Previously Aaron wrote about the current trend in Mormonism wherein Mormons tell Christians that Mormon beliefs are just the same as theirs – Mormon doctrines are the same as [fill-in-the-Christian-denomination] doctrines. I want to expand on a bit of what Aaron wrote, and add to it.
Mormonism claims that in 1820 all Christian denominations were fighting against each other, not only for converts, but for their unique versions of spiritual truth. According to Joseph Smith,
“…so great were the confusion and strife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was right and who was wrong. My mind at times was greatly excited, the cry and tumult were so great and incessant. The Presbyterians were most decided against the Baptists and Methodists, and used all the powers of both reason and sophistry to prove their errors, or, at least, to make the people think they were in error. On the other hand, the Baptists and Methodists in their turn were equally zealous in endeavoring to establish their own tenets and disprove all others. In the midst of this war of words and tumult of opinions, I often said to myself: What is to be done? Who of all these parties are right; or, are they all wrong together?” (Joseph Smith—History 1:8-10)
If every Christian denomination advocates for disparate doctrines, as Joseph Smith said, how can Mormon doctrines be the same as all of them?
When Joseph Smith inquired of God to know which church was right, he claims he was told that the creeds and doctrines of these churches were all wrong (Joseph Smith—History 1:19) – if Mormonism’s doctrines are just the same as these other churches, then reason dictates that Mormonism’s doctrines must also be all wrong – right?
At General Conference in April 2006 President James Faust quoted Apostle Dallin Oaks,
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has many beliefs in common with other Christian churches. But we have differences, and those differences explain why we send missionaries to other Christians” (“The Restoration of All Things,” Ensign, May 2006, 61)
How can these beliefs be different but the same?
Larry Dahl, then Associate Dean of Religious Education at BYU explained,
“Truly the bright light of the Restoration, bursting forth from the time of the Prophet Joseph Smith, makes clear the fundamental, eternal principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. That light, revealed through the Prophet, replaced doctrinal shadows and clouds of error the world had inherited as a result of the great Apostasy nearly 2,000 years ago.” (Ensign, “The Morning Breaks, the Shadows Flee,” Ensign, April 1997, 12)
Apostle Boyd K. Packer expressed a similar idea during the commemoration of the 175th anniversary of the priesthood restoration in 2004. As reported by Church News,
“The [Mormon] Church is not merely an adjustment or correction of what had become Christianity following the Apostasy, President Packer said. “It is a replacement, a restoration of organization and authority to what had been when Christ established it.” (Church News, 5/22/04, 4)
If the “bright light of the Restoration” replaced the “doctrinal shadows and clouds of error” that non-Mormons believe — if Mormonism is a replacement of traditional Christianity — how can Mormon beliefs be the same as those in apostate Christianity?
In fact, in 2007 President Faust told a gathering of mission presidents and their wives,
“Our message is distinctly different because it contains the gospel restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith.” (Church News, 6/30/07, 5)
President Gordon B. Hinckley also explained that there are “many things of a doctrinal nature that distinguish this Church from all others” (Church News, 8/6/05, 2). Indeed, while encouraging Mormons to maintain their self-identification as Christians, Mr. Hinckley clarified,
“Now we may not be Christian by the standards of the world. In fact, we are not Christians by the standard under which they are Christian. If we were, there would have been no need for a restoration of the gospel. The restoration of the gospel occurred to correct all the mistakes of the past.” (Church News, 5/23/98, 5)
Members of the Mormon Church may be more comfortable telling Christians that Mormon beliefs are the same as their beliefs, but to say that is to be disloyal to the consistent teachings of Mormon leaders from Joseph Smith to current Mormon apostles, and to disdain the whole reason for The Restoration. The teachings of Mormonism are necessarily different from those of the allegedly apostate Christian world. Mormons, Christians invite you to gird up your loins and respectfully engage in the debate. Why? Because as Aaron said, “Truth matters. Life matters. Jesus matters.”
johnsepistle,
Thanks for the thoughts.
First, if we do not accept the definition of the word “Christian” which society uses, who gets to define the word? Of course, the folks here are going to insist that they are in the best position to correctly define the word. But there is inevitably scores of other groups who would disagree.
I looked up the definition of “Mormon” in several online dictionaries. I stopped after six different dictionaries gave as their first definition “a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” That excludes members of the FLDS and RLDS churches. So if a person pointed out a polygamous group in Southern Utah and claimed they were “Mormon,” they would be communicated incorrect information to most people within our society.
In saying that, I don’t necessarily feel ownership or any particular competitive spirit toward that name, “Mormon.” In fact, we have been encouraged many times to refer to ourselves as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which I do as often as I can. So it is not as if I and other LDS are fighting for the territory including the name “Mormons.” For me, it is about precision in communicating. I neither want to hide information nor mislead any person.
Second, why should we associate a “Christian” with the definition that may have been used 600 years ago if that definition is any different than today? (My guess is that the use of the term would have been more inclusive 600 years ago compared to those today who want to exclude LDS). Should you be expected to use the English language as it was used by Chaucer 700 years ago? Of course not. Why should we use the term Christian in a way that contradicts the way society today defines it?
I have absolutely no problems with a person or persons claiming that LDS are not Christians and provide an explanation for why they maintain such a position. I have great confidence that the majority of people who heard such a claim would be able to place that claim in appropriate context. In other words, I think most people would recognize where those people making such an argument come from and that they represent a fairly small percentage of Christians.
But to claim that LDS are not Christians and not explain why or the basis for such a claim is dishonest in my opinion. Because LDS fits the definition of the word Christian as defined in almost all dictionaries.
MJP- I am puzzled by your response to my claim that LDS are Christians and have some things that are similar to non-LDS Christians yet also have other things about us that are different. Do you not understand how such a thing is possible?
All cats are animals. But not all animals are cats. It really is that simple.
Thanks.
Here is a simple answer.
The Gnositcs claimed that they were Christians in the 1st Century. They self identified as such. But they believed that all matter was evil and that Jesus did not come in the flesh. They were called heretics by the Apostles of Jesus and by the Early Church Fathers. Were they Christians? In the broad sense, yes, in that they CALLED THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS and their religion centered around the name of Christ.
The Mormons claimed they were Christians in the 19th Century. They self identified as such. But they believe that Jesus is not God in the flesh, (rather “a” god in the flesh), that men can become just like God (they are ontologically the same) and believe in polytheism (more than one God), baptism for the dead and a host of other heretical doctrines. Are they Christians? In the broad sense, yes, in that they CALLED THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS and their religion centers around the name of Christ.
Mormons believe that the Gnostics were Christians. In fact, in the recent Swedish Rescue Documents they include this as part of their answers to difficult questions,
No Christian would call the Nag Hammadi Library “scriptures”. Christians do not believe in many of the doctrines listed as part of Smith’s “restored gospel”. The current dictionary defines Mormonism as what the Mormons self identify as, it does not examine their doctrines.
Of course Mormons do not accept the Christian definition of what a Christian is. That would be self defeating. Duh. They want to be known as Christians. But are they? Not by their doctrines.
Are the FLDS Mormons? Yes, because they believe in the teachings of Jo Smith, including the Book of Mormon. Because the SLC Branch has discontinued some of those teachings matters not at all. Remember the SLC Branch still BELIEVE in polygamy and practice it (the sealing part) which makes their polygamous unions here valid in their afterlife.
Why do Mormons still use the KJV vernacular to pray with, and which is used in their scriptures and still exclusively use the KJV of the Bible which is over 400 years old?
All religions are religions, but not all religions are Christian. It is just that simple. Brigham Young let the Mormon “cat out of the bag” when he taught that your God was Adam. And why not? With so many gods to choose from? Jo identified him as Min, a picture he claimed was drawn by “Father Abraham”. The very first words from the manuscript of the Book of Abraham:
Shem
You said “A true follower of Christ is one who has accepted his will in all things, including the performance of required ordinances, and thus only the LDS are the true followers of Christ.”
A true follower of Christ believes in Christ and what Christ says. If anything the LDS are the true followers of Joseph Smith. They believe without question doctrines given by him. How much of Jesus is really in the LDS doctrine anyway? Christ appears briefly in the BOM, yet you claim he is central to your church’s belief’s? You don’t even believe what He said of Himself. Jesus claimed to be God. He said marriage is only for this world. He said that none of us are righteous. He said that he is now the temple. Before you come on here and tell us about your ordinances making you Christian maybe you should test the prophet that gave them to you. That would also be an act of obedience to Christ. Christ never mentioned anything about handshakes and eternal marriages giving you glory, thats all LDS prophet speak. Jesus doesn’t even introduce that stuff into LDS doctrines, does he? It’s all from the mouth of your prophet. If Joseph Smith or any of his predecessor have even one prophecy that didn’t come true your putting your faith into a false prophet. If your prophet is false than so is your church and your ordinances are nothing more than hand gestures.
Grindael, you made some great points . I think that we can get side tracked by Mormons
who say that they are christians too etc and request that they be called such by non LDS
who follow Jesus . Mormon leaders don’t want to really be known as just christians , because
they’ve claimed to be much more i.e. they are the only true christians. They don’t want
to be one of a family of christian churches in their communities because all those other churches
are part of what constitutes the Church of the Devil in these latter days, ( whose members are
to be viewed as anti christs , according to Mormon leaders like Brigham Young ) . To listen how
some Mormons leaders state that it is not in the spirit of Christian brotherhood to say LDS
are not christians . Christian brotherhood ? Influencial Mormons should just cut to the chaste
and tell the public in a consistent manner that Mormons alone are the only true followers of
Jesus . Others are peddlers of a perverted gospel and false doctrines about God that robs them
of salvation , the result of a universal apostasy 1900 years ago.
That announcement moves the spotlight where it belongs —challenging the claims that Mormon
leaders have made since their alleged appointment by Jesus in these latter days , and these
claims have way more to do than their merely stating that they should to be called ,
“christian” —- because the common Dictionary already can be used for that much .
“performance of required ordinances”
Well now that’s an interesting concept. A couple of thoughts. Did Jesus institute these “required ordinances” or where they instituted by some phoney prophet who lifted them from a fraternal organization of which, he was a member.
Don’t even talk to me about “required ordinances” unless you can provide some sort of Scriptural support because I don’t recognize rituals invented by a hustler.
I participated in all sorts of “required ordinances” when I was a Catholic. These ordinances were called sacraments. I was baptized as an infant. I went to confession and holy communion on a regular basis. I went through the confirmation ritual. Besides that I went to mass everyday when I was in elementary school, for many years said in Latin, and always on Sunday. If need be, these rituals can be traced far back in the history of the Christian faith.
Are any of them necessary for salvation? As a former Catholic, I’d say no. Do they assist those who participate in them to express their faith. I’d say sure, as long as they have a fix on who God is, what Jesus did for them and by placing their faith in Christ for their salvation, they have eternal life.
