SVG version available here
Viewpoint on Mormonism Archives
Blogroll
- 365 Reasons
- Apologetics 315
- Ensign vs. The Bible
- Heart Issues for LDS
- Heart of the Matter
- I Love Mormons
- Keith Walker
- Latter-day Saint Woman
- Mark Cares
- Mormonism Investigated UK
- Mormonite Musings
- Mormons are Christians… aren't we?
- Musings on Mormonism
- Of First Importance
- Share the Son Ministries
- The Mormon Chapbook
- The Religious Researcher
- Utah Advance
Links
Subscribe
Join the Discussion
Check out our comment policy.Categories
Afterlife Authority and Doctrine Baptism for the Dead Bible Book of Mormon Brigham Young Christianity Coffee Beans D&C and Pearl of Great Price Early Christianity Early Mormonism Forgiveness Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism General Conference God the Father Gospel Grace Great Apostasy Jesus Christ Joseph Smith King Follett Discourse LDS Church Marriage and Singlehood Misconceptions Mitt Romney Mormon Culture Mormon History Mormon Leaders Mormon Missionaries Mormon Scripture Mormon Temple Multimedia Nature of God Nature of Man Nauvoo Personal Stories Polygamy Priesthood Prophets Salvation Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry Uncategorized Viewpoint on Mormonism Virgin birth Worthiness
By the way, I don’t think you found this site by accident.
cattyjane,
You said, “Everytime Ive tried going to a different church things just got really confusing and I had a lot of questions and doubt.”
I am glad that you acknowledged the relevance of 2 Corinthinas to you possibly being mistaken about the origin of your personal experience; it takes a big person to admit that. I am sorry to hear that you have had questions and doubts about Christianity from your past experiences. The good news is that everyone of us here are ready to help you with any of your questions and doubts. Would you mind letting us into your world and sharing with us your previous concerns?
Brewed,
I get what you are saying about the ‘only one god, none before and none after’. That is a concern I have voiced and I havent had an answer to that that I have been satisfied with. As far as people becoming Gods I dont know too much about that. What I know is that the bible states that we are to be perfect as the Father in heaven is perfect…we should strive to be like he is. After we return to live with him we will be made perfect…christ said only the father is perfect. If this is true and we will be made perfect doesnt that make us equal to God…at least in knowledge and understanding..not authority.
Mist Test,
I guess to me if the God of the old testament is real, and he is the same yesterday today and always than he has to have guidelines about how to worship him, and how to return to live with him. There HAS to be a ONE right way. The christian churches outside of the lds are all over the place: be baptised, baptism doesnt matter, confess to god, confess to god and publicly, salvation is forever and cant be lost, salvation can be lost, Only believe, believe + baptism+ confess+ endure…..ick it is soo exhausting! Who is right and how did it come to all of this madness! This just makes me want to throw my hands up and say forget it who can know!? I cant just say a little prayer and die with my fingers crossed hoping that God will have mercy. I have to believe that there is proper authority out there to ensure that my baptism was legit. I felt the power of that authority when I was baptised in the lds church…the baptist church has never provided that feeling of assurance for me. I dont know all of the historical data that you guys do about the church and im not in a position to argue about it. I just know that everything else has let me down and left me feeling like something is missing.
Cattyjane,
I know how you feel. I truly felt that same exhaustion. The Christian denominations are kind of all over the place with specific doctrine. But I think in the heart of it traditional Christianity is very much the same. If you look at the core of traditional Christianity, despite all the denominations, we are very much the same. When you look at the heart of Mormonism and compare it to traditional Christianity it is not even the same religion. That is why so many Christians flinch when they hear people say that Mormonism is Christian. I like to say, “Some Mormons are Christian but Mormonism is not Christian.”
Some of the people here go to specific denominations. Some don’t. I agree with you that there has to be one right way. When Christ said something he meant it a certain way. The people who wrote the scriptures meant them to be interpreted a certain way. But we are flawed. We sometimes understand things wrong. We make mistakes. I think the beauty of it is that we don’t have to have a perfect understanding. But despite our imperfect understanding, Christ is the only way to the Father. He has the power to save us despite our imperfections, despite the fact that we will get some of it wrong. We believe in what He accomplished on the cross and we do the best we can. I think there are some denominations that have a better understanding of scripture than other denominations. My personal journey was that I started just reading the New Testament. Then I started reading the early Church Fathers because I believe they were pretty close to the source. I felt very connected with Eastern Orthodoxy. I agree with how the Eastern Orthodox understand scripture. Will some people disagree with some of the Orthodox interpretations of scripture that I believe are true? Yes. But that does not mean that salvation is not also accessible to them through Christ. He is the way, the only way. All the authority is His.
You were describing to Mist Testimony a feeling of assurance. You mentioned that the feeling of assurance came from a specific work or action that you took. Do you not believe that Christ, knows our hearts, knows your heart? Do you not believe that that burning desire to follow Him, know Him, serve Him, and be with Him is enough? You believe and you desire to take action on those beliefs. You just seem confused on what is the right action is to take. You seem to be looking for the assurance through a specific action.
You said, “I cant just say a little prayer and die with my fingers crossed hoping that God will have mercy.” Yes, that is what we do, maybe minus the finger crossing. We have faith in the work Christ accomplished. We believe in His love and mercy and that that He can and will save us.
If I may quote from a book I am reading by Anthony Conairis, “We are never “worthy” to come to Jesus. We come because only He can make us worthy. We come in obedience to Jesus Who invites us to come. We come praying, “I am not worthy, Master and Lord, that You should come to me… yet since You, in Your love for all, wish to dwell in me, in boldness I come…”
Christianity isn’t about marking checks in the box on your way to heaven. It is about turning your will towards God. It’s about letting Him consume you. And when we turn to Him and submit our wills, He will save us, because that is what he came to do.
I think if you do some research on Jewish and Christian history, you will find that Mormonism never existed prior to Joseph Smith. Mormon claims have no support. It’s a new and drastically evolving religion when you look at the big picture.
Also, if you don’t think belief is enough. Think about Mormon Doctrine on Baptisms for the dead. The dead that “accept” the work done for them in the LDS temple get to have eternal life, according to Mormon theology. What did they do? Did they do the ordinance? All they did was believe. Why is it not enough to believe in the work accomplished by Christ on the cross? Why do you also have to believe in a “saving ordinance”? Is Christ the way, the truth, and the light or is it the specific ordinance? Is your trust in God or in the ordinance? Is the trust in what God can do or what you can do?
Jaxi is Eastern Orthodox, I am Lutheran, other people on this blog are probably Non-Denominational, Baptist, and Calvinists among others. We are all Nicene Christians. We are all on the same page here with regards to the core of the Christian Gospel. There are differences, this is true. Jaxi and I probably share complete agreement on Baptism and Communion, others here would disagree with us. But a Christian can be saved without the sacraments, such as the thief on the cross; we believe these things are commanded by God and are necessary, but no one here believes that they are absolutely necessary for salvation.
I discovered Christianity in a different denomination than I am in now. Like Jaxi, my studies led me into the Church Fathers and the history of Christendom, all because something began to feel like it was missing, and here I am. But I have no doubt in my mind for one second that the denomination I came out of is full of Godly men and women who are truly saved in a correct understanding of the true Christ. In other words, they are just as much the body of Christ as all other Christians who accept historical orthodoxy.
However, Mormonism does not factor into this equation in any way. Their teachings are far beyond anything that can be observed through the study of Christian history and orthodoxy. Furthermore, historical Christianity does not have a check-list of works that one must perform in order to continue to advance in their salvation. Jaxi has discussed this subject in previous posts and it would be good for him/her to readdress this subject. Mormonism is so far beyond anything that any of us here could even remotely call Christian. The key is for you to find a Christian church that is filled with godly men and women who have their whole lives devoted to the love of the historical Christ in every area of their lives. It was a good thing that I saw the things that I saw to be where I am now, it was good for Jaxi too, and we believe that this time of confusion was good for you for a time for you to see where the true God wants you to go from here. Person to person, everything that the LDS church offers regarding your emotional feelings is easily present in a real church, without all the self-guilt but with peace that people will never be able to offer you.
