from Joseph Smith. You see, Fred, Mormonism wasn’t around back when Irenaeus was alive. However, the false teachings that Mormonism embraces were also embraced by other heretics who were caught up in heretical movements at that time under different names: Arianism, Sabellianism, Gnosticism, etc.
Fred, you have twisted the words of Irenaeus in trying to make him say something that he did not. He wasn’t implying that Jesus did all that He could so we could become deity (God) like He is. Let me offer you one verse just to make things simple here that pretty well sum up the Scripture teaching Irenaeus had in mind. It’s 2 Cor 5:21.
“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.”
Jesus took on a human nature at the incarnation. He became a human being with flesh and a human nature suffering all of our temptations while having to live the law of God perfectly. Christ did this perfectly and fully. In the atonement Christ took the sin debt of His people and suffered the Father’s wrath in their place. His elect, in turn, receive the righteousness of Christ imputed to them therefore declaring them not guilty and righteous to the Father.
Thanks Andy!
I always appreciate your scholarship and manner of cutting to the bottom line.
Who Jesus is, is the critical question that must be answered. Calling someone Jesus and even describing Him as “the Savior” is meaningless if His true nature isn’t realized.
The heretics attacked the nature of Our Lord, trying to make Him into someone less than who He is. These folks have always been devoted to an idea, a concept, but not to the Son of God as He is. Even the designator, “Son of God” is miss-applied and not fully comprehended.
The truth of the Gospel is that there is One God, immortal, eternal, everlasting, and never changing. God’s Word, has Him saying that He knows of no other gods. He’s it! Men are not going to morph themselves into being gods. This is the blasphemous teachings of a religion that while being devout, sincere and oriented to good behavior, is wearing a mask.
Taking off the mask would expose the hideous element of a religion that sees fit to put Jesus in its name, but don’t know who He is.
Falcon
Honest question. Your above post to Fred discussing “The Emperor of Mormonism” reminded me a bit of some Anti-Catholic articals I have read. As a former Catholic would you describe the Pope in a similer manor? If not what would you say to the people that would?
Note: I ask the question under the assumption that you do believe Catholicism is a saving faith that leads to Christ and that while none of is knows anyone’s heart the Pope may very well be saved. Forgive me if I have assumed incorrectly.
falcon,
I was thinking the same thing about the “emperor” of Mormonism while I was reading fred’s posts. Not only does the conference thing happen, but what about collecting money from people before they can enter into those very expensive temples, all decked out in riches? What about the money that exchanges hands in the temples? Is that of God? No LDS can enter any of the temples without paying the money. Personally I don’t think God makes us pay money to fully participate in the true body of Christ. Why would he? It’s all his anyways. Jesus says to be a cheerful giver, he doesn’t say that you have to pay a certain amount of money to be able to enter Heaven (live with God). He certainly doesn’t require us to meet at the end of every year to do a settlement. I know the LDS probably think that tithing settlement is just to get them ready for taxes or something, but it’s really to see how much tithing you are paying and to make sure you have paid enough, or I mean a “full tithe.” I have heard so many Mormons over the years complain about how much tithing they paid and how they could have bought a car or gone on vacation. Is that really being a “cheerful giver?”
Why wouldn’t God have divinely directed the council to be called? Is he not capable of it? Funny how this is so outlandish to a Mormon, yet their founder put a plain old rock in his hat, shoved his face into the hat, and brought forth a new religion, claiming it was from God! This just floors me. I wonder how many Mormons there are that don’t know this is what happened. I didn’t know while LDS.
Well TJay,
You’ve just thrown me a big soft ball that I’d like to hit out of the park. I could write a fifty or one hundred page paper on this topic.
Think about this for a moment. What does the Mormon church claim for itself? Yes I know, the one true church but take it further. Does this sound familiar: “The Church is perfect, but the people aren’t”. The Mormon faithful have a love affair with “the church”.
I run into this romantic fling that people have with their religious “church” in all sorts of denominations. As you pointed out I was raised Catholic and was/am very familiar with the hierarchy, the politics, the history and the corruption of the Papacy through out the ages.
I was tooling down the interstate one time and hit the Catholic radio network. There was an interesting discussion going on and the presenters, all very Catholic, were really nailing some of the corrupt popes. These are Catholics, not lapsed ones like me, and they were historians of the church. Their conclusions were that despite the corrupt popes and I guess the system that resulted, the Holy Spirit always preserved the elements of faith that were most important.
Bottom line for me is that the Catholic church is very political, just like all religious organizations. They are also steeped in tradition that goes back to the first century church. I don’t think the Catholic church is the Whore of Babylon. I’ve reconciled myself to a lot of what bugs me about the Catholic church. I could never be Catholic again because I just don’t agree with some of the theology. But I also have an appreciation of some of what’s there especially the writings of some of the theologians going back to Augustine.
These were bright people.
Falcon said, “Well TJay, You’ve just thrown me a big soft ball that I’d like to hit out of the park.”
Well I figure you deserve at least one a month… 🙂
To clarify what I got from your answer was that while you feel the Catholic faith has some theological problems Catholicism and it’s current leadership (and indeed many of it’s former leaders back to the first century) aren’t corrupt, leading people from God or trying to take over the world with the iluminate and that people who do believe any of those things are off.
Thanks for your insight.
TJay,
For fun I did a google search with the words “Bruce McConkie catholic church”. There’s quite a bit out there. I thought you’d find this interesting.