Mormons suppose that their rituals performed in the name of the Egyptian fertility god Min, will bring them to a place where they will become a god. Faith in a false god, no matter how sincere, will not bring someone eternal life.
Time to rethink this Mormons!
FoF,
My concern comes because its as if you want to have it both ways. When its convenient and beneficial, you want to be Christian, and minimize what differences exist. The differences that don’t seem problematic are the ones you are willing to talk about.
MikeR (and others):
It is inaccurate and misleading to claim that LDS believe we are the “only true Christians.” I have never heard this is a church meeting or in church literature. I can only think that our critics use this claim to justify their criticisms of us and their campaign to deny our church is a Christian church.
I accept all people as Christians who believe Christ is the Savior of the world and try to follow Him. I have no interest in drawing lines which would either include or exclude anybody from that category with the exception of my own religion. I simply do not care about controlling the language in that way.
MJP- how am I wanting to “have it both ways?” I accept the definitions of words like “Christian” and “Mormon” found in the dictionaries. And how do I try to “minimize” the differences between my faith and that of “Christianity” in general. I have no reason to deny any real differences, but also recognize those things that are “similar.”
My interest is more information and better understanding. I do not try to hide anything. I believe it is our critics who actually limit the information when talking to people who know little about this whole debate.
Grindael- as always- you seem to be adding confusion and distracting from the real issues. What in the world does Robinson’s reference to the Nag Hammadi “scripture” demonstrate? If I refer to the Muslem scriptures, does that mean I accept their canon as my own “scripture?” What a crazy argument. We do not accept the canon of the gnostics as scripture. Is that really what you are arguing?
You also make the claim that the definition of “Mormons” found in dictionaries are based upon our “self-definition.” How do you know? Do you have any support for that claim? Does it make a difference? The dictionary provides definitions of words used in English in our society. And we fit the dictionary’s definition of “Christians.” If you want to change the definition of the word “Christian,” you must first convince the rest of society that we should all change the definition. In the meantime, you are blowing hot air and being dishonest if you go around claiming that we are not Christians as society defines that term.
And neither can you change the definition of “Mormon” to suit your purposes without the approval of society and the dictionary. Can I start claiming that you are Chinese because you own a Chinese book or like Chinese food? Of course you have your own rationale (pretty weak albeit) for claiming we are not Christians. But you are wrong according to society. Society and the dictionary defines a “mormon” as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The FLDS or RLDS folks are not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So you are incorrect, my friend.
No. (not your made up part) Church leaders in Sweden, in an effort to quell the rising tide of discontent over unanswered questions put in a document heading NAG HAMMADI SCRIPTURES. They were calling them scriptures. It was their choice of words. The title of the book they were advocating was simply the Nag Hammadi LIBRARY. They added the word “scriptures”. You forget, I grew up in the church and heard many firesides where those documents were touted as PROOF that the “gospel” had been changed, I heard it personally from Hugh Nibley, and Einar Erickson, and others. They have now been elevated by your church leaders to scriptures.
Mormons are called Christians in the dictionary because that is how they self identify. Where else would they get the definition from? I’m not being deceptive at all. Your argument about being Chinese because I own a book written in that language is so far fetched and stupid that it defies logic. I didn’t start a religion that revolved around a Chinese book. I don’t hold that book as sacred, and God’s word. I don’t believe that the person that wrote the Book is a prophet or that I must follow them. That analogy is utterly ridiculous, like the rest of your lame arguments.
And I never said that the FLDS are MEMBERS of the Salt Lake Branch of Mormonism. I said they were Mormons. They are, because they follow the teachings of Jo Smith and believe in the Book of Mormon just like you do. You don’t have control over the term, and don’t own it. (Even though your Church tried to copyright it — and failed miserably). If you go to wiki and look under “Groups within Mormonism” you find the FLDS and a host of others. The term Mormon is a broad term that defines more than just the SLC Branch of Mormonism. You are wrong on this one bub. Encyclopedia Britannica (which gives more expanded definitions that are not included in dictionaries who are brief for a REASON):
You have to put words in my mouth and then act like I said what you are rebutting. You do this all the time. You are a walking straw man.
Grindael,
So your argument is that we accept the Nag Hammadi documents as scripture? Bizarre. I really don’t know what to say in response. It must be great to be so powerful as to make such decisions.
I would estimate the percentage of members who have even heard of the Nag Hammadi documents below .5%. That is probably over estimating the number.
Your line of logic in arguing that we are not Christians is very strange. I understand that you see yourself as some type of authority on the topic. But the reality is that you are not. We very much fit the description of a Christian as defined by society and the Bible. You have no more authority than any other person in the world to decide such things. You are free to your opinions, but they mean nothing to the rest of the world.
According to the definition of the word Christian in society, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are Christians. Your line of reasoning is simply bizarre and does nothing to change this fact.
And as I said before, I feel no binding attachment to the term “Mormon.” We are even encouraged to not use that term to define us. I am simply using the word as defined in the dictionaries. As long as critics indicate that the “Mormons” like Warren Jeffs and others are not members of our church, I really don’t care. The problem is that critics will often not provide this information for people and are simply being dishonest.
I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and am a Christian. You have no say in the matter. I have no desire to define your religion or your faith. It is puzzling that you seem so desperate to do so for other people. In my opinion, it screams of insecurity and doubt about your own religion.
Another statement from a guy that knows next to nothing about Mormon History. Here are some gems for you to chew on:
Now I come to us, “Mormons.” We are the only true Church, so we say. We have got the only true faith, so we say and believe. John Taylor, Journal of Discouses, Vol. 1, p.155, June 12, 1853.
But returning to the general corruption that has prevailed nationally, politically, and religiously, under the name of Christianity, leaving out Christ and his Apostles, I do think there has been no idolatry in the world, under any form or system, that could surpass it. It is the mystery of iniquity, the great whore of all the earth. It has brought the whole earth under a lasting curse, having departed from the laws of God, changed the ordinances, and broken the everlasting covenant, in consequence of which the earth is destined to be burned, and few men left. So far as that one point is concerned, of worshipping the one true God under the name of Mahometanism, together with many moral precepts, and in war only acting on the defensive, I think they have exceeded in righteousness and truthfulness of religion, the idolatrous and corrupt church that has borne the name of Christianity. Parley P. Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p.41, September 23, 1855.
The Christians profess to believe in Jesus Christ; but, if he told the truth, not one of them really believes in him. I do not doubt their honesty; but I doubt the manifestation of any knowledge they have of him; for if they were his disciples, they would do the works. which he did. That alone is positive proof to me that they neither believe in him nor have any idea what he designs concerning them. They may be honest and sincere; but they are very ignorant. This people have the true knowledge; they have it not, We have the Priesthood; they have it not. We have the way of life and salvation; they have it not. We know how to be Saints—how to save ourselves and all who will hearken to our counsel; they do not. Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.198, February 7, 1858.
We profess to be Saints of the Most High, and this is what we are in reality, or should be. This does not, of course, apply to those who are not Saints. We profess that this is the work of God in which we are engaged, and our profession is strictly correct. When we say this is the Church and kingdom of God, we believe it and so it is; and it is the only Church and the only kingdom that he has on this earth in this generation that we know anything about. We profess to know that God has revealed his law, that he has restored the holy Priesthood, and that he is communicating his will to the human family. We profess to believe that the kingdom of God will overrule and prevail over every other power and every other form of government and that it will go on from strength to strength, from power to power, from intelligence to intelligence, from knowledge to knowledge; and that in the due course of events, it will rule over the whole earth, until every creature upon the earth and under the earth and on the sea will be subject to the law of God, to the kingdom of God, to the dominion of God, and to the rule of the holy Priesthood. John Taylor, Journal of Discourses Vol. 8, p.96, June 17, 1860.
One of the first declarations made by Joseph Smith, when he was only a boy between fourteen and fifteen years of age, was, that the whole Christian world had gone astray, and that the true Church of Christ was not to be found upon the earth. … This, then, was Joseph’s authority. Jesus Christ himself, the Redeemer of the world, the Son of God, He that was crucified and put to death on Mount Calvary, but who arose triumphant from the grave, the founder, the organizer, the head, the President of the Christian Church, explained to Joseph Smith the condition of the world. There is no higher authority than He. If anyone in heaven or earth has a right to say what is true Christianity, and what is not, Christ himself, the founder of the church, has that right. Andrew Jensen, Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol.2, p. 151, January 16, 1891.
Therefore, do not allow yourselves to enter into politics so deeply that it will lead you from the path of duty as good Latter-day Saints, as good Christians, for I contend that the Latter-day Saints are the only good and true Christians, that I know anything about in the world. There are a good many people who profess to be Christians, but they are not founded on the foundation that Jesus Christ himself has laid. The Latter-day Saints have not only received the form of Godliness but the power of God unto life and salvation if they will only live it. The “PROPHET” Joseph F. Smith, Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol.2, p. 305, November 2, 1891.
There is no halfway ground here. The Lord clearly declares that this Church, which He had given His servants strength to organize, is the “only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth.” Now, because we make this declaration our Christian friends take exceptions to our course, and look upon us as being exclusive, narrow, bigoted, and accuse us of “unchurching” them. Well, we will have to bear the accusation of being narrow, and contracted, and bigoted; but this is the truth. If it is not true, let me repeat, Mormonism is a deception and a fraud, and is not what it pretends to be. B.H.Roberts, Brain Stuy, Collected Discourses Vol. 5, p.136, April 26, 1896.
It is ok for Mormons to proselyte Christians but oh, if the reverse happens….
And when these professed ministers attempt to lead away the young people of the Latter-day Saints, they must preach a belief in that being unto them, and in no other, for “Thou shalt serve the Lord thy God with all thy might, with all thy mind and with all thy strength.” We must not serve an unknown God, but worship the true and Living God; that being who made man in His image and placed him upon the earth. Not a supreme power believed in by the infidel world, only called by another name; not a supreme power that you feel in the air or see in the leaves upon the trees which infidels call by the name of nature, and which modern christians call God–both the same thing, only called by different names. Ben E. Rich, Conference Report, October 1901, p.51.
Notice the derogatory terminology, “professed” and “infidel”. And leading away young latter day saints? Oh my, we can’t have that! But it’s ok for Mormons to do the same to Christians?
Usually we go among the people who are Christians who do believe or profess to believe, and that honestly, in God and in the saving and redeeming powers of the Lord Jesus Christ; and when we go among them, and they hear for the first time that they are after all probably mistaken in the faith they have chosen … it takes instruction, and much labor on the part of the teachers of the Gospel to show these individuals that they have been in error, and that their religious advisers have also been in error, and to convince them of the truth which is brought to them by the true shepherds of Jesus Christ. Hyrum M. Smith, Conference Report, April 1906, p.50.