I don’t know if anyone has answered Shematwater about the JST since his last post, either directly or through continued discussion with someone else here. But, just in case…
Heavenly Father said in DnC 124-89:
89 If he will do my awill let him from henceforth hearken to the counsel of my servant Joseph, and with his interest support the bcause of the poor, and publish cthe new translation of my holy word unto the inhabitants of the earth.
And in 94:10:
10 And again, verily I say unto you, the second lot on the south shall be dedicated unto me for the building of a house unto me, for the work of the aprinting of the btranslation of my scriptures, and all things whatsoever I shall command you.
And, don’t worry, I clicked on the sublink for each term of “translation” and the LDS.org website confirmed that it was referring to the translation of the Bible/JST.
So, Shem, it seems quite clear that Heavenly Father wanted the JST published and even made physical preparations for it to be “printed”, i.e. – published. If so, then it should have been done long ago. In complete and convenient avoidance of your claims of dependence on Joseph Smith, let alone the 2nd Coming, the people addressed in these verses are people other than Joseph Smith and who lived long before the 2nd Coming. And it still stands, Heavenly Father’s intent was to have the JST published, if the prophets and apostles are truly who their office describes them as, or even if there are some non-prophets and non-apostles as indicated by the “friends” of Section 94, then the JST should have been published over a century ago.
Every day that passes without the JST published in full is an endictment of the superlative claims of the LDS Church and every other “only true” Mormon sect that has not done so.
————
Extra Tidbit Note: Lds.org helped me find a gem of DnC – 91:1-6. In it God says that the Apocrypha was mostly translated correctly but that (the main problem, then was) it has erroneous interpolations made by men. Heavenly Father then basically says that it is ok not to translate it because the Holy Spirit will help those who seek His help to benefit from the Apocrypha despite these erroneous statements/sections! Hmm…
Jaxi and Mist Test,
That is the issue I have with the other Christian churches is that they say Baptism isnt necessary but its important. If its not necessary than why do it at all? Like the baptist dont recognise ‘sprinkling’ baptism and if you convert than they want to rebaptise you…if its not important to salvation than what does it matter? Same thing happens with sacrement/communion. They (other christian churches not lds) say that its symbolic and it is taken as a time to reflect on christs death BUT they ask you to be sure that your heart is pure before the Lord and there is no unconfessed sin or you will be guilty of the blood of Christ.
I think ordinances are neccessary. The only reason the theif on the cross did not have to be baptised was because Christ was still alive. The theif was still under the law because Christ had not died yet. The Father had given Christ all authority in heaven and earth. If Christ wanted to forgive him and place him in heaven than who is to tell him no? Also we dont know what he meant by heaven….and other christian churches (not lds) do speak about different levels of heaven and exaltation…they just dont give them names. Instead they say to store up your treasures in heaven by your service to the lord here on earth. Or they say some people will have more crowns of glory than others. Or some will be nearer to the Father than others. Sounds like the same thing to me.
I know what it would be if I went to some random Christian denomination. I would never know if what I was doing was right. I would always worry that when I died I would end up eternally seperated from the Father. I would worry that my daughter would feel the same way as me. Always questioning and never knowing.
You claim that the christian churches (not lds) are pretty much on the same page…but I dont think you guys are. All paths cannot lead to home. Each denom has a different route ~through~ Christ. Yes all must go through him to reach the Father but all believe in a differently shaped path to get there..ie baptism, confession, endure etc. So lets say I decide to not return to the lds Church…what path do I take? What church is the true church?
Im not trying to be a jerk…i know you guys are just trying to help but im trying to be honest here. Every denomination can back up their ideas about salvation with scripture. It cant all be right. Tell me who is right? Because If I were to leave the lds church for good I would rather be Jewish than have to roll the dice on some protestant church. I understand the old test just fine..its the NT that caused all this division in beliefs.
Then again the Jewish faiths have different sects as well. Its all a huge mess.
Cattyjane
I don’t know if you read my last post but I would have liked to see a reply to the very specific points that I made especially that of my ex being told that she had to ‘pay’ if she wanted to be with our dead children in the next world. Read it again, then tell me that those leaders are Christ-like & showing the fruits of the Spirit. Read how much the Corporation gives in charitable aid compared to Christian churches then tell me the LDS is a charitable Christian Church. Do you realise that the LDS spent as much on a shopping mall as they gave to charity in 20 years? I wonder what Christ thinks about it, does the Temple & the moneychangers spring to mind?
As you mention different levels of heaven I’ll remind you of something else, the LDS claim that the doctrine of Terrestrial, Telestial & Celestial Kingdoms was ‘restored’ by Joseph Smith when it was actually plagiarized from a book written by Emanuel Swedenborg in 1758.
Cattyjane, you are making a terrible mistake, it seems to me that you are basing your beliefs upon your experiences & feelings. Those things cannot be used to determine truth, as someone once said “Are Mormons so arrogant as to believe that only they can have a testimony”? Every religion on the face of this Earth has people who make similar claims. So, may I suggest that you read Acts 17:11-12 Does Paul commend the Bereans for their feelings? Does he do what the LDS does, telling them they have the truth because they believed what he told them? No he doesn’t, he commends them because they did what others in here have suggested you do, they did the research by searching the Scriptures.
You said
“So lets say I decide to not return to the lds Church…what path do I take? What church is the true church?”
The true Church is made up of those who put their trust in Christ it is His body. His Church has been in existence for 2000 years, it was never totally apostate therefore never needed restoring. Think about this catty, if God founded His Church how could it have failed? Matthew 16:18 Forget about protestant denominations, forget about the LDS, give yourself some time alone with God, talk to Him, place your trust in Him & He will lead you to where He wants you to be.
“I would rather be Jewish than have to roll the dice on some protestant church”
You certainly don’t have to roll a dice. You don’t have to take my word for anything & neither do you have to believe that the corporation is true on the basis of appearance or what they say to you. There are many atheists who live good moral lives so does that mean they have the truth? Always keep in mind that false doctrine appeals to those who have not yet come to a saving knowledge of Christ. The unregenerate person follows the heart rather than Gods word, Jeremiah 17:9 so please don’t allow your life experience or your friends morality sway you. You could be standing at a crossroads, follow the example of the Bereans.
Cattyjane,
I would like to second what Old Man said, “Forget about protestant denominations, forget about the LDS, give yourself some time alone with God, talk to Him, place your trust in Him & He will lead you to where He wants you to be.”
The denomination thing is not the most important thing. Take your time with it. Study the New Testament, look at Christian history. You had me thinking that you were a sincere believer in Christ but then you made the comment that you would rather be Jewish if you weren’t LDS. That is a very strange comment. You would rather give up Christ all together if you left the LDS Church? You mentioned “rolling the dice’ with a Protestant Church. Aren’t you rolling the dice with Mormonism? Read the scriptures in the New Testament about false prophets. You are taking a big risk by following one. Mormonism is a completely different gospel than the Christian gospel.