In the book “Mormon Doctrine” a Mormon Apostle’s explained common LDS doctrine concerning the Catholic Church:
“It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this ‘church which is the most abominable above all other churches’ in vision. He ‘saw the devil that he was the foundation of it’ and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been a part of this satanic organization. (1 Nephi 13:1-10)”
– Mormon Doctrine, p. 130 (1958)
Rumor has it, that the Catholic Bishop of the Salt Lake area placed a phone call to the Mormon “prophet” concerning McConkie’s description of the Catholic church. McConkie, despite the fact that he was known as the “go to guy” for the Mormon leadership on matters of doctrine, kind of fell out of favor. Bill Mckeever of MRM says he misses McConkie.
You wrote:
“……while you feel the Catholic faith has some theological problems Catholicism and it’s current leadership (and indeed many of it’s former leaders back to the first century) aren’t corrupt, leading people from God or trying to take over the world with the iluminate and that people who do believe any of those things are off.”
Yea, I’d say that’s a pretty accurate reflection of what I said and believe. I don’t have much use for the leadership that allowed pedophile priests to continue their abuse while sweeping it under the rug. No excuse for that or for other churches that did the same.
So Tjay,
How about this? The Catholic church isn’t perfect, but it does a lot of good.
Falcon said
“Yea, I’d say that’s a pretty accurate reflection of what I said and believe…
So Tjay, How about this? The Catholic church isn’t perfect, but it does a lot of good.”
Fine by me. While I have a sizeable minority of family that are Catholic I don’t actually know any “lapsed Catholics” personally, so I was interested to hear your thoughts.
TJay,
As I’ve said on several occasions, I believe the “Church” is the Mystical Body of Christ comprised of all born again believers in Jesus Christ. God can see it, but I can’t, nor do I think anyone else is able to.
For example, I believe that you, if you became born again by the Spirit of God through faith in Jesus Christ would be a member of the “Church” as I’ve defined it. Now the caveat here is that a person can only become born again by the Spirit of God if their faith is placed in Jesus, not some false Christ. Only the authentic Christ can give spiritual birth to someone.
I’m really not that concerned, nor do I think God is, about where someone attends Church services, to a degree.
For example, I explained that lately I’ve been attending a type of a Lutheran church. This past Sunday I actually preached at another type/form of Lutheran church. Years ago, I served as the pastor of an independent Congregational church (in addition to my “real” job). I also served for a short period of time as the pastor of a small independent Charismatic/Pentecostal church. I got married in an Episcopal church…….way too long a story.
My point is that while Mormons, like fred for example, get all worked-up regarding the “true” church, I don’t believe that one exists apart from the Mystical Body of Christ. That’s why I can peacefully coexist with Believers regardless of where they go to church or if they don’t attend any.
Do you know what Christian denominations the (Christian) posters here belong to? No! Why? We don’t care. We understand that it’s all about Jesus, who He is, what He did on the cross and how our lives are to be transformed/conformed by the Holy Spirit.
Andy Watson says: – April 24, 2012 at 7:44 am –(How much time have you spent reading Irenaeus or any of the other Christian church fathers? I would point your attention to the title of Irenaeus’ work: “Against Heresies.”); (Fred, you have twisted the words of Irenaeus in trying to make him say something that he did not.)
When you read the teachings of those against Mormonism please remember to use the same standard on what they say. When something is taken out of context and twisted it can be used to look like something it is not.
fred
Fred, you still are in denial concerning the early Christian creeds. Your attempt to use
Constantine in the way you do is silly , he arrived far to late on the scene to create
christian doctrine . Are you using him to divert attention away from proving the claims of
Mormonism to be the sole true church , the New Testament church of Jesus Christ ?
The way you’re going about using the creeds and Constantine is not looking good on
you , so get back on track . Prayer for you continues . God stands ready to help you
to make the transition from following false apostles over to spiritual liberty in Christ.
You can do it .
{Part 1 of 2}
falcon says: – April 24, 2012 at 11:04 am – (In the book “Mormon Doctrine” a Mormon Apostle’s explained common LDS doctrine concerning the Catholic Church: ); (Mormon Doctrine, p. 130 (1958))
I see you are happy to follow those who only teach half-truths.
McConkie was not an Apostle when he wrote the first addition of Mormon Doctrine; he was made an Apostle in 1972.
McConkie was called on the carpet for making the statements in the book and a second addition was publishes in 1966.
For those who want more:
+++++++++++++++++
Bruce R. McConkie is credited with promoting the idea within the modern church that the “great and abominable church” was in fact the Roman Catholic Church. The first edition of McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine, a book which contained sufficient errors that the First Presidency declared that the book was “not approved as an authoritative book”[5] and that it should not be re-published, contained this rather direct statement:
It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this ‘church which is the most abominable above all other churches’ in vision. He ‘saw the devil that he was the foundation of it’ and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been a part of this satanic organization.[6]
{Part 2of 2}
When the first edition of Mormon Doctrine went into widespread circulation, the idea that the “great and abominable church” was the Catholic Church became embedded in popular belief, despite the fact that this idea was never sanctioned or preached over the pulpit. A second edition of Mormon Doctrine was eventually released with the offending language regarding the Roman Catholic Church removed. In the second edition, McConkie states:
The titles church of the devil and great and abominable church are used to identify all churches or organizations of whatever name or nature — whether political, philosophical, educational, economic social, fraternal, civic, or religious — which are designed to take men on a course that leads away from God and his laws and thus from salvation in the kingdom of God. [7]
This statement more closely aligns with what the scriptures themselves say, without any additional interpretation. Modern church leaders have stayed close to the definition in the Book of Mormon, by identifying the “great and abominable” church as any organization the leads people away from the Church of Jesus Christ.