This is not just come and get more, this is you are in error, your religious teachers are in error, you are wrong, we are the only true church, your God is an “unknown God” who is only “nature” who the “modern Christians” call God… and you wonder why we are defending ourselves from Mormonism? But there’s a lot more! I can do this all day…
Here is future “prophet” Joseph Fielding Smith,
We ought to rejoice in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, because it is the truth revealed again. We are not walking in darkness. We are not led by blind leaders who have taken to themselves authority and prerogatives which do not belong to them; but we are led by and directed through the spirit of inspiration, and it behooves each one of us as members of the Church to heed the warning voice and follow the instruction that is given at our conferences. We are, notwithstanding our weaknesses, the best people in the world. I do not say that boastingly, for I believe that this truth is evident to all who are willing to observe for themselves. We are morally clean, in every way equal, and in many ways superior to any other people. The reason is that we have received the truth, the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not to us a dead letter, something perhaps to be followed on the Sabbath day and forgotten on the six other days of the week: but our religion is an every-day religion. We are expected to live in accordance with the principles of truth every day of our lives; for these principles are just as true in the middle of the week as they are on the Sabbath day. I believe, further, that the Latter-day Saints are the only people who are consistent in their belief, and practice. We accept Jesus as the Redeemer of the world without qualification, and that is not done generally in the world, among those who profess to believe in Him and call themselves Christians. Even among many ministers who affix to their names the title of reverend, He is not accepted as the Redeemer of mankind. They are not consistent, because they do not teach and they do not practice the principles that have been set forth by the Savior, and which are recorded in the scriptures. Men stand up before the people in the congregations of the so-called Christian communities, and declare that they do not accept Christ as the Redeemer of the world. They teach the people that they do not believe in the resurrection from the dead. They do not even accept the eternal resurrection of the Christ…
I can’t even go on with this because it is so packed with lies. The Mormons are superior. They are the only true Christians. The Mormons only have the truth. They are the “best people in the world”. They are not led by “blind leaders” who have “taken to themselves” authority… Christians don’t practice the principles set forth by the Savior, don’t believe in the divinity of Christ, don’t believe in the resurrection???? Where does he get this from?
And FOF never heard of this stuff? Well, start reading pal. Of course you haven’t because you don’t want to be bothered reading it. You don’t care where Mormonism came from. You only believe the watered down modern version of Mormonism that has been tweaked by slick hired PR firms and the Correlation Committee of Whitewash.
.LOL. Now you change your tune about the word Mormon. Now you don’t care because you were proven wrong. Typical. And now comes the psychoanalysis, which is the only fall back for people like you who know nothing about your own church. My “religion” and my “faith” is belief in Jesus Christ as defined in the Bible. I don’t need Mormon “prophets” who are full of lies, confusion, deception, and error, to tell me what my religion or faith should be like you do. If anyone comes off as desperate here, it is you FOF, because you don’t understand Mormonism and try desperately to shove your erroneous version of it down our throats.
You don’t understand the concept of a rebuttal to falsehood. You don’t understand the concept of defending the faith. To you it is all “desperation”, because I can quote the actual statements of Mormon leaders and scripture in context within the actual historical framework and you can’t. You set up strawman arguments on a daily basis. You hardly EVER quote your own leaders. You don’t understand them, or your own doctrines or how they evolved. You believe what YOU want to believe, not what your leaders actually have taught. You have no real answers to the contradictions, the lies, the bad theology, or the ever changing “revelations”. You argue petty points using petty tactics.
You can call yourself whatever you want FOF. I don’t care. But I do care that you portray a Mormonism that is not what it says it is, as defined by its own leaders. THAT is where you keep going wrong, and continue to do so, and I’ll be right there to correct your errors every time you show up with them.
Your own church authorities put together a document that called the Nag Hammadi documents “scripture”. Deal with it. It doesn’t matter that Warren Jeff’s and others aren’t members of your BRANCH of MORMONISM. They still practice a pernicious doctrine that your church STILL PRACTICES and BELIEVES IN. That is the fruits of the teachings of Jo Smith. He is acting just like the Mormons did in the early church. Marrying children. Marrying other men’s wives. Lying, cheating, and preaching violence and hatred. Until your BRANCH denounces polygamy, removes it from your ‘scriptures’ along with it’s past racism and other crimes, you, and all those in your leadership are affirming that all of that was ok. It wasn’t “folklore”, and they sure did KNOW where it all came from. They are just lying about it. You in affirming those men give tacit approval to those actions.
If God was at the helm of your ONLY true Christian Church, like your leaders have claimed time after time, he would have removed Brigham Young, Jo Smith and others from office. That is a fact, they said so. But he did not, because God is not at the helm of Mormonism. Men are, who make it up as they go along. The documents prove it. History proves it. That is why you call me desperate, because you can’t accept the truth.
FofF
Here’s the Definition of Christianity according to the Oxford English dictionary:
“The religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, or its beliefs and practices”
It might be helpful to forget for a moment what society believes is ‘Christian’ & look instead at whether the LDS, or any other Mormon church for that matter, actually fits the above definition. What does the above definition say?
“The religion based on THE PERSON & teachings of Jesus Christ”
Months ago when I mentioned ‘The Person’ of Christ’ to an LDS member in here he didn’t even know what I was talking about & by that admittance showed that Mormons are not Christians.
Many times in here I’ve seen Mormons use the expression ‘required ordinances’ or the ‘law of tithing’ or any other law that suits the debate at the time. Is that following the teachings of Christ? When did Christians start living by the Law? If the above definition is accepted then the Mormon organization, by following such beliefs & practices, have effectively removed their church from the Christian fold & have taken a stance that is actually opposed to true Christianity. The LDS loudly proclaim their anti-Christian theology & at the same time protest when told they are not Christians. Talk about wanting your cake & eating it.
Ultimately what it all comes down to is this, if Mormons are, by their own definition, Christian, then anyone opposed to Mormonism must be anti-Christian & that I suppose would fit in well with the Mormon persecution mindset.
Fo F , you said to me , ” It is inaccurate and misleading to claim that LDS believe we are the only
true christians .”
First, what you personally believe is not of little importance to me . I evaluate Mormon leaders
teachings/beliefs . Mormon apologists are good at downplaying, dodging or even denying what
some of their leaders have said , so I really could care less what you believe.
Mormon leaders have said that the Mormon church is the only true church today , and they have
also said that true believers in Jesus are those who accept Mormon prophets as appointed
by God , those who do not serve another master . Spencer Kimball said that Mormons are
the true followers of Jesus Christ , and Joseph F. Smith said that LDS are the only true
christians [ Teachings of Spencer Kimball p. 434 ; Joseph F. Smith , Collected Discourses
vol. 2 p. 305 ; cited in MRM Newletter Nov/Dec 2008 , Mar/Apr. 2011 ] .
Now it seems you are way to quick to accuse others of being dishonest or misleading in what
they have said because they purposely limit information etc. and you have also said :
” The logical question is whether we misrepresent our doctrine or beliefs .” Since you used
“we” does that include the Mormon P.R. dept public responses about various Mormon beliefs?
Because if it does then you are wrong .
I find some of your statements about this whole , ” are Mormon christians ” thing ridiculous .
You think that I , as a critic, deny your church this category ( “christian”) ? You’re not
misrepresenting what I said/believe about this are you ?
This whole idea of yours of saying others here are trying to control who can be called a
“christian ” is almost a red herring because since the whole issue concerns Mormonism
then we should look beyond the mere Dictionary “christian ” and see how Mormon leaders
have controlled who can be identified as the true Church and true followers of Jesus in these
latter days .
Folks, this is a classic example of FOF making up a straw man argument. What I said was that Mormon leaders CALLED the Nag Hammadi writings “scripture” in rescue documents, so they must believe they are scripture. I never said anything about the church “accepting them”. I agree what you said is bizarre. Bizarre that you would get that out of what I said. Mormons believe whatever they want and that changes by the minute, depending on whom you speak to. Your leaders have taught that Adam is God, but not all Mormons believe this. So what? It doesn’t change the fact that your leaders taught it as “revelation”. What my point is, is that they are so desperate to verify Jo Smith’s heresies, that they will call heretical Gnostic writings “scripture” in order to do so. And because less than 5% of Mormons (your estimate) don’t know what they are, this is an easy deception to get away with, and is typical of Mormon Apologists and Church leaders like Turley and Jensen who can then claim they have no “authority” to do so, but do it anyway, and if someone objects they can say the “brethren” never said so. Their very answers are the same ones given by Mormon Apologists, who claim they are not acting for the church. Very deceptive. Very slick. In fact, Simon Southerton addresses this tactic here. He says,
Their prepared answers to the questions raised at that fireside included the document that had the Nag Hammadi documents listed as “scriptures”.
Grindael,
Yes- modern Christianity is apostate for sure. But we do not believe we are the only Christians.
And I suggest you just might glance over the thread- my statement in my last post was restating what I have already stated in this thread regarding the word and name “Mormon.” I am not changing my tune one bit. Keep up friend.
Nag Hammadi- hardly worth arguing with you. So we now believe the Nag Hammadi documents are scriptures? Your arguments are so irrelevant.
It doesn’t matter what you say. You are not the gatekeeper for Christianity. You are a partisan blogger who enormously over estimates the value of his arguments and position. You have no more authority than any member of my church or any other church.
Tell you what- since you deny that Christ was the Son of God, I will just conclude that you are not really a Christian. You are apostate and do not believe the Bible literally. Please come unto Christ and accept Christianity. Soften your heart and listen to the Good Shepherd.
Your position can very well be compared to a 7 year old kid sitting in the back of a station wagon crying to his mother, “mom, Billy is touching me.” That is essentially the mindset of those who spend their time trying to define who is and who is not a Christian based upon their own arbitrary criteria which aligns them perfectly with the Pharisees.
In my last post the word “not” should be left out of the second sentence .
K, fof, describe the differences. Don’t hold back. Tell uus, and anyone reading what is different between our faiths.
MJP,
Good luck getting FoF or any mormon poster here to be open and honest with what they believe.
For years the LDS have been claiming we dont know what they believe and we keep getting our facts wrong, and we are lying about them.
But me and Falcon have been asking the Mormons for years to set us straight and tell us where we are wrong, and as of yet, the LDS wont come forward and be honest in what they believe.
RickB and MJP,
Differences between our religions? Where do I start? Huge differences in my opinion.
Just looking at the most basic doctrines, I believe the doctrine of the Trinity is 50/50 paganism and Biblical extrapolation. I could not agree more with the statements from early leaders of the church that the doctrine of the Trinity is a very damaging doctrine that effects the ability of people to have real faith in God. It introduces distance between us and God necessarily. The justification for the doctrine could not be weaker in my opinion.
The doctrine of the atonement is a place where we differ as well. There is no system of belief that more highly esteems the atonement of Jesus Christ than that found in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The magnitude and depth of that sacrifice is infinitely more significant according to our doctrine than that in most of Christianity. Most Christians I talk to believe that Christ suffered on the cross what literally tens of thousands of other people suffered as they were crucified. To these Christians, it was the fact that it was God going through this that made it different. And in this way, it is in essence the belief that God got a special or discount deal on paying for the sins of mankind.