As I said before, I am Eastern Orthodox. You asked a question about why do any of the sacraments if they are not necessary. They are either important as some Christians say or they are not as others will say. Many of us will differ what we tell you on this. But I am in a group that believes very strongly that these sacraments are important. The Eucharist isn’t seen as a symbolic act either, in Orthodoxy, it is the literal body and blood. So your question to me was if these sacraments aren’t essential than why do them. The idea is that belief always comes first. That is the heart and spirit of it. But we don’t live in a strictly spiritual realm. We live in a physical one. God created matter. He loves matter and He wants us to interact in a material world. One can be born again by the spirit without the physical action of baptism. However, I believe the action is important. Baptism is the physical action that we take that God asked us to take. It is a moment of communion with Him. The sacraments (baptism, marraige, eucharist…) are not what save you. They are opportunities to be close to God, to commune with Him. They are physical actions that we take to demonstrate that we are turning towards Him and not away. So I believe the sacraments are important. But I acknowledge that Christ is still alive. He still holds all priesthood power and authority. He will save all those that turn and submit their wills to His. He can do that outside of an ordinance because He is not bound to an ordinance. All power and authority are His.
You said, “The Father had given Christ all authority in heaven and earth. If Christ wanted to forgive him and place him in heaven than who is to tell him no?” Exactly. This is still true.
Cattyjane,
You said, “its the NT that caused all this division in beliefs.”
I do not agree with this statement. I think if you look at Christian history you will not find that it was not the NT that caused the problems.
sorry about the double negative in the last comment. Take out one of the nots. 🙂
Cattyjane,
The very best way for you to understand God’s truth is to study his word. It may be helpful for you to find a good translation that you understand. Personally I prefer the American Standard, our church uses The New King James. I would do some research and find one you feel comfortable with and take some time and just see what it says, in entirety. There are many personal opinions about what belief in Christ should look like but I feel like God makes things pretty clear in His word.
When you are personally studying it chapters at a time instead of by verse the picture becomes much clearer. Christ is clear that he is the ONLY way to Eternal Life and that faith in him is all we need tp be in the presence of the Father.
The rest of the stuff will not affect that BUT will draw us nearer to him and will help us to be obedient to him. The safest place for us to be is in God’s will. I know it seems confusing to try and figure out but I also know that God’s word is the best way to know His will. Baptism is a touchy subject for people. I thought these two sites helped me to understand it better but I would still tell you to read the Bible and come to your own conclusion.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/icc/ICC122.html
http://www.bible.ca/ef/topical-baptism-a-prechristian-history.htm
As interesting and as helpful as these sites are, they cannot replace your alone time with God.
I can’t stress that enough.
Further to what Jaxi said I would like to point out that she & I would almost certainly disagree about some things but we would never disagree on matters pertaining to salvation. Unlike members of the LDS we do not consider the things we disagree on to be essential to our salvation.
Probably the biggest difference between LDS & Christian belief is the LDS dependence on the Law. The law had its place among the Jews but plays no part in the Christian life. Christ fulfilled the demands of the Law; He was the only one who could do so, no man or woman could possibly do it for, being imperfect, no matter what we do, scripture tells us that we will fail. James 2:10 I know that Mormons will say that Christ’s Grace applies ‘after all we can do’ but that is a completely unwarranted & heretical addition to Scripture.
So, Christians are no longer under the law & because of Christs sacrifice, we are saved by Grace through faith. When, by whatever means, we start to live by the law rather than by Gods Grace we fall into the trap that the enemy has set for us. Satan wants us to go back to the days of the old Covenant because that is the way that leads to death; he does not want us to live under the new Covenant because that is the way to life. Romans 8:2
The LDS Corporation under the guidance of the false prophets mentioned by Jaxi has subtly insinuated the old covenant into the new, of course they will deny that because they won’t appear to be a Christian organization but nevertheless, that is exactly what they have done. No matter what names they may give to their rules, it is still living by the law. Anyone choosing to live by these ‘laws’ nullifies Christ’s sacrifice. Christ removed our chains & the LDS attempts to put them back. You must choose catty, be free in Christ or live by the law for you cannot live by both.
Cattyjane,
I understand your confusion with denominations. I came out of the LDS church 3 years ago after 40 years as a Mormon. One thing that I think you need to understand is that Mormonism has many different denominations as well. Upwards of 70 different denominations. All with a prophet and apostles, all claiming to be the “one true church” that Joseph Smith started. They all claim that they alone have the “authority” to act in God’s name. Which denomination is the “true church” and why?
The FLDS are the closest to what Joseph Smith was practicing and revealing when he was killed, are they the true church? They claim the LDS are apostate and have been led away from the plain and precious truth.
The thing is, it’s not about denominations, it’s about Jesus. When I was confused and questioning I threw up a wall and decided that I wouldn’t trust anyone but Jesus. I went out and bought a Bible not affiliated with the LDS church and I read, prayed and studied. I didn’t need anyone to tell me what it said and I read it with an open mind not “as long as it is translated correctly.” Put your trust in Jesus first. Learn about Him, get to know Him first. Then let him lead you to where you need to be.
cattyjane,
The only reasons why your concern would be confusing is if you either were trying to join every Christian congregation simultaneously, or if you believed that the body of Christ would be perfect in every way as Christ is perfect. The body of Christ is a big mess right now as you said, this is true. But this is only true because we as sinners are what makes it a mess. God is a skilled surgeon, but it’s like the most skilled surgeon in the world using a broken spork and a rusted butter knife as his tools. That is what we Christians are to God, and yet He is still able to masterfully save all who call on Him. It is very naive to assume that the true body of Christ would be a sinless institution here on this fallen world, but the good news is that we are all sinless before God but only by the blood that was shed on the cross for us.
You would never know that for the most part everyone here is from different traditions by listening to the way that we all agree and do not disagree with each other. This is because you should listen to what we are talking about, the truth of salvation in Christ alone. You need to understand that all of us non-Mormons here who profess a saving faith in Christ are fundamentally the same and only superficially different. This would be confusing for someone if they had an inverted picture of the core of Christian orthodoxy of if they they simply did not understand the Gospel in its correct form.
LDS would like to paint the picture that all the denominations quarrel and fight amongst each other as if everyone were saying that they alone were the one true church and all others were going to hell. But this is a myth perpetuated by false teachers, we all here stand shoulder to shoulder in agreement on the Gospel of Salvation, and only when false religions come along that teach a completely different gospel (i.e. Mormonism) do we then have to explain the true Gospel, seemingly from scratch each time. Don’t try to join every visible congregation, join the one invisible congregation with Christ as its head, that is we are encouraging you to be bold about today.
Mistaken Testimony,
Well said. One thing that has struck me over the past year of posting here is that the Christians here have studied Mormonism frontwards and backwards, but Mormons have not studied Christianity at all. I hadn’t either as a Mormon. The only thing I knew about Christianity is what I had been taught by Mormons. It is so off the mark. As LDS we are taught the church, the church, the church! Jesus is sort of an after thought. I think that’s why it’s so hard for Mormons to separate Jesus from religion. I don’t think they truly understand what it means to be a part of the Body of Christ. This is why denominations or sects are confusing to them. I experienced this myself while I was questioning and researching.
Cjane,
When I pointed out Jesus said, you are of your father the devil and you speak his language. You said you dont agree. I take God at his word and believe he meant what he said.
So if you dont agree, then tell me what you think he really meant, and how you came to that conclusion.
Cjane,
I notice lds are always bringing up the many denomanations. So tell me why these seem to bother you, but you never seem bothered enough to mention the same problem with in your church. Funny how this issue is always so one sided.
Rick B,
I think that verse is talking about people who are choosing to live in sin and outside the fathers will.
Your right about the different lds denom. I didnt realize there were soo many until I saw what people posted here about it.
Cjane, you cannot support your view of thst verse. Like I ssid, jedus ssid the were the children of thr devil. But let me add this, you said you dont agree because it means people will go to hell and you dont feel that is part of hf plan. So how do you handle all the verses in the bible and the book of mormon that speak of eternal damnation and the bigger problem of, if Jesus and Lucifer are brothers then why is it ok in lds theology for hf to send his son Lucifer to outer darkness or the lake of fire if you want to call it that. It’s ok in Mormonism but not christianty. Why is that.