Foot notes:
5.[note] Dennis B. Horne, Bruce R. McConkie: Highlights From His Life & Teachings (Eborn Books, 2000)
6.[note] Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1958).
7.[note] Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 760
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Great_and_abominable_church
fred,
Old Brucie got spanked by the other boys in the club. Here he is one day the major poh bah when it comes to Mormon doctrine and the next he’s the crazy uncle living in the attic with Brigham Young.
Oh, I’m so glad you linked to “fair” that stellar organization of great independent thought.
You need to study hard to learn the truth fred. Now you just need to get a hold of some reliable sources of information.
Fred, I’m not sure what you were trying to prove with your referencing Mormon authority
Bruce McConkie , but I’m glad to see you cite him . He was one of the last Mormon authorities
who was not as PR oriented as most of those that taught Mormon doctrine after him. At any
rate what you cited about him is interesting and I see this : he is credited with LDS
embracing the belief that the Catholic Church was the church of the devil, so this belief
was the spiritual witness of multitudes of faithful LDS, and why not since they believed the
witness that confirmed it to McConkie to teach it,right? But then the F.P. determined that the
language he used was too “offensive ” , so they told him to change it . Interestingly, but though
the specific language was changed ,was the belief ? It then became accurate in the heart and mind
of many LDS instead of on the printed page . So modern leaders chose to stay close to the BofM
in interpretating this definition but did’nt some past leaders promise this also ? So “modern”
leaders have to refraim from being as open about it since McConkie’s slap on the hand by
the F.P.? This appears only to be another example of Mormon leadership’s effort to seek
an image of the Church that could fit in more with the rest of Society , so unless there was a public
apology by McConkie for this teaching being false doctrine , and by Mormon leaders before him
who taught it , then the slap on the hand by the F.P. over the book “Mormon doctrine” was just
for the camera’s .
Hay Mike,
Did you ever notice that the Mormon church ended up patterning itself after the Catholic church. Both have a priesthood, both have bishops, both have a leadership group at the top i.e. Quorum of 70, College of Cardinals, and finally both have one man at the top a Pope and a prophet. The prophet in Mormonism speaks for the Mormon god and the pope speaks for God also to the faithful.
Now the major difference of course is that when it comes to the basic doctrines of Christianity the Catholic church is pretty much down the line whereas Mormonism goes why out in left field with different gods etc. etc.
I have to agree with Fred on this one. I don’t see how McConkie’s belief that Catholocism being the Whore of Babalon or the Church of the Devil is really an issue. But I’m just a dumb kid, so what do I know.
Falcon, that’s interesting but I’m still trying to figure out why Fred keeps resorting to rabbit
trails in order to avoid the $ 64,000 question : Can we trust the claim by Mormon apostles
that Jesus’ gospel of salvation was lost and then restored by God thru them in 1830 ? Is their
gospel the same or is it a case of Gal. 1 :8-9 ? I mean now he’s using Constantine as some way
of argument . What’s next ?
TJay,
It all goes back to Joseph Smith and his many and varied renditions of his “first vision”. Remember that in one of the on-going and constantly updated versions, what one of the “personages” told him re. “abomination” regarding the Christian religions of the time? McConkie picked up on this theme and went after the Catholic church. Remember the scene that used to be played out in the Mormon temple with Satan and the Christian preacher? This is the topic being discussed here as I understand it.
There’s also some “inside baseball” political intrigue going on that I think should give pause to the faithful Mormon regarding the “truth” claims of the Mormon church. It appears that these very spiritual men at the top had trouble wrapping their brains around McConkie and controlling him. It’s instructive that there was a generation of Mormons who clung to McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine tome like it came from the mouth of the Mormon god.
I think if the average dedicated Mormon had the veil pulled back and they saw the inside political moves going on in the Mormon leadership/hierarchy, they’d have to seriously evaluate the “spiritual” nature of the boys at the top. These guys are good at running the business of Mormon Inc. and spouting meaningless platitudes that have a spiritual sound to them.
That’s why as Christians we are constantly taking Mormons back to the cross and understanding who Jesus is and what He did there i.e. the significance of the redemptive act by God on the part of sinful mankind. Knowing who Jesus is and what He did, coming to an understanding of the spiritual significance of both, will cause Mormonism to melt away.
Fred stated: “When you read the teachings of those against Mormonism please remember to use the same standard on what they say. When something is taken out of context and twisted it can be used to look like something it is not.”
Fred, the issue that is being discussed here is the reference you made in your post: Irenaeus – not any other writer. I can only assume that this is a self-admission that you twisted the context of Irenaeus’ words and inserted your own LDS presuppositional apologetic in a blind attempt to somehow make a point for other writers that you perceive to be unfriendly to the LDS agenda. As I stated, Irenaeus was no friend to the heresies of his day that Mormons today have incorporated into their belief system. I would urge you to be more cautious and discretionary about quoting people that you are not familiar with not having read their writings. A “backfire” is not only unpleasant to the ears, it is also unpleasant to the reader resulting in loss of credibility.