According to our belief, Christ literally paid the legal penalty for all of the sins of mankind in a one-to-one deal. In other words, He suffered the cumulative penalty that all mankind would have to suffer for all of our sins, not a token payment or sampling of that punishment- He suffered exactly what we would have suffered added up for all of us. In addition to paying for all the sins of mankind on this planet, Christ suffered for the sins of “worlds without number.” In addition to paying for sin, Christ suffered every pain, depression, every illness and emotional, spiritual, and physical pain every experienced for mankind on this planet and all those “world[s] without number.” He did this to empower Him to “succor” us in our trials and pains. All of this took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross at Calvary. Most of Christianity has no idea about most of this. They see Him as having suffered the pains of crucifixion alone, which although terrible, don’t even approach the suffering He really suffered from our perspective.
Traditional Christianity does not believe in a God who is unchanging and alive. Instead, they believe in a past God and past revelation. Despite their rationalization, they cannot accept a contemporary prophet or revelation. And in this way, they are just like past generations that have rejected prophets. The Pharisees claimed to base their religion on the tradition of Abraham and Moses, yet they rejected Christ who was standing in front of them. There is something about human nature that makes it easier to believe in ancient prophets than in living prophets. And of course, there will always be a justification or reason for doing this.
Apostate Christianity sets up the Bible as the infallible, complete and perfect compilation of all of God’s revelations to mankind. We believe it is the word of God, but nothing approaching a complete compilation of God’s revelations. As a result of Christianity’s perspective of the Bible, many among them borderline worship the book rather than He who provided the revelations contained therein. Although they claim it as their authority, most do not recognize that it provides them with no more authority than it does anybody else.
Ironically, many Christians reject the process and concept behind the Bible. By that I mean that they reject the idea of personal revelation and the authority that that represents. They apparently do not understand that every revelation in the Bible is the result of just such revelation to individuals on planet earth. It strains their faith and belief to think that God can reveal truth to individuals today and answer questions authoritatively. Instead, they will almost always refer back to the Bible as the ultimate authority, apparently not recognizing that they are engaging in circular reasoning in rejecting revelation.
And on and on. This is just a start. But these are very significant differences of which I feel no degree of embarrassment or shame. My impulse is to lift these differences up for all the world to see. Although I am certain that many lengthy arguments and posts will follow this attempting to tear apart my perspective on these differences, these are some fundamental differences from my perspective which I provide at the request of some here. I don’t hesitate for a second to point out our differences. But I also recognize that we have some things in common. And I am no more embarrassed of those than I am our differences.
Thanks.
“We know how to be Saints—how to save ourselves and all who will hearken to our counsel; they do not. Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p.198, February 7, 1858.”
This speaks volumes. Mormons know how to save themselves and others. Tell me again why they profess to be Christians. True Christians believe in Jesus for Salvation. I will give them this, Mormons are fantastic record keepers. Too bad for today’s LDS, they can’t just make this stuff go away. FOF, how do you reconcile what your past leaders say about “the one true church”and “the only true Christians”
with what you say you believe? Either they’re right or you are. Who do we believe?
Kate,
We save ourselves by choosing to repent and apply the atonement of Jesus Christ to our lives. And we perform vicarious ordinances for those who did not have the opportunity in this life so they can receive the blessings of the atonement of Christ.
We profess to be Christians because we know that it is only through Christ that we are saved.
But I think you know that. But it serves your purpose to try to paint a caricature of our beliefs as the critics are wont to do.
Thanks.
That (that your church believes they are not the only Christians) is not what your leaders have taught, so you are lying. Who are you to say what Mormons believe? You have no authority whatsoever. You are just a misinformed drone who can’t even comprehend English. I proved it in my posts above, but you NEVER give credence to your own leaders, you ignore them and then try and say “we believe”. It’s what YOU WANT TO BELIEVE, but that is a lie. Keep doing so at your own peril. It makes you look even more foolish than you are. You can’t accept reality, only the made up world you have invented that doesn’t include facts and common sense. (The Mormon Bubble of Denial)
You are “changing your tune”, because you did not rebut MY PREMISE, which was not based on your feelings about the word MORMON but the definition of it, which includes ALL BRANCHES of the MORMONism, including FLDS. I just proved you wrong, AGAIN. And if you didn’t care about the word Mormon you would not have responded to me, so you are lying (again) to boot.
My arguments may be “irrelevant” to you, because you don’t care about the truth. But there are many that do, and will see the argument for what it is, a deceptive way of trying to prove that Jo Smith “restored” some mythical gospel he made up, which is just as wacky as the Gnostic Version of Mormonism. And you continue to use your own made up version of what I actually said. Can’t you read? Comprehend? Take some English courses. You need them.
I know you are but what am I… Yeah, that is FOF, LOL. True Christians who believe in the doctrine of Christ as given in the Holy Bible (not Jo Smith pseudepigrapha) have great authority. I get mine directly from Christ. You get yours from a made up priesthood ordination that Jo Smith inserted into “revelations” that he changed after the fact. You have no leg to stand on here. You believe in fiction.
LOL. Here you go again making up stuff. That is all you are good for. Wow, you sound just like those Mormon leaders I quoted. All you can do is lie, just like they do. This from a Book of Mormon “expert” who can’t even quote the Book of Mormon without making up stuff and adding your own words to it. Who will ever take you seriously FOF except for those few fellow Mormons that buy into your lies? I can’t believe you come back here after all of the dishonesty and falsehood you propagate. I would be embarrassed to be you. Jesus is embarrassed for you. He can also forgive you if you accept Him as your personal Savior and stop following men. But all you have is that cult mindset. Why don’t you listen to Christ? You won’t because you personify what Peter wrote,
Your master is the Mormon Church and it’s self proclaimed “prophets”, not Christ. You deny Christ because you believe that he is some lower God, the son of Min the Phallic god of the Egyptians, who Jo Smith illustrated to the world is your actual god, (The Father sitting on his throne with an erection) who Brigham Young then said was Adam.
You believe those men are prophets and thus you are ensnared. I feel sorry for you FOF because you will never see the truth and that by your own design. You are deluded. Throw out all of your pseudepigrapha and return to the Bible and the true Jesus Christ, not the ineffectual Mormon shadow-Christ, who can’t redeem you from your sins and can only give people a resurrection, who was first part of a trinty, was then the Father in the flesh, and is now his own full blown god who is a first born spirit baby of a polygamous god who was once a man who Jo identified as Min and Brigham Young identified as Adam. Whew! And you call ME apostate? Really? Keep listening to those “prophets” and cutting yourself off from the Holy Spirit of God. At your own peril. Mormonism makes Gnosticism look simple by comparison.
Now that is a great analogy that you must have pulled from your own experience. Thanks for the great picture of yourself. And Pharisee is such a big word for you FOF. I’m so impressed! Did you read that in a dictionary too? The Bible defines Jesus, not Mormon “prophets” who can’t even decide who he is.
I guess that all of Jesus apostles and Jesus himself, who spent all of their time trying to define who are real Christians, would fall into that derogatory category of yours also. You dishonor them every time you speak such lies. I’m honored to be among them, persecuted by you, who says he doesn’t care what we think, but has to repeatedly come back to persecute us some more. Don’t you have anything better to do FOF? Like read the Book of Mormon so you can quote it accurately? Read some Conference Reports so you actually know what your leaders teach and what you should believe, not what you have made up?
You are right where Satan wants you to be, “tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming.”
Notice Kate, that FOF did NOT answer your question. This is typical of Mormons who live in the Bubble. Mormons “profess” to be Christians, but they do not teach in their scriptures that Jesus saves them, they save themselves as Brigham Young also taught. Christ only guarantees them a resurrection. They MUST do the rest themselves. Saved after obeying EVERY single man-made Mormon regulation, not by doing only what Christ said, Loving God and your neighbor.
Fof F, wow , I just can’t believe your responses on this thread . You’re just throwing out anemic
responses left and right , but no answers . You don’t have to render allegiance to the apostles
of Mormonism , freedom is available by dismissing them as authorities in your life . Now it will
not be easy but it will sure be worth the effort. God will help. Ask Him for assistance .
Thanks
I have no desire to define your religion or your faith.
I believe the doctrine of the Trinity is 50/50 paganism and Biblical extrapolation.
And in this way, it is in essence the belief that God got a special or discount deal on paying for the sins of mankind.
Most of Christianity has no idea about most of this. They see Him as having suffered the pains of crucifixion alone, which although terrible, don’t even approach the suffering He really suffered from our perspective.
Traditional Christianity does not believe in a God who is unchanging and alive.
And in this way, they are just like past generations that have rejected prophets
Apostate Christianity sets up the Bible as the infallible, complete and perfect compilation of all of God’s revelations to mankind.
As a result of Christianity’s perspective of the Bible, many among them borderline worship the book rather than He who provided the revelations contained therein.
Although they claim it as their authority, most do not recognize that it provides them with no more authority than it does anybody else.
Ironically, many Christians reject the process and concept behind the Bible.
By that I mean that they reject the idea of personal revelation and the authority that that represents.
It strains their faith and belief to think that God can reveal truth to individuals today and answer questions authoritatively.
Instead, they will almost always refer back to the Bible as the ultimate authority, apparently not recognizing that they are engaging in circular reasoning in rejecting revelation.
My impulse is to lift these differences up for all the world to see.
I have no desire to define your religion or your faith.
My impulse is to lift these differences up for all the world to see.
I have no desire to define your religion or your faith.
My impulse is to lift these differences up for all the world to see.
I have no desire to define your religion or your faith.
My impulse is to lift these differences up for all the world to see.
I have no desire to define your religion or your faith.
You said this to Grindael
“That is essentially the mindset of those who spend their time trying to define who is and who is not a Christian based upon their own arbitrary criteria which aligns them perfectly with the Pharisees.”
The above seems a rather strange thing to say as, prior to Grindaels post, I quoted, from the Oxford English dictionary, the definition of ‘Christian’ That definition is not arbitrary neither is it a social definition. The Oxford English dictionary is one of the most respected available & it clearly refutes the Mormon claim to be a Christian organization
Did you even read what I posted yesterday at 2:16pm? I was hoping to see some kind of response from you but instead you chose to throw insults at Grindael. Anyway, while I’m waiting for your reply I’ll just add this. If you still insist, assuming that you take the time to read my post, that Mormons are Christians perhaps you could explain away or otherwise justify all the anti-Christian THEOLOGY & rhetoric that has been part & parcel of the LDS from it’s earliest beginnings &, perhaps more importantly, why do you as a Christian, belong to such an organization?
FOF,
“We save ourselves by choosing to repent and apply the atonement of Jesus Christ to our lives. And we perform vicarious ordinances for those who did not have the opportunity in this life so they can receive the blessings of the atonement of Christ.”