Parden the spelling errors, I sent my replies from my phone, and the buttons and letters are really small and I cannot text to save my life.
Rick B,
Im sorry I took so long to respond but you sent me on quite a journey with your question. I dont even know how to answer anymore Ill just explain what I discovered and see if you can make heads or tails of it.
Basically I looled up scripture on the creation of Satan.
So what I discovered was that it was not just the father, the son and the holy spirit present during the creation but also all of the heavenely beings as well ie: angels, cherubs, saraphims etc. Job 38. There is no scripture that indicates that Satan was an angel…only that he can take on the appearance of an angel 2 Corinthians 11:14. It also says that he has angels that serve him but that doesnt make him an angel Matt 25:41 and Rev 12:9. Since God cannot create evil this would imply that satan was once good…means he also.was given free will and chose to do wrong. Job 1:6 states that the sons of God came to present themselves before the lord and Satan came also among them. Does this mean Satan was a son of the lord? Im not sure what the Hebrew translation of the word son here would be.
Basically what I discovered in all this is that we are just one of many different creations of beings that God made. The site I read this on makes a claim that humans were created in order to prove a point that God wanted to make to the good and bad angels…i didnt see any scripture to back that up. It made it sound like we are a very small speck in the big picture of things. I dont know. I guess if its Gods game than he gets to make the rules. The article I read was really depressing tho because it made it seem like humans are just pawns in a chess game and its all to prove a point. Its sad that people will suffer for that. I can post the link if you want to check it out and see if its bogus or not.
Cjane, you better go back and read your bible some more. It does say that lucifer, ie, the devil is a created being. He is not the brother of Jesus either. Jesus is God, not a god. But God. Lucifer is a created being and is part of God’s creation.
Rick B,
Ok I agree Lucifer is a created being…i dont know what kind of being but hes created. But HOW can Jesus be God and pray from the earth to the Father? I know he was present at creation and I know the John 1 scripture. I know the father gave him all authority on heaven and earth but how is he the Son and the Father because I know that is what you are implying when you say he is God.
Cjane, a very good and long 4 part series was. Just done on the trinity, , I cannot post a link from my phone, maybe someone else can, also if Lucifer is created, then how can him and Jesus be brothers if Jesus is God and not a created being. If you feel Jesus is a created being, then prove it from scripture, but that cannot be done since it does not say Jesus is created, but eternal.
Cattyjane,
Go to the tags section of Mormon Coffee and hit the trinity link. Also, seriously pick up the Mere Christianity book by C.S. Lewis that I mentioned before. He really helped me personally in understanding the Trinity.
Apparently Satan/Lucifer was beautiful, he was a cherub, he was perfect. Ezekiel 28 (It start by talking about the king Tyrus, but it is apparent that he is really discussing Satan).
I think this why God’s word says” But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Gal 1:8 and
“and no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” 2 Corinthians 11:14
Satan, like sin, is beautiful, attractive, and appealing. But he is a liar and a deceiver. He’s counterfeit.
He was an angel of God but rebelled, wanting to place himself higher than God, wanting to be God.
His favorite lie is to tell us we can be like God.
He is not the same as humans, he is an angel.
BTW angels and humans are separate beings. Humans do not become angels and angels do not become humans. They are separate. Jesus is God who became human. Jesus was never an angel, he was never on par with Satan, and he is certainly not Satan’s brother.
I agree with Jaxi, Get your hands on C.S. Lewis.
Brewed, Jaxi, and Rick B,
Who were tge sobs of God that appeared before God in Job 1:6…and why was Satan called one of those sons if Jesus is called the only begotten of the Father?
Jaxi,
I will work on finding that book.
Oops correction…im typing from my phone…it should read who were the sons of God that appeared…sorry bout that.
Cattyjane,
Look at this link
http://www.biblestudytools.com/job/1-6-compare.html
You will notice that in the different Bible translations some say, “angels,” some say, “sons of God,” and some say “divine beings.” The version I read says “angels.”
The verse is talking about angels. “sons of God” is not really inaccurate either. Notice the lowercase s and when we speak of Christ we say Son of God with a capital S. Although we are creations and not literally the Sons and Daughters of God, we are still sons and daughters of God. We are because God loves us and accepts us as such when we turn our wills to Him. Notice that the devil is not included in the “sons of God.” It says, “and the devil also came with them.” He once had the opportunity to be counted as a son of God but rejected it and is no longer included.
I noticed also on another topic that you commented to Brewed about her having been atheist. I hope she can share something that will be helpful to you. I’m glad you will look into reading “Mere Christianity.” I really think it will help because C.S. Lewis was atheist before becoming Christan as well. The book helped me when I was wondering if I should become atheist after I left Mormonism.
Rick B
You said “Here is something I find funny. LDS claim we must perform “Works” To help in our salvation. I claim Grace alone
Now we read in the JST in Romans 3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith ALONE without the deeds of the law.
We read in the JST of romans, only one word was added to that passage to supposedly correct it, the word ALONE. Houston, we have a problem. Either we are saved by grace alone, or we are saved by grace, AFTER ALL WE CAN DO. Yet God supposedly told JS to correct the Bible.”
Q. JS claims that the book of Malachi is “correct” yet the angel Moroni quotes it differently. Joseph Smith history 1:36-39. So is the Prophet correct, or the Angel who told JS about the golden plates correct?
A. They are both correct. Joseph Smith never says that Moroni corrected Malachi, only that he gave a quote that was similar in what it said. He also says in D&C 128: 18 that he could render a plainer translation of Malachi, but that what is currently had is plain enough.
Q. The D and C, God Supposedly told JS and Sidney Rigdon to complete the JST of the Bible. But we read in the Preface to the JST it is possibly not complete.
A. While the translation itself was complete the work of publication never was, and thus the JST as a work was not completed. As such the manuscripts we have are more in note form than in written form, and thus it is sometimes difficult to make out what Joseph Smith intended.
“First problem I find is this, why is it JS simply copied some verses word for word and claimed he corrected these verses, when in fact there is not a single change made? below are some examples.”
Funny thing is that all of these have changes. Exodus 2: 11 changes ‘an Hebrew’ to ‘a Hebrew;’ The Leviticus verses change ‘an heave’ to ‘a heave;’ and Exodus 3: 1 separates ‘backside’ into two different words, and removes a comma. Thus these belong in your later complaints. Actually, there is not a single verse that is noted as changed that isn’t. You should get things straight if you want to criticize it (http://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/default.htm).
“it even states in the JST on Page 11, Psalms 1-11 and 18-32 are exactly word for word as the KJV? How is this Correct or inspired as JS claims?”
Has anyone ever claimed that Joseph Smith needed to correct every verse of the Bible?
“Then there are some verses in the JST where there is only one single letter added or one single word changed, and it still works out to saying the same exact thing.”
When one does a translation they put it in the current grammar and spelling of the time. Thus these corrections would merely be Joseph Smith updating the language in terms of grammar. What is the problem with this?
“Then we read in KJV of the Book of Revelation 22:18-19
Anyway, If these verses are correct to the point they were not changed in anyway, then this poses a problem, even if LDS feel these verses only apply to the Book of Revelation and no other book, then JS did make changes to the book of Revelation. So why would God put these verses in the Book, only to later have JS turn around and “correct” the Book.”
Honestly, I have always found this to be one of the most absurd objections, and this is why. If Joseph Smith was returning the text to its original wording and meaning than he hasn’t changed anything. Rather it is those who alter the text in the past that are the culprits.
“If God is really all knowing, and if He is not the author of confusion, it would stand to reason, He would have foreseen the changes that needed to be made to the book of revelation, so why would God put these two verses in the book in the first place?”
Because he foresaw that wicked men would change the wording, and so gave a plain warning to them. Thus when he judges them for this corruption he is justified, for he has warned them.