Andy;
Try reading him with an eye to what his views on what your main stream churches are teaching. And remember, that is churches with an “s”. I left PROTESTantism because I wondered why my friends in other PROTESTant groups were being taught different things then I was being taught and I started looking to find the reason.
And this nonsense about “Bible based churches”, I know I have only samples some, but the teachings differed according to what the pastor of the congregation believes God was saying. As is taught here, you can shop for a “Bible based church” that agrees with you. You can believe anything you want and you can find it. At least with a church that belongs to a denomination you know what to expect when you visit them.
As to “Church Fathers”, as I read different ones I see that they were all over the map with their own ideas as to what God meant.
And yes, I used a sound bite to see if anyone here really studied like they say they do. You will notice that the noisy ones did not bother to check it out.
fred
TJay, falcon; – (The Catholic church isn’t perfect, but it does a lot of good.” ______ Fine by me.)
You give me hope that ya’ll will someday change ya’ll minds on Mormonism like ya’ll have done on Catholics. I remember what my PROTESTant church leaders said about that no good cult of a Catholic Church and how Kennedy should not be president because he was one of them Catholics.
fred
fred,
I think you’re going to have to pick-up on my use of absurdity when I write. The comment about the Catholic church was a take-off and tongue in cheek poke at one of the favorite fall back positions of Mormons when it comes to the Mormon church.
You really seem stuck on this one true church business and some sort of odd notion about different theological positions taken by various Christian denominations. That’s a big “so what”! The basics are all the same. I don’t much care if people argue about the details. I find it stimulating.
One thing I’ve learned in my time on MC is the total inconsistency of Mormonism, what it teaches and what it means.
Take our buddy TJay for example. There are days when I don’t even recognize him as a Mormon. He appears as some hybrid version of different thoughts and beliefs rolled into some form of religion that makes him comfortable (with Mormonism). TJay isn’t unique within Mormonism.
Again I ask you, why are there so many brands/sects of Mormonism? They all have a prophet who speaks for the Mormon god. They are all the one true church. They all have the “real” revelation.
You are terribly misled and confused not only about basic Christian doctrine but what has and does go on inside Mormonism itself. Mormon prophets have been all over the block on matters of doctrine and practice. The current Mormon game is to call all of the changes “folklore”.
You really have trouble grasping the obvious. Mormonism has yet to conclude what the “truth” is even as far as Mormonism is concerned. Even your own beloved BoM has been changed and altered and doesn’t resemble the work that Smith pulled out of his hat by use of his magic rock.
fred,
It’s pretty funny that you just cannot tolerate what you see as inconsistencies and ambiguity in Christianity, while you totally ignore the same thing in Mormonism.
You are blind to reality.
That’s why you can’t answer questions, most often provide nothing but one-line posts and ignoring what I would guess is uncomfortable for you.
Cults are really good at claiming “the truth” and having all the definitive answers. It seems to me that you would have been a good candidate for any cult. You would have been at home with the Jehovah Witnesses, the Moonies, the Children of God or any other group that tripped your trigger. It just happened that you swerved into Mormonism.
But the bottom line is that you seem to have ready made excuses for the glaring holes in Mormonism; it’s doctrine, history and practices.
Let’s face it. You like Mormonism. It trips your trigger.
At least be honest with yourself regarding its true nature.
Mormonism doesn’t have the answers. It has the answers that fit your narrative.
falcon says: – April 26, 2012 at 6:13 am – (I think you’re going to have to pick-up on my use of absurdity when I write. The comment about the Catholic church was a take-off and tongue in cheek poke)
Then you believe that the Catholic Church is a cult?
Protestants in the 50s and 60s did.
fred
So I think we’ve pretty much identified fred’s issue.
On-the-one-hand he charges Christian denominations with confusion because of a variety of opinions on religious dogma. He found that disconcerting and he went on a quest to find the one true church that could alleviate his concerns and frustrations.
Interestingly enough he chose Mormonism as the answer to all his confusion because they bill themselves as the one true church with prophets and apostles that speak for god “today”. “Today” would be defined as any particular era/generation since the founding of Mormonism by Joseph Smith.
What I find curious is that fred is blind to the huge credibility problems within Mormonism, it’s founder and subsequent prophets and apostles. Some how fred has reconciled all the problems in Mormonism because he believes it (Mormonism) is true blue.
Observe fred’s thinking process. The Mormon church is true, the Mormon apostles and prophets are true and speak for the Mormon god, therefore there aren’t any discrepancies; because it’s true.
The reason fred can’t apply the same reasoning to Christianity is because he doesn’t believe it’s true. If fred would use the same thinking process to say the Catholic church, he’d be Catholic. The Catholic church was established by Jesus who anointed Peter as the first leader i.e. apostle/prophet so it’s God’s one true church.
What about the Catholic church straying from “the truth” and becoming corrupt? Well what about Joseph Smith straying from the Mormon truth? Smith is seen by other sects of Mormonism as a fallen prophet. The SLC denomination of Mormonism is seen as “fallen” by the FLDS as well as the other sects.
Sounds like a lot of confusion within Mormonism to me.
So how can fred justify all of this? It’s simple. fred likes SLC Mormonism. It works for him. Ignoring the obvious is easy.
Falcon said, “Take our buddy TJay for example. There are days when I don’t even recognize him as a Mormon.”