“We profess to be Christians because we know that it is only through Christ that we are saved.”
Do you honestly not see the contradiction here? Christ cannot save you unless you are willing to save yourself. This is not Christianity. This is not the Christ of the Bible. These are the words of a self proclaimed prophet and sadly he has led many to Hell. How arrogant of you to claim you can save others by doing “works” for them. As if Jesus needs your help. Jesus Saves, not man. How can Mormons claim to be Christians? You believe the words of self proclaimed prophets and apostles over the words of Jesus himself.
This is what Jesus said:
John 6:27-29
“Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father; even God, has set His seal.”
They therefore said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”
What commandments did Jesus give?
Matthew 22:36-40
“Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
He did not give us a laundry list of commandments and works and he certainly didn’t tell us our brothers and sisters can’t be Saved without us doing ordinances or “works” for them.
Now remember, Saved in Christianity is to live in God’s presence. Just so you understand.
So once again I will ask you, how do you reconcile what your prophet said with what you say you believe?
Thanks, FoF. I actually appreciate the honesty. I think we’d get further if you’d speak more forthrightly as you do here.
I’m not going to go point by point and discuss everything you have said. But I will say that everything here is a caricature of our faith that does not represent what we believe.
I bring that up solely to point out that isn’t one of your greatest critiques of us, as critics of your faith, that we inaccurately portray your faith? If you cannot get our faith right, how can you complain about what it is we say about your faith?
Old man,
You provided this definition from the Oxford dictionary for the term “Christian:”
““The religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, or its beliefs and practices.”
That is a very accurate description of our church and faith. Your disagreement does not change the fact. All of our teachings, doctrine, and liturgy come from Christ. The fact that you do not believe that or accept that does not make it untrue.
I do believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is Christ’s very church, exactly what it claims to be. You are conflating two things in your argument- the Law of Moses and God’s commandments. They are not one and the same. The Law of Moses does not include all of God’s commandments. Christ said, “if ye love me, keep my commandments.” It could not be more simple and clear.
And yes- I have come to believe of late that those who spend their time criticizing the church and trying to smear its doctrines, leaders, and members are of an anti-Christ Spirit. I do not necessarily mean that everything in their lives in “anti-Christ.” But their efforts to belittle the restored gospel are very much anti-Christ. His sheep hear His voice and follow. Instead, the critics try to make His church look bad and his saints ashamed to follow. Even if everything our critics say was true, a real follower of Christ would not spend his or her time doing what our critics do. And if what we say is true, the critics are very clearly anti-Christ in their “ministries” to LDS.
Kate- we do have a role in salvation- we must repent and have faith. And we can do things that Christ leads us to do for the salvation of others. Your inability to see that doesn’t change a thing. There is no contradiction whatsoever. By the way, how do interpret the Old Testament verse which says that “saviors shall come upon Mount Zion?”
MJP- my descriptions may not describe your personal faith perfectly. It was not my intention to do so. Rather, I attempted to explain my view on non-LDS Christianity in general. And that group of religions is more diverse that the critics here care to admit. But in general, I would stick to my characterizations although they are coming through me who is stating as I rarely do a critical perspective of non-LDS Christianity. I am more charitable in general than what I have stated. But I am simply placing the mirror in front of those who spend their time criticizing us and applying the same methodology in criticism.
Grindael- I will only say that your knowledge of us is so limited that you do not even understand our view of the atonement of Christ and what it does for God’s children. No amount of cutting and pasting random and obscure statements from past leaders makes you a more knowledgeable critic. Succinctness and understanding are not your strengths when it comes to our faith.
Thanks.
Diversity in Christianity? Shocking, I tell ya. You state this as if it is some sort revealed secret. I think most people here understand and appreciate the diversity, and welcome it. But your focus on it is not only misplaced, it misses the point of what Christians share in their belief.
I know that your intent was to show your understanding. But that still plays into my point about how wrong you are about our faith, even though it is what you see about our faith. All I can do is explain to you what it is I believe. I cannot make you believe it, or get it.
But so it is with your faith and us. I don’t complain that you get my faith wrong. Actually, I would generally view it as an opportunity to explain it. Now, though, I use your lack of understanding to show the hypocritical stance you have taken towards our supposed misrepresenting your faith. That you get bent out of shape when we state your faith inaccurately to how you view your faith but cannot state our faith accurately speaks volumes about your sincerity.
Integrity is not just being nice or inoffensive. It is being honest and forthright, and acknowledging uncomfortable truths. If you are going to hide behind niceties, pleasant and nice you may be, but full of integrity you are not. The better descriptors are dishonest and misleading.
I would suggest, if you do have integrity, is to not complain about how we misrepresent your faith if you cannot get ours right. I would suggest you be honest always about the differences, which do run deep and go far beyond what you listed there. I would suggest you admit the similarities you state we have are at best superficial, or offer an argument as to why they are not superficial. Defend your faith, your previous leaders, your faiths current leaders. Defend the Latter Day Saint organization. Don’t merely be nice and avoid conflict.
MJP- so now, you don’t want me to explain what I see as differences between our faiths? I answered your question which you claimed I never would do.
So where am I wrong- do you not believe in the Trinity? Do you believe that Christ atoned for the sins of not just this world, but “worlds without number?” Do you believe the atonement took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross? Do you believe he felt and experienced every pain and sorrow we experienced, personally? Did He suffer not just the pains associated with being crucified, but something more? Do you believe in ongoing revelation through authorized prophets? Do you believe that there is some authoritative in addition to the Bible?
Those are the points I stated we differed on. Correct me if I am wrong.
Another difference I see is that if you tell me what you believe- I will take your word for it. Our critics do not extend to us the same respect and courtesy. I am told here routinely that I don’t know my beliefs as well as the genius folks here (most of whom have not even read the Book of Mormon cover to cover, or if they have, it has been a long, long time).
I don’t often go on the offensive with other faiths or religions. I don’t believe in doing so. Do you see how being on the other end of things can be frustrating? If so, good. I see most of the critics standing on a religious foundation that is thread-bare and could not be weaker. But I do not think they recognize that and have little interest in discussing it, ironically.
FoF,
You misunderstand my aim. First, I wanted you to come out and tell us what the differences between our faiths are. You’ve merely stated they exist before you gave your answer above, and actually putting words to your rhetoric that differences exist is important, don’t you think?
Second, that your list includes critiques is really immaterial to me. I am more than happy to discuss them, and how you have misrepresented our beliefs, but that is also outside the scope of my present intent. My present intent is to get you to stand up and tell everyone what it is you believe and how that is different from what it is we believe. You did that.
Third, because there are such gross misrepresentations from your presentation of my faith, it is hypocritical for you to claim that we misrepresent your faith.
Fourth, because of these misrepresentations, your claim that we are intentionally making LDS look silly is off base and needs to be called out. I am sure you are not doing anything intentional in your presentation of our faith, so surely you understand.
Fifth, it appears you have a desire to be nice and to not offend. I find this lacks integrity if and when there is truth involved. Your being nice dilutes your position and makes it seem weaker. Your being nice and avoiding conflict can give the appearance of hiding things so, apparently, as not to offend. Frankly, if you stand up for what you believe and be direct, it makes it harder to suggest you are hiding something.
Now, if you would like me to go point by point on how and why your critiques are wrong, I am happy to do so. But understand that I am really not concerned about that at the moment. The truth of those will come out, but until you are able to commit strongly to a position, we will keep going around in circles. Even if it means getting uncomfortable, freely talking about everything is a must before progress can be made.
FofF
The definition I provided does not describe your church or your faith; let’s look at it again
“The religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, or its beliefs and practices”
I told you that when I mentioned ‘The Person of Christ’ to one of your more knowledgeable apologist brethren in here he didn’t have a clue what I was talking about. I believe the same applies to you. The Person of Christ is an alien concept in Mormonism. Sure you talk about Christ, you tell us that you follow him, but what about the rest? Do you tell the world that He is our elder brother, do you tell the world that He is Satans brother, do you tell the world that He was the offspring of a man who became a god? No of course you don’t, that would ruin the illusion. Your Christ is not the Christ of the Bible; Your Christ is an invention of Joseph Smith so how can you say that your beliefs are based on the Person of Christ, how can you say you are a Christian?
The Person of Christ:
1 Jesus Christ is fully & completely divine
2 Jesus Christ is fully & completely human
3 The Divine & Human natures of Christ are distinct
4 The Divine & Human natures of Christ are completely united in one person
Christ is fully & completely God & through him ALL things were created.
I hope you are not going to tell me that is what Mormons teach & believe.
You said
“You are conflating two things in your argument- the Law of Moses and God’s commandments. They are not one and the same. The Law of Moses does not include all of God’s commandments. Christ said, “if ye love me, keep my commandments.” It could not be more simple and clear.”
Thank you for that but I’m not simple & I know exactly what I’m saying, I’ve been through this several times with other Mormons & have no intention of repeating the obvious to you so instead, as you quoted John 14:15 I’ll just ask you a few questions
Did Christ command us to tithe? Did Christ command us to take more than one wife? Did Christ command us to marry women who were already married? Did Christ command us to bow the knee to men claiming to be prophets? Did Christ command us to make blood oaths in a temple? Did Christ command us to baptise the dead? Did Christ command us to be part of a Melchezedik Priesthood? Should I go on?
No Law of Moses there my friend, & none of Christ’s commands either.
MJP-
I thought I had stated my position as it differs from non-LDS Christianity fairly clearly. But to respond to you, here are a few of those basic differences:
1. I do not believe in the trinity as defined by modern Christianity. I believe God can mean a few different things, but the Godhead to me is God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. The Father and Son have physical bodies, but Holy Ghost does not. The can be referred to collectively as “God” or individually as Gods. Heavenly Father is our literal Father and we are literally created in His image. If this is not me stating my position clearly, I don’t know what to say to you.
2. The atonement of Christ- I believe it took place in the Garden of Gethsemane, the trial, and during the crucifixion on Calvary. I believe Christ’s crucifixion was the “tip of the iceberg” of His suffering. We maintain that He experienced every and all human suffering- the punishment of all sin, the physical, emotional, and spiritual pains not resulting from sin, cumulatively for all of mankind within that window of time in the garden and on Calvary. His atonement was “infinite and eternal,” not just because He was God suffering these things, but literally, infinite in its magnitude. If any other being had experienced what was placed on His shoulders for even one second, he or she would die instantly. Only the Son of God could keep His Spirit and body together through the pain. The atoning sacrifice was completed with His resurrection, which He had power to achieve within Himself.
As a result of His atonement, all mankind will be resurrected- good and evil. And all who repent of their sins and follow Him will be forgiven of sins and live with Him and the Father for eternity. Thus, one part of the atonement is unconditional, another is conditional.
Christ’s atonement achieved these things not only for this world, but “worlds without number.”