“Then there are 9 books JS felt were correct and never changed, both in the Old and New Testemants.
If we add to that, all the verses that were not changed, all the verses that were altered, [but whose meaning is unchanged], then the more serious changes that were made are really so few, it would stand to reason that the majority of the Bible is accurate.”
You seem to have finally realized what the LDS church has long maintained, and the members have accepted. You will never find a single member or leader who has ever declared that the majority of the Bible was inaccurate. This is a fabrication created by the enemies of the church in order to confuse those who don’t know the truth.
“And seeing as how the LDS feel it is not Accurate”
There are many degrees of inaccuracy. If a book contains one error it can be rightly said to be inaccurate. The Bible, though containing significant inaccuracies, was never said to contain a large quantity of inaccuracies.
“Who is correct. The Bible or JS?”
Both, when you understand what we mean concerning these things. The Bible, by and large, is accurate and correct. However, Joseph Smith was correct in that over time some errors have occurred.
Actually, I have answered all your questions in the past, so I will answer no more right now. The Bible has always been the foremost scripture of the LDS church, and always will be. We trust the Bible as the word of God, but also accept that God has revealed more for us to clarify the meaning of the Bible.
“Mormons only believe that if someone prays and either hears from God about something being true, if that is, the person believes what the Mormon said.”
Are you really any different? How often have the LDS here stated that they have prayed and unless they agree with you you start in telling about the seducing spirits, and how they need to think about whether or not it was a devil talking to them? I actually refrain from such statements as much as possible, for this very reason.
spartacus
Heavenly Father also said “when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offering.” (D&C 124: 49) God intended there to be a temple in Jackson County, as well as Far West; but because of severe persecution the saints were prevented from doing so, and so God no longer required such at their hands, but delayed such work until a future time. In like manner God intended for the work of publishing the JST to be completed, but because of severe persecution this was prevented, and so God has no longer required such, delaying the work until a future time.
Mistaken and falcon
“Spoken like a true cultist. Evidence doesn’t matter it’s the witness of the spirit is all you need. Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, this inner witness of the spirit is a fabrication? That it’s the result of hope and desire and emotional manipulation.”
Actually, despite what you want to think, I have considered this, and after reviewing all the evidence I have, on more than one occasion, concluded that it has been God speaking to me. But, more to the point, you twist my words. I never once said evidence doesn’t matter. What I said is the lack of evidence doesn’t matter. I can believe in something even when there is no evidence to prove it true.
Mistaken
“I am glad that you acknowledged the relevance of 2 Corinthinas to you possibly being mistaken about the origin of your personal experience; it takes a big person to admit that.”
So, what does this say about you, as you apparently have never considered such a thing?
Brewed
“Also, the LDS church doesn’t use the JST regularly.. I find that interesting because if JS really did “restore” the “plain and precious truths” why wouldn’t they stress the JST’s importance more?”
I don’t know about others, but I use it regularly, and always have. In fact, it is frequently referenced in the lesson manuals of the church. We use it frequently, but for the purpose it was intended for.
“It is simply too convenient that the Bible would be inaccurate only where it contradicts Mormon theology.”
If the LDS doctrine is true than why would anything agreeing with it be in error; and how could anything contradicting it be true? This just doesn’t make any sense.
“It is not taught in church”
Actually it is, or at least was. It was quoted in the manual Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith; and it was printed in its entirety in the Ensign.
Old man
Similar things have happened among the LDS, so don’t tell me there isn’t love.
Did you know that the LDS church as a whole gives more to charity than any other organization and is praised worldwide for its humanitarian aid programs?
You said “Putting it all in a nutshell I believe that the Corporation has put itself between God & man; it claims to be the only genuine route to God & demands unconditional loyalty from its members, love for God has to be channelled through the LDS.”
Then you don’t under that LDS faith.
cattyjane
I understand your concerns. They are actually very common. While I am happy to discuss them with you, I would prefer not doing so in this blog. I have done so on many occasions and I am tired of it. I have my own blog at shematwater.wordpress.com. If you want to discuss these things I would glad to do so there.
“Could the scripture that references ‘his word will not pass away’ be referring to the ‘Word’ who is Jesus Christ like it refers to him in John 1 as the word?”
I do not think this is possible. First, it is Christ himself saying that his word would not pass away, and in no other place does he refer to himself as the word. Second, the JST corrects this reference in John 1 to read “In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.” Thus the Bible doesn’t actually refer to him as the word.
Kate Said “One thing that I think you need to understand is that Mormonism has many different denominations as well.”
The difference being that we do not accept that all these denominations are equally true and able to lead one to Christ. They are just as false as the rest of Christianity.
“Mormonism isn’t about marking checks in the box on your way to heaven. It is about turning your will towards God. It’s about letting Him consume you. And when we turn to Him and submit our wills, He will save us, because that is what he came to do.”
The statement of Kate’s is just as rightly applied to the LDS, despite what people try to say.
Shem,
You are so blind and so badly want to believe a Lie, that I will just reply to you with this.
Your reply is evidence of how badly you want to believe your false prophet and sadly when you die and spend your eternity in torment, All I can say is, You were told and you rejected the truth.
You really mean to tell me and you really believe, The Most correct book upon the earth needed God to Tell JS to “Correct” and update “Minor” Grammar Issues. These Issues are so trivial that if JS did not do them they would not change a thing. Then you guys rarely use the J.S.T.
So the lack of use and passing it out is evidence your reply is illogical, and just more of the same, defending a lie.
LOL.
Their lack of humanitarian aid is disgusting – especially for a so called church. The numbers below are from an official Mormon church publication. Notice how they use the sum of a 25 year span to make the number look significant. Breaking it down to an annual basis and to a per member basis demonstrates how little the Mormon church gives in charitable aid.
Humanitarian assistance rendered (1985-2009)
Cash Donations $327.6 million
Value of Material Assistance $884.6 million
The value of material assistance is a wild guess from materials donated by members and not directly out of the church’s pocket. We will assume that it actually came from the church directly for simplicity.
Let’s look at the numbers.
Total number of years: 25 years
Total amount of aid: $1,212.2 million (cash 327.6 + materials 884.6)
Amount of aid per year: ($1,212.2 / 25 yr) = $48.5 million per year
Let’s assume an average of 12 million members of the church over that 25 year time span.
($80.8 / 12) = $6.73 per member given in charitable aid per year!!!
Just so that this is clear – The Mormon church only gives out $6.73 in charitable aid per member per year.
As a reference, here is some info on the $3,000,000,000 (3 billion dollar) mall: http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon403.htm
The cost of the mall (assuming now 14 million members) is ($3,000 million / 14 million members) = $214 per member. Compare that to the charitable aid. Is this a church or a corporation?
Now look at the Salvation Army,
About The Salvation Army
Here is the charity report for 2010: http://www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national/religious/salvation-army-national-corporation-in-alexandria-va-1221
Total Revenue: $3,745,103,000
Total Expenses: $3,239,149,000
Programs: $2,655,565,000
Fundraising: $190,721,000
Administrative: $392,863,000
Expenses in Excess of Income: $505,954,000
Beginning net assets: $8,826,309,000
Other changes in net assets: ($101,692,000)
Ending net assets: $9,230,571,000
Total liabilities: $3,762,273,000
Total assets: $12,992,844,000
Total liabilities: $3,762,273,000
That means they gave 82% of almost 4 BILLION DOLLARS for 2010 alone. There is simply no comparison with the Mormons. NONE.
“Kate Said “One thing that I think you need to understand is that Mormonism has many different denominations as well.”
“The difference being that we do not accept that all these denominations are equally true and able to lead one to Christ. They are just as false as the rest of Christianity.”