It’s because I’m not really Mormon. I’m actually a Zoroastrian that’s sympathetic to Mormons. I just keep posting here to annoy you. 🙂
TJay,
Yea, I can buy that you are a Zorastrian. I forgot what it was so I did a quick search and reviewed the beliefs. I can see how you ended up there from Mormonism. I hope fred doesn’t know where you live or you can bet you’ll be getting a visit from the boys.
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/zoroastrianism/beliefs.asp
Now fred,
There you go again with the off-the-wall one line posts. I really, as usual, have no idea what you are talking about.
You’re posts continually expose you for being shallow and having limited knowledge. I would say that the posts are meant to just toss a bomb to take the discussion some where off of the topic.
Bottom line; Mormonism can’t stand up to scrutiny and you are unable to defend it.
Based on your performance of this blog, I can see how you ended up a Mormon. You are perfect cult material. That is, limited knowledge and a willingness to follow anyone who claims to have the answer, the truth. You are what is known as prey to these groups.
Study hard to find the truth fred.
I will continue to pray for you.
Falcon;
You sure do add to your knowlage about me by adding things you think should be; and then you teach that as if it were true. It is a bad habit for you to teach untruths about me.
++++++++++
(What I find curious is that fred is blind to the huge credibility problems within Mormonism, it’s founder and subsequent prophets and apostles. Some how fred has reconciled all the problems in Mormonism because he believes it (Mormonism) is true blue.)
(The reason fred can’t apply the same reasoning to Christianity is because he doesn’t believe it’s true.)
Christianity is true; it is parts of your version that are false.
I know that there are some things that must be taken on faith alone. There are also many things that are backed up by original documents and testimonies that are countered by other original documents and testimonies. It is often hard to decide which person’s conclusions were most accurate.
Because I fear this post would be pulled if I posted some of the unreconciled problems with all of Christianity (including the nontraditional Christian Mormons), I would share some original document ideas that show Jesus was not the Christ. I fear that your witness is not strong enough to face the kinds of questions you place on Mormonism when the questions are against our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ.
fred
Falcon, when you said to Fred , ” You are terribly misled and confused not only about basic
Christian doctrine but what has and does go on inside Mormonism itself. Mormon prophets
have been all over the block on matters of doctrine and practice .” Your assessment here
of Fred and Mormon leaders is spot on . I’m glad Fred left ” PROTESTantism ” , unfortunately
he was then detoured into embracing the counterfeit gospel of Mormonism. It’s the image that
the Mormon PR dept advertises that hooks most people. It promises to be free of the errors
of all other Churches, errors such as “paid ministers” ; lack of God’s direct supervision which
has led to altering the gospel that Jesus directed His apostles to preach, confusion over what
ordinances to perform and how to perform them . These are used as “proof” by Mormons that
it is the one true Church whose apostles are actively supervised by Jesus to teach correctly His
gospel truth and practice . Yet beneath the surface of this slick advertising there exists the fact
that Mormon leaders have been guilty of many of these same errors that they’ve accused all the
churches of ! Of course most people are never aware of this , they only see the exterior face
Mormonism wants to publically portray so they join. You mentioned that we’ve run into all
kinds of LDS here , and you’re right . There’s TJayT, who among other things, is’nt completely
sold on a official and foundational doctrine of Mormonism — the existence of Heavenly Mother.
Then there’s Clyde …. [ cont]
[cont]
Clyde said that he does’nt really have time to bother thinking much about Heavenly Mother
since Jesus and Heavenly Father occupy his thinking etc. This is a tiny example of what is
likely a iceberg , i.e. what many Mormons really believe vrs what they publically confess
lies hidden beneath in their hearts and minds. Being a good Mormon is’nt easy since to
verbally question their prophet’s counsel on what he says is spiritual truth is to invite God’s
judgement on their lives and place their salvation in peril . The seeds of personal apostasy
can happen when an individual starts to contemplate that his/her leaders are not providing
accurate guidance in teaching certain spiritual truths. Thankfully many Mormons are seeing
the truth about their leadership being not reliable guides , and are dismissing them from their
lives . These Mormons are finding that a simple dynamic life of knowing Jesus is what they were
longing for before they were detoured into Mormonism , so they’re turning to the source of
spiritual truth relative to knowing about Jesus and eternal life —- the teachings of the true
apostles that Jesus actually did direct to spread His gospel . These beautiful truths contained
in the New Testament have been sufficient for anyone to read and embrace that they may
come to possess a complete salvation and relationship with God , so Mormonism has nothing to
offer in all of this . The answer is’nt “PROTESTantism ” or ” MormonISM ” , it’s all about
coming to JESUS Himself — Heb.7:25
Mike,
Super Job!
fred,
I tried to follow what you wrote but believe me I spent most of the time re-reading and scratching my head trying to figure it out.
I draw my conclusions about you by what you write so if you feel it’s not accurate then give us all a more precise picture.
I’d be glad to have you offer whatever you have about Christianity but remember, this blog is about Mormonism. I doubt if you could offer anything about Christianity that I haven’t come across in one form or another.
You’re stuck fred, let’s face it. You’re a perfect candidate for something like Mormonism. You reveal it in your writing. You want to go on testimony for verification of Mormon truth? OK try this one. Did the witnesses to the gold plates see them with their natural eyes or the eyes of faith? I’ll help you out. By their own testimony, since that’s what you favor, it was the eyes of faith. Do Mormons know that? I doubt it.