3. I believe every person must be willing to accept current revelation and current prophets. I believe all true religion is based upon personal revelation and obedience and faith. Archaeological, linguistic, historical evidences do not produce faith one iota. I believe God very much intended to test the faith of modern folk by calling Joseph Smith and bringing forth the Book of Mormon. We are in a position that is exactly parallel to those who lived at the time of Moses. We can believe and follow or reject and doubt. I believe Thomas Monson is every bit a prophet as Moses, Isaiah, or Abraham.
4. I believe the Bible is a collection of sacred writings that resulted from revelations to ancient prophets and apostles. It is not anything approaching comprehensive or complete in the revelations and prophesy it contains. It has been handed down by faithful saints who believed in God. But I also believe that there were times when portions have been altered for various reasons. This includes the changes made by the Deuteronomists between the first and second temple period. We do not know who has had care for it in all periods of time. I accept it “as far as it is translated correctly.”
5. I believe that God reveals His truth and will to individuals through personal revelation. I believe the most reliable source of truth is the Holy Ghost. All revealed truth from heaven has ultimately come through the Holy Ghost. Those who claim to accept the faith claims of the Bible on the grounds of anything but the Holy Ghost deny the very foundation and source of the Bible. The Holy Ghost will reveal the truthfulness of the restored gospel including the divine call of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon to any individual willing to invest the time, humility, and commitment that is necessary.
Does this suffice for stating my position? This is not comprehensive or complete. But it certainly includes fundamental issues upon which we will disagree.
If this does not satisfy you, I have no confidence that I can say anything that would.
Old man- not all truths are of the same value. Would you describe a 5 Carat diamond as a clump of carbon? No. Neither would my primary description of Christ be that He is our Elder Brother. I do believe He is that. But the most fundamental and most important description of Him is that He is the Creator, Redeemer, and Judge of all. Adopting the language of the creeds and reformers is not a requirement for following Christ, despite your claims otherwise.
And yes- Christ commands us to tithe, to follow His servants, to participate in the redeeming work of salvation in temples, to be worthy of and receive the Melchizedek Priesthood, etc. Your failure to recognize Christ as the author of these commandments and ordinances changes nothing.
FoF,
I am anticipating a response such that I am not willing to engage in a discussion on my beliefs.
I offer this only to shut that down, and emphasize the points made in my previous post. That is what I am most concerned about, not these. These are vitally important, but so is the attitude with which you bring to the table. Do not be afraid of offending me, or I am assuming anyone else here. I am a grown up and can take criticism, even that of my faith. You will not offend me by discussing it, or accusing me of various things concerning my faith. Know also that, like Paul, I am not ashamed of the gospel, which brings salvation to all who believe.
Now, the Trinity. Your statement offers nothing of substance here. You simply state that it is 50/50 paganism and extrapolation, but nothing to support this. You state that you agree with early church leaders (which church?) that it is a stumbling block to belief, but not only do you fail to list any such leaders or what statements they made to this affect, but you fail to recognize the millions upon millions of believers have believed the Trinity. That some may find it problematic is not surprising, as people saw what Christ did in person, and they still did not believe him. You also seem to expect God to be an easy concept. Certainly, its simple, but he is not easy to fully understand. There have been unbelievers for a long, long time. So, that the Trinity may be a difficult concept, though simple, is hardly a reason to dismiss traditional Christianity. (You also state that the justification is weak– care to state what it is and how it is weak?)
The atonement. I am not sure where you get the idea that Christ’s suffering was not for everyone in Christian belief. It very much is. I cannot imagine the pain he felt knowing what was coming to him. Part of everyone is me, and that just blows my mind that Christ would atone for my sins, just as he did everyone else who has lived or will live. Did he do that in the garden? I don’t know if I have ever thought about that, but I think the atonement itself happened when he died, because that is when sacrifice happens. But, he suffered greatly in the garden knowing what was coming– a very real, deep, and person pain that I cannot imagine. You also ask if I believe he died for worlds without number? I suppose we’d have to define worlds, and then ask if we are willing to make doctrine out of an obscure reference. I am not sure what you mean by getting a special discount, perhaps you can expand on what you mean by that.
Was it a one-to-one deal? Absolutely. However, in that one to one deal, Christ died for our sin so that we would not have to do anything to earn salvation. All we must do is simply trust in God to save us. This is not what your faith ultimately teaches, is it? There’s a number of items of small print associated with that, isn’t there?
The Bible. I’ll state at the outset that many do seem to put a lot of emphasis on the Bible such that it appears to be a possible substitute for God, an idol in and of itself. But it is the word of God literally. God breathed, suitable for all teaching, rebuking, etc. To deny this is to deny the word of God, under whose authority it was written and exists today. Now, why is the Bible important? Because it is where we learn about Him. We learn about his plans and how he relates to us and how we can grow closer to Him. As to ongoing revelation and additional scripture, refer to the following paragraph. As to problems with translation: we have enough manuscript evidence and knowledge of transcription to be more than confident that the Bible we now have is an accurate translation. Look into it some if you don’t take my word for it.
Ongoing revelation? Revelation of what? God still speaks to us, sure, absolutely, but his entire plan was laid out in the Bible. There is nothing that requires God to have ongoing revelation of new plans, is there? Christ’s sacrifice, which I just discussed, was enough for everyone for all time. I am not sure there is need for more, but am open to hearing it. I certainly do not mean to speak for God. However, I also believe that God will not and cannot contradict himself, and therefore anything that I may hear I will check it out against scripture. There is nothing wrong with doing this, as it ultimately puts faith in God rather than or own intuition.
Think about this for a second, if you would: if the Bible is God’s literal word, breathed into the Bible, then it should be accurate and trustworthy, assuming God is accurate and trustworthy. If we receive something we perceive as a revelation from God, shouldn’t we then compare what we receive against the Bible? You dismiss those who reject revelations, such as that the Book of Mormon is true, based on the Bible because they fail to connect the validity of the BoM with the Bible? How is that a bad thing?
You suggest that reliance on the Bible is circular. But relying on an individual feeling is just as circular, if not more so. The Bible gives clear standards and we can objectively look to see the words written in it to see what is there. We cannot do that with individual feelings, can we?
Now, you bring in that you take our word for what it is we believe. If so, why can’t you accurately portray our beliefs? They are there for the taking. The difference is that you have leaders, which are authoritative, stating things differently than what you present. Who are we to believe? You, random blogger? Or your authorities?
My view on critics of my faith is actually welcoming.
Once again, not a “random” statement from one of your leaders, but from the great lds.org, where they post the approved doctrinal statements of the Mormon First Presidency,
If we are accountable for “our own sins”, what sins of mine did Jesus suffer for? None. It works like this,
If I never heard of the Mormon Church and I live a good life, what happens? I die. Then I go to the Mormon “spirit world” where I am preached to by Mormon missionaries under the direction of the dead Jo Smith. If I accept the Mormon “gospel” there, what happens? I wait until someone does my proxy work for me on earth in a Mormon Temple. Then what happens? I am eventually judged. How am I judged? ON WHAT I DID WHEN I WAS ON EARTH. If I was a really, really, really good person, supposedly I go to the Celestial Kingdom, if I wasn’t good enough for that, to the lower ones.
Jesus Atonement got me a resurrection because it cancelled out the sin of Adam. How do you repent after you die? You can’t.
I did all the rest.
This same scenario would apply if I was living on earth and accepted the Mormon “gospel”.
This is the application of the Mormon Atonement. Jesus suffered to fix the sin of Adam. This is exactly what FOF says,
In Mormonism, Jesus gets you a resurrection. You must do the rest. This is not what the Bible says.
FOF is wrong once again.
MJP- I am actually enjoying this exchange. Thanks.
I think a discussion of the Trinity is beyond the scope of this discussion. Can we simply say it involves the doctrine that God the Father is something other than a being with a perfect, physical body and our literal Father? I fear an in depth discussion about this could derail meaningful dialogue. And by justification, I refer to interpretation of passages of scripture used to support the doctrine. I do not believe the Trinity doctrine is supported by the Bible. And that is the fundamental way that I am different than you and others. And the complexity of the doctrine is not the sole reason for rejecting it, in my opinion. The relationship with God is altered with the doctrine, even if you simplify it as much as you like.
The atonement. I am not sure you are understand what I am trying to communicate. I talk to many non-LDS Christians who believe that the atonement of Christ was His death on the cross. Understand that hundreds of thousands of people have been crucified in the planet’s history. And these Christians I am referring to do not recognize any difference between the crucifixion of Christ and the crucifixion of other people other than the fact that Christ was the Son of God. And they see the amazing fact that Christ would be willing to do such a thing. And that is good.
But I am stating that we believe that the cumulative suffering that all of mankind would have suffered for our sins was placed, literally, upon Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross. He was given no special means of deadening that pain and suffering. That is what I mean when I say He didn’t get a “special deal.” He felt every pain that all of us would have suffered for our sins. To demonstrate, take one finite sin I could commit- say committing adultery. You take the spiritual, physical, and emotional agony I would be required to endure to pay for that sin. All of that was very literally placed upon Christ. He would have experience the exact thing I would have experienced. Now add up all the sins for all of mankind on this planet and “worlds without number.” It is truly impossible to fathom and understand. But that is what we believe occurred in the Garden and on the cross. It was not just that He was stressed out about having to be crucified. He carried the burden for all. Like I said- no other being could keep his or her body and spirit together through such an experience- they would die immediately.
Add onto that punishment for sin all the physical and mental, emotional pain ever suffered by mankind. He experienced it all. In other words, the pain I experienced when I broke my collar bone in wrestling in school- He literally felt the very pain I felt during the atonement. Not just samples of our pain. He experienced all of it.
Do you get what I am trying to say?
The Bible- I was saying that those people who try to justify their belief in the Bible with archaeological and historical evidences are naive. The simple question “how do you know the Bible is true” quickly exposes the problem. Ultimately, every person has to know through the Holy Ghost that the Bible is true. But our critics will not go there and refuse to discuss this usually because they know it means the same is true of the Book of Mormon. (And they rely upon physical evidences in their argument against the BOM). That is what I am referring to in circular reasoning. It is like stating that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true. I am very familiar with the manuscript evidence. But every bit of that evidence ultimately takes us back to the same position as we stand with the Book of Mormon. We are trusting that those revelations occurred. No amount of manuscript evidence can change the ultimate need for the Holy Ghost to reveal the truthfulness of scripture.
And you are right that God does not contradict Himself ultimately. But He certainly tests our trust in Him. And if nothing tests our trust and faith, we have none. The experience of Abraham is the ultimate example (other than Christ’s obedience) we should consider. He was asked to do something that completely went against what he considered “right.” Yet he trusted that God saw and understood things that he did not. And that is faith. So I believe we should expect some degree of conflict and difficulty in working some things out. (By the way, I believe that this is one of the reasons for polygamy in the 19th century). Our comfort zone can be a serious barrier between us and God.