Each Mormon denomination claims your denomination is just as false as the rest of Christianity. Which denomination is correct and why? The way I see it, the FLDS are practicing what Joseph Smith himself practiced. I would say they are more in line with Mormonism than you. It doesn’t really matter though because ALL of Mormonism is false. It isn’t difficult to see what Joseph Smith and his cronies were up to. Power and perversion come to mind.
“God intended there to be a temple in Jackson County, as well as Far West; but because of severe persecution the saints were prevented from doing so, and so God no longer required such at their hands, but delayed such work until a future time. In like manner God intended for the work of publishing the JST to be completed, but because of severe persecution this was prevented, and so God has no longer required such, delaying the work until a future time.”
What “severe” persecution??? The Mormons were giving just as good as they were getting. Funny how I was never told anything about the murdering Danites, Avenging Angels, the hit on Governor Boggs, Kirkland Bank, block voting, fiery public sermons, The Battle of Crooked River or Samuel Tarwater, the burning of Gallatin and the people the Mormons killed there, etc. I was told about Mountain Meadows but it was all a lie and blamed on the Indians. Pathetic. If you want to complain of persecution please have enough honesty and integrity to admit the Mormons were just as bad as anyone else.
http://www.farwesthistory.com/mcgee.asp
http://www.mrm.org/violence-in-early-mormonism
http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_mormonpersecution.html
This site is a wealth of information on early Mormonism.
http://1857massacre.com/MMM/danites_index.htm
You know, living in the Mormon Bubble can make you look awfully ignorant. Especially when people who reside there make statements that they have no idea are so wrong. Here is Shem, speaking from the Bubble:
Really? Perhaps you don’t know as much as you think, Shem. Blame everything on “enemies” who “fabricate” everything, and then spew this out over and over until you believe it yourself. Here is Orson Pratt doing EXACTLY what you say that “enemies” made up”
For more on Mormons and their attacks on the Bible, go here. Here is Pratt again, on how he speculated that MOST of the Bible has been ejected by those “evil” Christians:
I would really advise you to start researching your own church Shem, before you make conclusions that are so inaccurate. You are really making yourself look bad, but that’a par for the course with Mormonism.
Rick B
You said “Here is something I find funny. LDS claim we must perform “Works” To help in our salvation. I claim Grace alone
Now we read in the JST in Romans 3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith ALONE without the deeds of the law.
We read in the JST of romans, only one word was added to that passage to supposedly correct it, the word ALONE. Houston, we have a problem. Either we are saved by grace alone, or we are saved by grace, AFTER ALL WE CAN DO. Yet God supposedly told JS to correct the Bible.”
I am sorry. I included this in my last post but gave no reply to it. This was an error on my part, and I correct that now.
On this point I went back and read all the changes made to the first five chapters of Romans. In chapter 4, verse 2, he makes an interesting change. He turns ‘justified by works’ into ‘justified by the law of works.’ He makes the same change in verses 4,5, and 6. This brings things into stark contrast with what Paul says in 3: 27 “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay; but by the law of faith.” He then gives a great discourse on the faith of Abraham, who was not justified by the Law of Works. Then in verse 1 of chapter four he gives this alteration; “Therefore ye are justified of faith and works, through grace, to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to them only who are of the law, but to them also who are of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all.”
Thus we see that through the alterations made by Joseph Smith Paul’s words are made clearer; he was comparing the Law of Works, or that law that was added at the time of Moses (see Galatians 3), to the law of faith, which was had by Abraham and was taught by the apostles. This law of faith still included obedience, as was required of Abraham, but not obedience to the sacrifices and rituals of the Law of Moses (or circumcision, which is the main topic of Paul’s discourse at this point in the epistle).
As to your reply, I notice you can’t really say anything to counter what I said, except your usual “Your wrong because I said so.”
You said “The Most correct book upon the earth needed God to Tell JS to “Correct” and update “Minor” Grammar Issues.”
First, the Bible is not the most correct book. That honor belongs to the Book of Mormon. Secondly, who ever said God needed to tell Joseph Smith to update the Grammar. It is simply that he chose to (or that Joseph Smith chose to as he was doing the work). I don’t know and I don’t care. This is a trivial matter that has no direct baring on anything, and is being blown way out of proportion in your attempt to discredit Joseph Smith.
You said “Then you guys rarely use the J.S.T.”
Actually, we frequently use it, at least in my experience. The real issue is that we don’t use it for the purposes and in the way that you want to claim we should, and thus, once again, to try to use something that is basically meaningless.
I use it all the time, but not in my discussion with non-members, as it is not meant for that. It is meant for the instruction and enlightenment of the membership, not as a proof of the work. To use it as such a proof is to misuse it.
Kate
You said “Each Mormon denomination claims your denomination is just as false as the rest of Christianity.”
So. Catty was making the point that not all the denominations can be right, thus countering your claims that they are all the church of God, despite their differences. To this you mentioned the many denominations that have broken from the LDS church. This only has baring on the case if we accepted all them as legitimately LDS and able to bring men to God. We don’t. Despite all the denomination we still hold that only one can be right, and thus mentioning them becomes pointless.
You said “Funny how I was never told anything about the murdering Danites, Avenging Angels, the hit on Governor Boggs, Kirkland Bank, block voting, fiery public sermons, The Battle of Crooked River or Samuel Tarwater, the burning of Gallatin and the people the Mormons killed there, etc. I was told about Mountain Meadows but it was all a lie and blamed on the Indians. Pathetic. If you want to complain of persecution please have enough honesty and integrity to admit the Mormons were just as bad as anyone else.”
Funny thing is that I have known about almost all of these since I was about ten. I am not ignorant of the history, despite you allusions to such. However, the fact remains that the LDS church and its members did not act to the same level as those who persecuted them, and rarely did those who struck out do so with the authority of the church leadership. I know people like to claim otherwise, but these claims have no real evidence in the historical records.
Shem,
I know what the conversation was, my point still stands that all Mormon denominations consider themselves the one and only true church. That’s the difference between Mormon denominations and Christian denominations. Christians aren’t hung up on being the one true CHURCH we all belong to the body of Christ. Every other denomination of Mormonism considers you and your church apostate. You are just as wrong as the rest of Christianity. Those were your words. Just pointing out your sect is thought of the same way.
You are ridiculous. The horrible things Mormons did are perfectly ok and acceptable because somehow what they did wasn’t as bad as what was done to them? Murder is murder, looting is looting, extermination is extermination, etc. These don’t become less serious just because it’s a Mormon doing them. I could have some respect if mormon leaders would say these things happened but instead they have lied about them, doing or saying anything to paint a story of innocence while being persecuted. That’s a lie.
Of course, there’s no proof right? I can tell you are blind to ANYTHING that shows your leaders as anything less than perfect. If you truly did know about those things when you were ten, you are the exception. The LDS church has admitted that members are leaving in droves because of the Church’s history that members were not aware of. Your leaders did bad things including murder and you denying it even though there is evidence, shows how far you will go to believe a lie. Ya know, sometimes a duck really is a duck.
Maybe you could research or actually click on the links we provide, who knows, maybe you’ ‘ll learn something new.
I did not reply to every little point you made, not because I cant, but because I like you feel it’s a waste of time. I will touch on this, I said LDS rarely use the J.S.T, And you claim thats not true.
I say Really? Well how about this, From the Time JS finished the J.S.T till today, show me if you can, or explain why books, Magazines, listen to Mormon Prophets, teachers, or any Mormon source, If I look at how many times they quote the Bible, vs Quoting the J.S.T. It will be about 100-1. I even see you quoting the Bible here on this blog, but never do I see you saying your quoting the J.S.T.
I bet if I went back and looked at every Bible verse you gave on this site, and compared it to the J.S.T , I would see changes between the two versions. Why are you not only quoting the J.S.T ONLY?