You know that picture of Joseph Smith the Mormons put out with him leaning over the gold plates, doing the “interpretation”? Didn’t happen fred. It’s a false testimony.
Joseph Smith’s numerous accounts of the first vision? All false testimony. Read Charles Finney’s testimony who lived in the same geographic area and same era as Smith. It’s very curious when the two are compared. Finney didn’t need eight cracks at it to get it right.
Yes indeed fred, you find all of these faults with Christianity but you’ll accept anything Mormonism puts out even though the holes in it are a mile wide.
You simply dig Mormonism fred. You’re like a guy married to a woman who’s a drunk and he keeps covering for her and denying she has a problem.
Wake up fred!
Falcon
“Yea, I can buy that you are a Zorastrian.”
Of course you can. I’m surprised no one noticed earlier since it’s so blatantly obvious. But I actually became one by reading Nietzsche’s Thus spoke Zarathustra. You know, since Nietzche was totally a Zoroastrian. That’s why he would write a paper using there religions founder as a literary tool.
“I hope fred doesn’t know where you live or you can bet you’ll be getting a visit from the boys.”
Oh don’t worry about me. I’ve convinced all my local leadership to leave the Lds chuch and follow Zoroastrianism as well. We’re just staying in for the great food and virgin sacrifices they have in the Temple every Monday night (that’s the REAL reason they shut them down on Mondays, but shhhh don’t tell).
MikeR
Belief in Heavenly Mother isn’t necessary to gain a saving faith in Lds Theology. That’s why Clyde and I can have a differing opinion on the subject then other Mormons and still be granted Exaltation. Sort of like how different Christians can believe in Synergetic or Monergistic salvation and still be saved in Mainstream Christian theology.
Mike R says: – April 26, 2012 at 2:04 pm – (It’s the image that the Mormon PR dept advertises that hooks most people.)
For me it was the stuff that people like ya’ll said about the LDS Church that caused me to find out why ya’ll were wrong.
And I would say that some came in to the Church like you say, and some of them find out they do not like the idea that God has a reason for having a recording angel follow you around writing in the Book of Life everything they do. So they leave the Church.
fred
Fred, you sad to Falcon, ” …I fear this post would be pulled if I posted some of the unrecon-
ciled problems with all of Christianity … I fear that your witness is not strong enough to face the kinds of questions you place on Mormonism when questions are against our Lord …” Fred, I assure
you we would’nt be surprised at anything you dredge up to castigate “christianity” . But do you
stop and think how you arguing here ? We both believe that Jesus gave His disciples the gospel
message of salvation to spread to all ,but we disagree with your claim that this gospel was
lost then restored 1800 yrs later by your prophet . This is a very serious claim because
Jesus warned of false prophets coming who preach a counterfeit gospel . Based on the teachings
from your apostles since this alleged restoration occurred we conclude that Mormon apostles
preach a false gospel, a look-a-like gospel –Gal 1:8-9. You disagree. We ask for you to prove
the claims of your apostles and all you attempt to do is say we’re mistaken , and then now
you’re attempting to prove your gospel by bringing in some problems of some Christians .
That won’t prove your gospel is from Jesus. Why not just do what we ask and take teachings of
Mormon apostles we feel are at odds with the teachings of Jesus’ original apostles in the N.T.
and see if they stand the test —2Jn 9 ? After all, Mormon apostles claim that Jesus directs
them also , right ? You’re trying to spread this debate so wide that it only muddies the water
so please get back to the center[.cont]
cont.
Fred, you said to me , ” For me it was the stuff that people like ya’ll said about the Church
that caused me to find out why you were wrong. ”
So what “stuff” are you referring to and how was it wrong ? My claim has been that the claim
of Mormon leaders to be trustworthy guides in several important spiritual truths , truths that
affect a person’s relationship with God, is found to be wanting. I’ve looked at their teaching
track record and it is’nt consistently reliable, despite their claim to be so . I give you my
testimony that the spiritual truths recorded in the New Testament if embraced are sufficient
for anyone to gain a complete saving relationship with God through the Lord Jesus Christ. This
gospel has never ceased to be on the earth . Any “modern -day” prophet’s gospel needs to be
evaluated by how it measures up with the gospel Jesus gave to His original apostles , since false
apostles and prophets are always ready to detour people who seek God’s truth .
TjayT,
Don’t have to believe in a Heavenly Mother in order to be exalted ? Well that poses some
questions like : since Mormon leaders have testified of Her existence being a very important
doctrine, and church curriculim teaching that the belief in Heavenly Parents is a “stupendous
truth” and ,” a basic in the Gospel Plan ” , that Heavenly Father could’nt even be God without
Her, then belief in Her is a fundamental doctrine of the Mormon “plan of salvation”. One thing
for sure is that to reject your leaders testimony to know this, CAN invite loss of exaltation . But
then you’re a rebel, right? 🙂
TJay,
Here’s why I can’t figure out why you stay in Mormonism; you’re lack of real knowledge. Mormons have NEVER sacrificed virgins in their temples! First of all it goes against what’s written in the BoM and secondly we both know the role that women play in the procreation of spirit babies who will populate the planetary system of the Mormon god/goddess morphed from human to deities. I think you’re lack of professed faith in heavenly mother has skewed your thinking and you could be in danger of being set aside.