You speak of the difference in our having leaders that can be held to their words. I recognize this. But I also recognize that we must be mature and wise. God does not control every word that comes out of the mouth of a prophet. He does not prevent a person from stating opinions. We have standards of truth. The Book of Mormon is one of them- a big one. He provides us with these sentinel, big measuring sticks to base our testimonies upon initially. I think it is extremely unreasonable to expect every word of literally hundreds of modern apostles and all the prophets to fit perfectly with no apparent contradictions or difficulties. A person can quickly point out apparent contradictions within the Bible. But perspective is required to see it for what it is and its value. And the instinct to “make a man an offender for a word” is a very difficult temptation for our critics to resist.
Thanks.
FofF
You said
“And yes- Christ commands us to tithe, to follow His servants, to participate in the redeeming work of salvation in temples, to be worthy of and receive the Melchizedek Priesthood, etc. Your failure to recognize Christ as the author of these commandments and ordinances changes nothing.”
Please give me one, just one, example of Christian tithing in the New Testament, Christ NEVER commanded anyone to Tithe. The last time this topic was raised the resident Mormon apologist was trying to prove that tithing was a ‘Law’ he attempted to show that it was found in the Old but not the New Testament. Now we have you attempting to tell us that Christ commanded us to tithe, who is right, is it you or is it him?
Please tell me where Christ commands us to do temple work, have you forgotten that in the time of Christ there was just the one temple & that was NEVER used for the purposes which you now tell us are commanded by Christ. Incidentally, I’m sure you know that Christ prophesied the destruction of the Temple (AD70) but have you ever thought of why was it destroyed? The answer is simple enough, it WAS NO LONGER NEEDED. Read 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 to find out why it was no longer needed.
Please show me where in the New Testament Christ commands us to be worthy of receiving a non-existent priesthood.
My failure to recognize Christ as the author of any of the above is quite simply because He wasn’t, the author was actually a man by the name of Joseph Smith.
You claim to believe that Christ is the creator of all, that’s simply Mormonspeak, you CANNOT believe that for if you did it would mean you do NOT believe that Christ is the son of a man/god who is just one of an infinite number of man/gods. Neither could you say or believe that He is your elder brother. I think you need to go back to basics & really think about what you are saying.
I know you’re an intelligent man so I’m not going to spell this out for you, I’m sure you can work it out for yourself. If you truly believe in the Person of Christ then you will know that there never was a restoration because there was nothing to restore. Christ was either who He declared himself to be or Joseph Smith was who he declared himself to be, but they could not both be who they declared themselves to be. One of them must have been lying. Please don’t tell me as others have, that there was a restoration because the church founded by Christ failed, if that was the case then the restored church founded by Joseph Smith has not only failed but has failed catastrophically. Does this mean that at some time in the future another Joseph Smith will be needed, then another Ad Infinitum
Think about it.
By the way, I do not adopt the language of the creeds, I gave you the dictionary definition of the Person of Christ & that is all. Clearly, like other Mormon apologists, you do not understand the term & you probably never will until you become a follower of the true Christ of the Bible.
FOF,
“We do have a role in salvation- we must repent and have faith.
Jesus says we are to believe. Is having faith and repenting part of Christian belief? Yes, but Jesus himself says believe on Him who He sent. Do I believe Jesus himself or you?
” And we can do things that Christ leads us to do for the salvation of others. Your inability to see that doesn’t change a thing.”
First, please provide scripture to back this up. Second, if we can Save each other, why did Jesus die? By saying this you completely diminish His work on the Cross.
“By the way, how do interpret the Old Testament verse which says that “saviors shall come upon Mount Zion?”
Obadiah 1:21
“And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be Jehovah’s.”
This is talking about the deliverance of Israel. Mount Zion in Jerusalem. Salt Lake City is not Zion. Jackson County, Missouri is not Zion. This is one more scripture cherry picked by your prophet who then created a whole doctrine around it. It doesn’t say you are a savior! One with the ability to save your brothers and sisters. There is only ONE savior and I will stick with Him thanks. I would suggest you read the entire book of Obadiah and please put it in context.
We have a Mormon here who has openly said Mormons save people. Who implies that the LDS are saviors. Please tell me where Jesus is found in ANY of this. Floored, just floored. And FOF wants to be called Christian…..
Sure thing pal. You just did in as nasty a way as you could.
Who cares what you believe? Prove it. We can quote your leaders, you have only opinion. Sorry, but that just doesn’t cut it. And of course, now you don’t want to talk about it. Typical.
Not one Christian here has ever said anything like that. He bore our sins IN HIS BODY for us ON THE CROSS. That is what the Bible says. That is what Jesus Apostle says. You just make stuff up FOF, to suit your yourself. You even do it to people here, changing what they say into what you want them to have said. I have proved this time and again and shown it, but you keep doing it. You are a serial teller of falsehoods. Full Of Falsehood.
Here is what Christians who follow the Bible believe:
13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. (Colossians 2)
A special discount? For that? You really are despicable.
Again, who is “most of Christianity? Please enlighten us. But you won’t, BECAUSE YOU CAN’T. And no, the BIBLE says,
How did he do this?
You think Christians don’t know what this means? Of course you do, because you believe Mormon lies. Peter was there, Jo Smith was not. I believe Peter. So now YOU KNOW. Please stop lying about it.
Wow. Another bald-faced lie. Here is what Christians believe: “I the LORD do not change. (Malachi 3:6) Our God is alive. There are too many verses in the Bible that say this and Christians believe the Bible. Mormons believe that God wan’t God for all eternity. He was a man once. You have this exactly backwards.
They first have to be real prophets. Jo and those that followed him are not. So no one rejected any so called “prophets”.
Now Christians are all “apostate”. By whose standard, YOURS? Again, NO PROOF. This is just a lie to make you feel good. But the Bible has enough to save us all. And it is a perfect repository of information to give us the formula to achieve salvation.
Again, dribble. What is “borderline worship”? There is no such thing. You are making this up to feel good. It’s so grossly inaccurate that it defies logic. Again, back up what you say with actual statements like we do. You can’t.
We get our authority from Jesus, not the Bible. Another gross, misleading, dishonest statement with not a shred of evidence to back it up.
LOL. Who are they? Please enlighten us. What we reject is Mormon “prophets” who have tried to destroy the credibility of the Bible, because there is absolutely no evidence that there were any Nephites that ever existed. It doesn’t matter about having a witness, you can’t have a spiritual witness of a people THAT NEVER EXISTED.
No they don’t. We all have the Holy Spirit to guide us, who is God. When we take upon us the name of Jesus Christ, we have his authority, through faith. Again, read the Bible that you hate so much, instead of the fictitious Book of Mormon and other pseudepigrapha of Jo Smith.
God reveals truth everyday. But not through Mormon “prophets”, who have been caught in so many lies and doctrinal blunders that they have proven themselves unreliable. We have shown the proof. You have not.
The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. But that testimony has to agree with his REVEALED WORD. God is not a God of confusion. That is why we test everything with his revealed word. Mormonism contradicts the Bible, the revealed Word of God. Their “prophets” do the same. Therefore they are to be rejected in toto.
You have listed nothing, only your own rambling, made up, regurgitated talking points from Mormon apologists and false “prophets” with not a shred of evidence to back any of them up. Is this the best you can do? No one will believe a random blogger who can’t back up any of his statements with evidence and then when asked for it dodges out of it because they claim it is “beyond the scope” of the discussion. LOL, you are pathetic FOF.
Old Man,
You are demanding evidence of something within the context of a former set of holy writ and prophets. And that is precisely what the Pharisees did. They accepted the old and rejected the new. In fact, they rejected the Messiah Himself.
The truth is that I don’t have to provide you with the evidence you demand. The gospel of Christ is not negotiated on your terms. It is Christ’s church and His gospel and His commandments. The test for all of us is whether we will hear His voice. He has provided the proof and enough opportunity to hear His voice. I have no interest in modifying or altering what He has provided for us.
You will likely dismiss this as a “cop-out.” And honestly, I could not care less. The Book of Mormon is available for anybody here to read, study, and obtain personal answers about it from God. That is the gate which He has established in our time. Each must choose for himself or herself what to do with it.
The temple was destroyed as a consequence of the wickedness of the people who lived in Jerusalem and claimed to be “God’s people.” Please provide one passage that suggests the reason it was destroyed is that it was no longer needed.
And there is no logical problem in my stating that I believe Christ created the heavens and the earth and all things in them. Not sure why you would claim such a thing.
It is ultimately circular reasoning alone to claim that an apostasy never occurred for no other reason than that it didn’t occur. Christ has made it clear that the restoration of the gospel was planned to prepare the way for the second coming of Christ to the earth.
Grindael- your understanding of our doctrine is very limited, thus demonstrating that the ability to cut and paste quotations does not ensure a person understands anything. Your claim that we only believe Christ’s atonement provided a resurrection is simply completely wrong and either dishonest or uninformed.
Consider Doctrine and Covenants 19:15-20:
“Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.
For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they bmight not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink— Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.
Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I humble you with my almighty power; and that you confess your sins, lest you suffer these punishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have tasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit.”
You are claiming that the effort involved in repentance and following Christ is one and the same as the punishment for sins. Silly you. They are very different things. I suggest looking into our doctrines as well as the scriptures to work this out in your mind. (If you were familiar with the Book of Mormon you would understand this very basic doctrine).
FoF,
You brought up the Trinity, therefore, let’s discuss it. I happen to find more than enough evidence for it in the Bible, so which is it? We both can’t be right, can we? But to support my position, I’ll start with the idea that there is only one God. God himself states this, and he cannot contradict himself, can he? In fact, he states it rather plainly and directly. Jesus then claimed to be God. It was for this reason that he was crucified. The Holy Spirit is spoken of in direct relationship with Jesus and God. I’ll leave you to discern the scripture for this, but if God cannot contradict himself, well, you can figure that out, too…
I guess I don’t understand what you mean by talking about the atonement and what is different with Christ. I have never spoken to any Christian who says anything remotely to what you seem to refer. I will say the sacrifice came at his death upon the cross, not at any time before that. Sacrifice comes with loss, and until that point there had been no loss, no death. But beyond that point, I am really not sure what it is you are saying, honestly.
The Bible. Reliance on the Bible is reliance upon God himself, who reveals himself through his word. Sure, he reveals us in many other ways, but those revelations are empty without knowing what to do with them. We do use archeological evidence and other sources to support the validity of the Bible, and that you choose to close your eyes on why we do so is telling.
The archeology does not prove the Bible, that is right. All it does is give evidence the Bible tells truth. If what it says about history is true, then what is says about spiritual matters can be true as well. If it were not telling the truth on history, why should we believe it on spiritual matters? So, can we discuss how this plays into the BoM? What proof do we have that it tells the truth on history? Why, then, should we believe it on anything else?