I went to a local LDS book store here in town to buy my Copy of the J.S.T, They said they were not allowed to sell it and LDS dont use it. I had to by copy online.
I also went through all my old and newer Mormons published and authorised books, I looked for Bible quotes and wanted to see, was it the K.J or the J.S.T. Like I said, it was about 100-1 KJ vs J.S.T.
You can do this yourself and see, it is not used as much as you claim, also I never in my roughly 15 years or so of talking with LDS in person, on the street, or in LDS church services, do they read from or use the J.S.T.
You either know this and Lie, or you really are clueless.
Kate
“Christians aren’t hung up on being the one true CHURCH we all belong to the body of Christ…Just pointing out your sect is thought of the same way.”
Have I ever denied that? What bearing does this have on the discussion at hand? That is my point. You brought this up as if it countered Catty’s objection that not all the denomonations can be right, and it does nothing of the kind. It merely illustrates that the only ones that agree with Catty are the LDS, despite the many offshoots that have arrisen.
You say “You are ridiculous. The horrible things Mormons did are perfectly ok and acceptable because somehow what they did wasn’t as bad as what was done to them? ”
When did I ever make this claim? You are twisting my words so grossly that I find it hard to recognize them. I have never sought to excuse the acts of any man guilty of such crimes, and your attempt to portray my words in this way is highly offensive. I do not condomn what any of those guilty of murder and pilaging did, and neither did the church.
My point is that your attempt to claim that what a few members did is equal to the persecution and murders that were perpatrated against the saints. That is false, and anyone who actually knows history would agree. They would also tell you that the leaders of the church did not condone this behavior and that many of those who did act this way were excomunicated for doing so. They will be judged according to their crimes. But so will those who raped and murdered the saints.
“Your leaders did bad things including murder and you denying it even though there is evidence, shows how far you will go to believe a lie.”
I have seen the evidence, and every credible historian that I can find will tell you that the evidence is inconclusive, and most frequently exonerates the leaders of the church, despite what critics try to claim through twisting facts. Yes, some of the members have done horrible things, and I have never denied this. However, I have seen no credible evidence to suggest that it was ever done by the leaders; unless those leaders were subsequently excommunicated for the crime.
“Maybe you could research or actually click on the links we provide, who knows, maybe you’ ‘ll learn something new.”
I have done research, despite you people constantly telling me that I have no clue what I am talking about. I also frequently read your links, when I have time to do so. But again, I have found nothing credible in them to support what you claim. Partly because I have also looked at the credencials of most of the sites you give and they are usually extremely biased.
Rick
First, as you point out, the changes that have significant meaning are few, and so it is logical to quote from the KJV, as it is a common translation, rather than worrying about minor alterations like ‘an’ to ‘a.’ So, if we get right down to the meaningfu differences we are going to have a ratio of about 100 – 1, and so it is not surprising that such a ratio would exist in the quoting of the scriptures.
Second, it is possible to read a story as given in the KJV in order to teach a point without needing to use the alterations Joseph Smith made. Take the story of lot, as an example. His basic obedience to the men of God can be easily illustrated without the Joseph Smith translation, as can his wife’s lack of obedience. The alterations do portray a much better picture of Lot, but are not required for the purpose of that lesson. So, once again it is logical to use a more commonly accepted translation in teaching.
Then go back and see how many times people quote from the Book of Moses in all the publications. As this is part of the Joseph Smith Translation than any quotation from it is using that Translation. This part is actively studied in Seminary, Institute, and in the sunday school classes along side the KJV of Genesis, and a very familiar quote comes from it (see Moses 1: 39). Anytime a person speaks of Enoch they will most likely be quoting from the Joseph Smith Translation, as it is where the greatest record of this prophet is found.
Just to give a few examples of media that use it: The New Testament Video “The Woman at the Well” uses the JST of John 5. The video “To This End Was I Born” portrays part of the Book of Moses chapter 4 (the choosing of Christ). The Institute Manual for the New Testament, lesson for quotes the JST of John 1: 19. Again, in lesson 55 in that manual the JST is refered to in reference to Revelation chapter 12.
I could go on, but I think you get the idea. When the JST provides a significant insight into doctrine it is quoted without hesitation in the manuals and other teaching media that the church has set up for the instruction of the members. However, it is not as frequently used when speaking to non-members.
The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (through Emma Smith) retained all the original work Joseph Smith did on the Bible when the members split after Joseph Smith died. The RLDS obtained a copyright on the Joseph Smith Translation (JST), and they began to publish the entire JST. The Book of Moses and JST of Matthew 24 were canonized in the Pearl of Great Price by the Salt Lake LDS church. In the King James Bible published by the Salt Lake LDS church the JST is in the footnotes. The JST is used exactly as Shematwater said. Every LDS person I know uses the JST in personal studies.
People have been committing crimes and murders in the name of Christianity, by many, many different denominations, in just about every country in the world, from about over 1,500 years ago to today. The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and so much more. How about the Protestant led KKK, Army of God, Concerned Christians, and many more in modern times. It was Martin Luther’s anti Semitism writings and statements that led to the anti Jewish thinking and persecution of the Jews in Germany in WWII (and even before WWII in other European countries). What is the purpose of bringing up some of the fighting some of the early Mormons did? It does not accomplish anything.
Silkworm,
“What is the purpose of bringing up some of the fighting some of the early Mormons did? It does not accomplish anything.”
I brought it up because Shem played the “sever” persecution card that Mormons love to throw out there. Mormons were not innocent as the LDS church loves to teach. They did their fair share of persecuting. Yes we all know about the ugliness that has been done by Christians, the difference is we KNOW about it and it’s not swept under the rug or downplayed or outright lied about. The LDS church has admitted that members are leaving because of this violent history (and other history) that has been covered up or whitewashed by the church. Members have never heard of a lot of this stuff, they were taught the early LDS were “persecuted” just because of their religion, but a lot of it was because of their actions towards non Mormons. I’m not saying what either side did was right, I’m saying tell the truth about it.
Shematwater said:
spartacus
Heavenly Father also said “when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offering.” (D&C 124: 49) God intended there to be a temple in Jackson County, as well as Far West; but because of severe persecution the saints were prevented from doing so, and so God no longer required such at their hands, but delayed such work until a future time. In like manner God intended for the work of publishing the JST to be completed, but because of severe persecution this was prevented, and so God has no longer required such, delaying the work until a future time.
Problem: Let me just say first, I don’t understand how ungodly men “behooveth” God to do or not do anything. Now:
1) the commandmentS to complete and publish the JST was never rescinded so your analogy and related logic are irrelevant.
2) The only way your argument could work, even for Missouri Temple, let alone the JST (which 1 shows it couldn’t anyway), is if you are wrong when you said “God intended there to be a temple in Jackson County, as well as Far West”. Because if that is what God intended then it would have been done long ago. It hasn’t, so either God is too weak to empower men to do His will or God purposely makes Himself too weak to do but a fraction of His will and not at all in His timing by limiting Himself to the strength of men.
Instead, the only way I can see you viewing this consistently is to actually claim, “God wanted to test his followers by giving a commandment, bad men resisted, but testing was accomplished, God removed the catalyst – the commandment to build”. Otherwise, God wanted the temple built and built then, if it was resisted for a time, then sooner is better than later, so it still should have been done long ago, the temple, and certainly the JST.
What’s your response Shem?
Kate
“I’m not saying what either side did was right, I’m saying tell the truth about it.”
Well, considering that accuracy is part of telling the truth, maybe you should take your own advice. Your portrayal of these events is not accurate; your comparison of them to those acts committed against the saints is not accurate. Please, if it is the truth you are interested in, try sticking to it yourself.
The simple, historical fact is that the saints in Missouri and Illinois suffered sever persecution, and anyone attempting to deny or downplay that is not being honest. Another fact is that they never started the violence, though some members did react to such in the wrong way. This is the truth, despite what anyone tries to claim. What I said was perfectly true and accurate, and any attempt to portray it as otherwise is dishonest.