Look what it says in the BoM Second Rufus 5: 7-19. A portion:
“……..and yea it shall come to pass that the choice virgins will be taken by the sons of man to serve them in all of creation the NUMBERS OF THEM COUNTED TO EACH MAN AS HIS FAITH ALLOWS”
Now you really don’t have to read between the lines to figure out that what’s being talked about here is polygamy and the necessity to practice it to reach the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.
That’s why the creeds of the modern Mormon church, as articulated in the D&C, are such an abomination. Only the FLDS, who incidentally have a real respect for the role of women in the economy of the Celestial sphere, have held fast to the truth.
The prophets of the SLC Mormon sect have led them astray and away from the revealed truth.
In many ways you have strayed personally to a point where your denial of heavenly mother has put you in risk of losing your reward and the planet Kahotetrah. You didn’t think I knew about that did you?
Fred said
Put your money where your mouth is and back it up.
I would bet my life nothing you post backing this up would get pulled, and I’m a betting man on this, and am betting you have nothing and it’s just more of the same from you. Smoke and mirrors.
Rick,
Isn’t that fred a stitch? He thinks he has some super secret information discrediting Christianity that we are unaware of. AND if we saw it, our “testimony” would totally fall apart.
Man I wonder what this super secret information could be? Do you think some enterprising Mormon maybe unearthed it from the hill Comorah?
I think our buddy fred is playing a form of that Mormon information shell game tactic where by he has information, I mean really important stuff, but we have to find it ourselves. That was fred’s game for a while. Then he went to the one line posts proving he doesn’t know anything and then, in answer to one of Andy Watson’s posts he pastes something that actually counters his own point.
Well I’ll wait, along with you, for this super secret information. He probably got it from Mark Hofmann!
Mike,
Heavenly Mother isn’t mentioned in any of Mormonism’s Sacred Rites, nor in its Scripture. So no, you don’t have to takw a particular stand on there being a Queen of Heaven to be granted exaltation. Lately I have heard some ideas that make me more open to the idea of a Heavenly Mother outside of an infinite regression model, but for now I’m still basically agnostic about it. Is it true that my wife becoming a co-equal goddess alongside me is a fundamental doctrine of the Plan of Salvation? Yes. Is it true that Heavenly Father couldn’t be God without a Queen of Heaven? In certain infinite regression models. But acceptance or rejection of the idea doesn’t matter to exaltation.
“But then you’re a rebel, right? :)”
Maybe. Does joining the rebellion mean I can train to be a Jedi? 😉
Falcon
“Mormons have NEVER sacrificed virgins in their temples!”
Oh heavens, we don’t KILL them! I was being vague because there may be underage readers. Lets just say they “sacrifice their virginity” (both male and female might I add). It’s part of the brain washing process. Silly Falcon.
“Only the FLDS… have held fast to the truth.”
I thought you once said you thought the CofC are the right ones. Maybe I should get you some chicken for your waffle?
“In many ways you have strayed personally to a point where your denial of heavenly mother has put you in risk of losing your reward and the planet Kahotetrah. You didn’t think I knew about that did you?”
Actually I would name my planet Bob and make it out of anti-matter so every asteroid that hit the atmosphere would new like a miniature nuclear explosion. Just to keep everyone on their toes. But I’m actually a Zoroastrian, so I don’t believe any of that nonsense, right?
TjayT, a few comments on what you said: ” HM is’nt mentioned in any of Mormonism’s
scared rites , nor in it’s scripture. ” That’s correct and I don’t blame for your refusal to
embrace it , it’s a bogus doctrine . But I’m looking at what Mormon leaders have declared
about this doctrine after all they , not you, establish Mormon doctrine . I appreciate that
you are somewhat of a “rebel” by rejecting their testimony on this . But that brings up the
question of how a Mormon can testify that their leaders are in effect giving false counsel
on a doctrine , after all they clearly testify that She exists and plays a important part in the
LDS plan of salvation, you on the hand are rejecting their testimony about this and calling
into question their credibility as teachers . In effect you’re worshiping a different God than
the married One they promote , and that according to Apostle McConkie , can cause you to
lose your salvation. So I guess this issue boils down to who to follow , your opinion or that
of Mormon apostles. I admire your “rebellious” way , but if I ever became a Mormon I would
take more seriously the counsel of Mormon leaders on important doctrines because I would
have sworn my support of them as being the sole channel of communication from God to man,
that’s just the way I roll.
Mike,
Here’s the deal. TJay can believe whatever he wants, he just can’t teach it. So how does that all fit into the case you made above for believing the leaders? I think it depends on what kind of Mormon a person is. There are a lot of Mormons, I’m told, who are laying in the weeds. As long as they’re not too vocal, they can play along.
So what you said about the leaders and their teaching things that guys like TJay aren’t buying, it doesn’t matter. The TJays have mental mechanics that allow them to work all of that out.
In terms of HM, she’s part of the Mormon godhead in some odd and peculiar way. You’re right. Without HM, HF doesn’t exist nor do any of the other gods in the Mormon pantheon of gods.
See when a person has no real mooring, they can suppose whatever they want. That’s Mormonism. Smith and his early cronies where just one supposition after another. They were creating a religion. That’s why there’s so many different sects of Mormonism. TJay stays in the mainstream of the SLC bunch because he’s clever enough to know how the game is to be played. My guess there’s familial reasons for his stay put stance.
I’m surprised that TJay would be so open about sex with virgins in the Mormon temples. That’s a take off on the Greek temples but they were using prostitutes. I know that the Mormon god is depicted as a fertility god in the BoA. His name slips my mind at the moment. Was it Minh? He appears fully exposed in one of the facsimiles. At any rate Mormonism is sort of a fertility cult when you think about it.
Falcon said
Sad, sad, sad. One thing I said before is, I like to debate the hard core atheists. These atheists that I debate are inclined to say the Bible is wrong and try and find things wrong, where as the Mormons might throw the Bible under the bus sometimes, but not like the atheists.
I can assure Fred, he really has nothing that will be as big as he says. One evidence is, he either wont post anything, or he will make more excuses as to why he cannot or will not. But Fred, if you really have some earth shattering “evidence” Then please bring it forth or stop telling us you do when you cannot provide it.
Falcon, I guess people might join the Mormon church for other reasons than believing it is
the only true Church , and I’m sure that after they find out some of the evidence that even
dismantles that claim that they continue to stay in because of family ties or employment or
other reasons but then they begin to dismiss teachings of their leaders that they personally
find to be unreasonable or uncomfortable. Yet these type of Mormons still defend the church
( maybe out of pride etc ) , so it does’nt make much sense to me how TjayT reasons and
it certainly makes a case for me personally why I could never become a Mormon . But
I think he is closer to becoming free of this false prophet led organization than we think .
I’m not sure what he meant by the Temple rituals /virgins etc . sounds like it was tongue
and cheek ?
What was objected to in Mormon Doctrine, was the “politically incorrect” conclusions that McConkie made. His son later explained that David McKay asked McConkie to republish the book under the guidance of Spencer Kimball. But McConkie was really only going by what was already written in the Book of Mormon concerning the Catholic Church (whose objections were the direct cause of McKay’s consternation) and PROTESTantism. (lol) That’s about as adult as those who spell out Mormonism, as MORmONism. And as for Seventy’s, here is a talk by Milton R. Hunter in 1949, that should put the matter to rest:
The Prophet Joseph Smith, like all the holy prophets, who preceded him, always prefaced his teachings with the divine dictum of “Thus saith the Lord.” Truly of him it can be said as it was said of the Man of Galilee, “. . . Never man spake like this man.” (John 7:46.) Since Joseph Smith received what he gave to the people directly from Jesus Christ, such should be the case.
The Lord declared in modern revelation that the words spoken by prophets when they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost should be considered as scripture. To quote:
And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. (D. & C. 68:4.)
LIVING ORACLES
I wish to emphasize the fact that this revelation is not limited to Joseph Smith and the other great prophets who preceded him. We have standing at the head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints today living oracles through whom God reveals his will. Certainly the words of this revelation apply to President George Albert Smith, to his Counselors, to the Twelve Apostles, and to me [Milton R. Hunter, a Seventy], also the Patriarch to the Church, just as much as they did to Joseph Smith, or to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Moses, Nephi, Alma, Peter, Paul, or to all of the other ancient prophets of God. (Conference Report, April 1948, p.30)
I didn’t see any of the leaders of the church object in the slightest to what Hunter had to say here. Mormons want to have it both ways. But the historical record tells us the truth.
Post your info Fred. It won’t be suppressed. If you have any worth reading that is. Falcon, perhaps this is what you are referring to? http://vintage.aomin.org/Mintract.html
grindael says: – April 28, 2012 at 10:43 am – (Post your info Fred. It won’t be suppressed.)
OK, start with this one, I already know why I do not believe this, but let me see your reasons, and have falcon and rick also answer since you seem to be better informed then they are.
How do you justify the original document of an eye witness that says Jesus is the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier and that Mary told Joseph the story of Jesus being the Son of God just to cover up her adultery?
fred
grindael,
Thanks for jumping in here with a very informative post. I believe Mormonism could have as their motto, “We have our cake and eat it too.” Those folks certainly do want it both ways.
What I learned from your post is that there’s a lot of Mormon leaders who function in the office of prophet without carrying the label. They are recognized for their efforts in the prophet mode. Once again, however, it’s a good fall back position for Mormons to give a “he wasn’t really a prophet” to someone who functions in that capacity, in effect.
It was also interesting how you pointed out that McConkie’s “Mormon Doctrine” book just sort of had the language sanitized but kept the sentiments about the Catholic Church intact.
There is a concept in law that practice trumps policy. In-other-words if an organization has a recognized pattern of behavior it trumps what their actual policy or contract states. The fact that “Mormon Doctrine” was recognized and used extensively by Mormons for years is enough to establish it as a legitimate source within the religious sect.
Now Mormons want to run away from it to the point that they won’t even publish it any more.
Yes indeed, there’s a whole lot of crazy uncles living in the Mormon attic!
Fred, You already don’t believe in that ? Great , neither do we . Can you see how nobody
can take you seriously on your reasoning here ? You’re drifting into ridiculous rabbit
trails in your your attempt to avoid answering why we should believe that the Mormon gospel
is the same gospel Jesus’ apostles preached , instead of another gospel . Even Brigham
Young said that we should take up the Bible and compare Mormon religious beliefs
with it to see if Mormonism is teaching the true gospel etc. Can you try and stay with
that concept , because most of the time the rationale you resort to only affirms why we would
not consider becoming Mormons.