Spartacus
First, your first point is truly pointless. Just because we do not have a record of God saying “Don’t worry about that anymore,” is not proof that he didn’t accept the work done, just as he had with the work on the temple. Your argument only works if you can prove that he didn’t accept the work, and this can’t be proved.
“Because if that is what God intended then it would have been done long ago. ”
Let me ask you this: When God commanded the Israelites to go and destroy all the nations in Palestine did he intend for them to do so? If he did than why were they not all destroyed? They were not destroyed because many of the people did not comply with the commands of God, and thus God allowed this, as he will not force action in anyone. However, he accepted the work of those who were faithful.
This is basically the same thing that happened in Missouri and with the JST. God gave the command, but due to internal disobedience and external persecution the work was not completed. God allowed this to happen, as he will not force action in anyone. However, he accepted the work of those who were faithful.
Now, what you say about testing is perfectly true as well. It is perfectly true that God knew that the Temple would not be built at that time, even though he would have liked it to be done then. But if he hadn’t commanded it then than he could not have tested and tried the people.
Just because God wants something at a certain time does not mean he doesn’t know it ain’t gonna happen. After all, God wants all of us to come to him and be saved, and he wants us to do it now. But he knows that this will not happen. He knows that some will fall; he even knows which ones will not make it. But he still wants us all to make it, and acts as though we will for as long as he can.
Shem,
“What I said was perfectly true and accurate, and any attempt to portray it as otherwise is dishonest.”
I have yet to read anything from you that is true and accurate where your church or leaders are concerned. I think it’s grindael that calls this the Mormon bubble. You are so biased that you can’t admit what your leaders have said or done. There is always a fantastic explanation that you give that is so far off the mark it is unrecognizable to those of us who have been LDS. Yes Mormons were persecuted, but they also did the persecuting, including your leaders. I’m sorry that you can’t accept that. Mormons weren’t the innocents that your church has portrayed them to be. Live in your bubble if you want to but don’t push that bubble onto others.
Shematwater said:
Spartacus
First, your first point is truly pointless. Just because we do not have a record of God saying “Don’t worry about that anymore,” is not proof that he didn’t accept the work done, just as he had with the work on the temple. Your argument only works if you can prove that he didn’t accept the work, and this can’t be proved.
——————————————
My Reply: Shem, I respect your moves. However:
1) My first point still stands. You have to assume I assume what you assume in order for my piont to be pointless;) Instead I was just assuming that Heavenly Father’s quote you gave was part of his cancelling the commandment. Also that prophets are used. If prophets are used, then clarity should exist. With that quote you gave of Heavenly Father (that when followers are obedient but enemies are tough he’s behooved to remove the command) he wasn’t just giving an excuse for all failed goals, he was also communicating the removal of the command. Since HF did neither in regards the JST my point stands on the evidence that is, your move only exists on an assumption. What is the point of a prophet but to have clear communication from God? Instead, you want to assume that God is using the same logic for the JST as he did for the Mo Temple and, apparently, for all other times past, present, and future, that God’s endeavors don’t come to pass. This gives you an out, but what are you left with?
———————————————-
Shem said:
[spartacus said] “Because if that is what God intended then it would have been done long ago. ”
Let me ask you this: When God commanded the Israelites to go and destroy all the nations in Palestine did he intend for them to do so? If he did than why were they not all destroyed? They were not destroyed because many of the people did not comply with the commands of God, and thus God allowed this, as he will not force action in anyone. However, he accepted the work of those who were faithful.
————————————————
My Reply: False. Or at least false analogy. Your reasoning so far has been based on the excuse of “enemies” hindering completely obedient followers (JS with the JST and Mo Temple), not the disobedient choices of those commanded (the Israelites). In your example of the Isrealites, they were not defeated by enemies, they disobeyed. They disobeyed and paid for it with the progeny of those they left coming back to harrass their own progeny later. If God gives up on the JST and MO, not because of the disobedience of his surviving followers but because of the enemies’ force, then the we can be certain that those punished include all of his faithful followers from then until the present, going without a temple and a properly translated Bible.
I may not have written clearly enough, but when I said that if God intended it it would be done, I was assuming the LDS system – humans clearly spoken to, in a particularly favored/empowered dispensation, and obedient. Given a true prophet with a true priesthood and supernaturally unfailing last dispensation of “not falling away”, it would seem, by this time, that, God intending it, it would be done, or else the givens above become suspect.
In our issue – the JST (and it works for the Mo Temple, too) – we only have Joseph doing the translation assumedly obediently and him getting killed by enemies. So we have God not “keeping his end of the bargain” by preserving an obedient Smith until he either finished the translation and/or published. Either JS was obedient and God failed against enemies, or JS was not obedient, or it was all a test/ruse. Or God meant what he said, “3 Now, verily I say unto you my servants, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, saith the Lord, it is aexpedient to btranslate again;
4 And, inasmuch as it is practicable, to preach in the regions round about until conference; and after that it is expedient to CONTINUE THE WORK OF aTRANSLATION UNTIL IT BE FINISHED.” DnC 73, (emph. mine)
———————————————————
Shem said:
This is basically the same thing that happened in Missouri and with the JST. God gave the command, but due to internal disobedience and external persecution the work was not completed. God allowed this to happen, as he will not force action in anyone. However, he accepted the work of those who were faithful.
—————————————————–
My Reply: What “disobedience” Shematwater? Are you saying Joseph Smith was disobedient? Or the pioneer Mormons were disobedient? Who was disobedient?
———————————————————
Shematwater said:
Now, what you say about testing is perfectly true as well. It is perfectly true that God knew that the Temple would not be built at that time, even though he would have liked it to be done then. But if he hadn’t commanded it then than he could not have tested and tried the people.
Just because God wants something at a certain time does not mean he doesn’t know it ain’t gonna happen. After all, God wants all of us to come to him and be saved, and he wants us to do it now. But he knows that this will not happen. He knows that some will fall; he even knows which ones will not make it. But he still wants us all to make it, and acts as though we will for as long as he can.
———————————————————
My Reply: Again, these are not “enemies” resisting the will of God that “behooveth” him to stop trying. Obviously, God does not force His followers to do what they do not want to do, nor does He force non-believers to believe, but He does empower His followers to do His will.
Shematwater, you said, “God allowed this to happen, as he will not force action in anyone. However, he accepted the work of those who were faithful.” Your replies throughout this discussion have not even entertained this possibility – that God empowers His (obedient) followers to do His Will. But why doesn’t Heavenly Father backup those who follow him? Why isn’t Heavenly Father faithful to those who are faithful to him? Why deny the power of God?
I suppose you can’t entertain such though- IF God really wanted it done AND He empowers followers THEN it would be done. But it wasn’t done, so you have to deny the first premise – God didn’t REALLY want it done. Or His followers weren’t really followers, but disobedient.
To my recollection, God has never ceased an initiative because of enemies; He allows His followers to fail at following (Israelites clearing out the Promised Land, people believing in Christ), but He has never allowed enemies to stand in the way of Him or His faithful followers.
In the end, Shematwater, Heavenly Father wanted a good thing, the Bible corrected and a temple, He commanded it to be done, He made specific, detailed directions to several people besides the only one to be killed, to have the JST “finished” and “published”. Although JS died, there is supposedly someone perfectly able to do the same – every LDS prophet for the past 169 years – and a church body able to publish – for the vast majority of those 169 years- but all that is lacking is God’s will?
So now we are down to it:
Either the LDS church is false (JS to Monson and all inbetween not prophets or [as you indicated] disobedient) or Heavenly Father is false or at least [as you indicated] the sole cause of the 169 year delay of blessings originally offered immediately.