You said this, too: “It is like stating that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true.” Well, true, it does say it is true. First, do you not believe it is true? If so, why even bring it up? Second, the historical evidence also suggests it is true, so it is not just itself. And third, do you really think we do not believe that God speaks with us today? I really hope that is not true, and that in fact you do believe Christians talk to God daily and that he reveals himself daily to us. Otherwise, you have your eyes welded shut concerning Christians.
Testing our faith: indeed, our faith is based on that which cannot see. We are to stretch ourselves, and rely on faith and God to guide us through, trusting that he has our best interest in mind. But what we think is our best interest and what he thinks our best interests are are likely very different. Not everything will be rosy, and I expect you to stop trying to make everything rosy here. I encourage you to test your faith by seriously considering what it is we believe. You’ve shown little evidence to convince you understand our doctrine and why it is. Test your faith– put yourself out there and get to know us.
In the process, test your own faith, and your leaders. You state that you believe polygamy was a form of testing. What kind of God would do that? Not a truly just God. Not a consistent God. The same can be said of the God who shunned black people, only to let them in when the political heat got too great. Adam as god? Becoming god? I could go on, but the point should be clear– your god has revealed to your prophets very problematic ideas, not only in the face of society, but against God’s very word.
——————-
Now, having been through all of that, I want to come back to the original point I was making: you have done very little to defend the doctrines that are problematic. This gets back to me saying you want it both ways: you want to be able to rest comfortably in that which you perceive as similar to us, but you want to wash these other doctrines away.
When confronted with them, as Grindael and others have done countless times, you only say they were misrepresenting what was said by Young, or whoever stated these things. Their words were and are clear. They meant them.
You play nice by not wanting to offend, but we just saw how you can get. Not only did you come out swinging, but you revealed your biases just the same as how you proclaim ours to be. But when you did that, I am positive that there was no intent to deceive or manipulate. You were calling it as you see it.
So, moving forward, just be honest about what it is you believe, and try to understand what it is we see. We are not out to embarrass your faith so much as we are out to state the truth as we see it. Minimizing the things we see only makes it seem as if you are indeed hiding something. Young did state that Adam is our god, did he not?
Silly me? Hardly. How, FOF does Christ atone for your sins when you are responsible for your own sins? Simple answer. Do you have one? I am intimately familiar with the Book of Mormon, but the Book of Mormon was written when Jo still believed in the Trinity. But he gives us a glimpse of what was to come:
Aaron has written a good piece explaining what this means.
You can’t have it both ways. You want to, but you can’t. That is simply the unvarnished truth.
Both of these tracts were approved by the First Presidency. Mormons can talk about Jesus taking on the sins of the world all they want. Those “scriptures” mean nothing, because of what Mormons DEFINE SALVATION AS. So Christ did suffer, yes, but only to gain for everyone a RESURRECTION. The rest YOU MUST DO YOURSELF. He paid for the sins of mankind up until the time they accept the Gospel, but after that, those sins are on YOU. Jesus only gains people a RESURRECTION in Mormonism. NOTHING ELSE.
You, FOF are the one who is uninformed (you are no Mormon “apostle’) and can’t even accept the words of your own “prophets” nor the Book of Mormon, which you obviously seldom read, because you can’t even quote it correctly.
I told you so folks. I told you so. He has none. He is only here to lie about Christians.
MJP-
The point of this thread is the debate about whether members of the church hide behind the claim that “we are the same” as other Christians. I really don’t have the interest or time to go through all the differences I have listed and provide all the background and supporting information. Such was not the point of the thread. I have stated as clearly as I can my position on some basic doctrines and where I see differences.
I have not seen you correct me in describing the view of many Christians, despite your claim that I am very misleading in my descriptions. Of course I didn’t describe the faith and doctrine of every Christian. But I gave what I think is a somewhat representative description with some criticism on my part.
Of the Bible, you say, “If what it says about history is true, then what is says about spiritual matters can be true as well.” That is an enormous assumption. Using this logic, why do you not practice the religion of the ancient Pharaohs? After all, we have plenty of documents showing the accuracy of their history. Do you see what I mean. What makes the Bible different? How do you really know that it is true?
And I understand that you and other Christians believe that God communicates through general inspiration and guidance, but you do not believe in revelations like we have in the Bible. Am I wrong? Is the canon closed? That is the real question to demonstrate our differences on this matter.
You have not shown that I do not understand your doctrine. Why not?
What kind of God would put people through the test of polygamy? The same God who tested Abraham by asking him to kill his son.
You keep encouraging me to be honest. Please show me where I have not been honest.
Grindael- you are simply following McKeever in his claim that we don’t believe in mercy outside of the resurrection. And you really don’t know the Book of Mormon. I have read it cover to cover over 80 times and can tell you that you know very little about it. Word searches do not constitute anything approaching an understanding or real knowledge. This claim about mercy and salvation shows you know nothing about the book.
Why did you cut McConkie’s statement out of context? Pasting from somebody else’s argument?
First, it is telling that you have to go back to 1982 to find a statement you think you can cut up to say what you want it to say. But here is the full statement from McConkie:
“Grace is simply the mercy, the love and the condescension of God has for his children, as a result of which he has ordained the plan of salvation so that they may have power to progress and become like him. . . All men are saved by grace alone without any act on their part, meaning that they are resurrected and become immortal because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ… In addition to this redemption from death, all men, by the grace of God, have the power to gain eternal life. This is called salvation by grace coupled with obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. Hence Nephi was led to write “We labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”…
“Christians speak often of the blood of Christ and its cleansing power. Much that is believed and taught on this subject, however, is such utter nonsense and so palpably false that to believe it is to lose one’s salvation. For instance, many believe or pretend to believe that if we confess Christ with our lips and avow that we accept him as our personal Savior, we are thereby saved. They say that his blood, without any other act than mere belief, makes us clean….”
“Salvation in the kingdom of God is available because of the atoning blood of Christ. But it is received only on condition of faith, repentance, baptism, and enduring to the end by keeping the commandments of God.”
And I noticed you totally ignored the passage from D&C 19 which demonstrates my point very well.
You cannot answer this simple question- if what you say is correct, what was the role and purpose of Christ’s suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane when He bled from every pore?
How crazy that you pretend to be some kind of expert on our religion in a public forum like this yet really know essentially nothing about our most basic doctrines. My 9 year old daughter knows infinitely more about our faith than you.
Quick- do a word search and find another statement to suit your purposes.
Hilarious.
FofF
“You are demanding evidence of something within the context of a former set of holy writ and prophets. And that is precisely what the Pharisees did. They accepted the old and rejected the new. In fact, they rejected the Messiah Himself.”
Before I answer any of your objections I want to make something clear. I do not seek to wound or cause distress to anyone here but I will speak the truth, not as I see it, but as it is written by Christ & His apostles. I use plain language that any lurker here can understand, that is the purpose of this site. I am NOT here for an intellectual debate. I use the Bible as my yardstick as Christians have been doing for 2000 years & the mere fact that you say ‘former set of Holy writ’ proves to anyone reading this that Mormons cannot be Christians.
“The truth is that I don’t have to provide you with the evidence you demand. The gospel of Christ is not negotiated on your terms. It is Christ’s church and His gospel and His commandments.”
No you don’t have to provide evidence yet immediately after saying that you ask me to provide it. It’s nonsense to say I am negotiating the Gospel on my terms I quote from Scripture, scripture that is accepted by all Christians. Yet again you show you are not a Christian & yet again you shoot yourself in the foot.
“The temple was destroyed as a consequence of the wickedness of the people who lived in Jerusalem and claimed to be “God’s people.” Please provide one passage that suggests the reason it was destroyed is that it was no longer needed.”
Ok, Read John 4:19-23 & understand what Christ is saying to the Samaritan woman
He is saying that because of the atonement the Temple, where sacrifices for the propitiation of sins were carried out was no longer necessary. As Christ uttered the words “it is finished” the Temple veil was torn from top to bottom signifying that the barrier between God & man had been removed & we can now worship God in ‘Spirit & in truth’. Any who truly worships God can now stand before Him and present their cause to him, knowing that he will hear and consider their prayer because of Christ’s sacrifice Then, a High Priest in a Temple was needed; today we have another High Priest who has no need of a Temple, Christ Himself dwells in the heart of the true believer.
“And there is no logical problem in my stating that I believe Christ created the heavens and the earth and all things in them. Not sure why you would claim such a thing.”
There is indeed a logical problem; unless you are prepared to tell me you no longer believe that Christ is the offspring of a man who became a god? Your prophets have declared that ALL, every one of us, are the spirit children of this man/god yet you are now saying that the Mormon christ, wherever he came from, created us. With respect, that doesn’t sound very logical to me.
“It is ultimately circular reasoning alone to claim that an apostasy never occurred for no other reason than that it didn’t occur. Christ has made it clear that the restoration of the gospel was planned to prepare the way for the second coming of Christ to the earth.”
But I didn’t say that, go back & read my post again because clearly you have not understood what was said. If you come back & tell me that you still do not understand what I’m saying then perhaps you should pray about it, what seems obvious to a person indwelt by the Holy Spirit is foolishness to others. Read 1 Corinthians 2:14
http://www.garnertedarmstrong.org/Feature_pages/feature_page_trinity005.shtml
Anyone who can worship a Trinity and insist that his religion is monotheistic can believe anything.” – Robert A. Heinlein.
Protestant theologian Karl Barth said: “The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence.”
As early as the 8th century, the theologian St. John of Damascus frankly admitted what every modern critical scholar of the New Testament now realizes; that neither the doctrine of the Trinity nor that of the two natures of Jesus Christ is explicitly set out in Scripture. In fact, if you take the record as it is and avoid reading back into it the dogmatic definitions of a latter age, you cannot find what is traditionally regarded as orthodox Christianity in the Bible at all.” – For Christ’s Sake, Tom Harpur.
The Encyclopedia Americana: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”
The Illustrated Bible Dictionary: “The word Trinity is not found in the Bible…It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century.”
The Encyclopedia of Religion: “Theologians agree that the New Testament does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity.”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology: “The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity.”
The Encyclopedia Americana: “Christianity derived from Judaism, and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road that led from Jerusalem to Nicaea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” –(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
Dictionary of the Bible by John L. Mckenzie, S.J: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are Greek philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The Trinitarian definitions arose out of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.” – (New York, 1965), p. 899.
The New Encyclopedia Britannica: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear O Israel; YHWH our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4)…The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies…By the end of the 4th century the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.” -(1976), Micropedia, Vol.X, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formula that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” –(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
It is now a well known fact that the following verse, the only verse of the Bible which actually states the Trinity doctrine, is a medieval insertion to the text:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (1 John 5:7, King James Version)
…..many Bibles have a footnote stating this does not appear in the most ancient Greek texts. This verse does not appear in the New American Bible, the NIV or the ASV, and many others.
Justin martyr (about150 A.D.) knew nothing about the trinity doctrine said, “While Jesus was god, he was entirely distinct from God the Father, in every respect”.
There is a lot more.
Faith of Fathers: You do an excellent job, thank you! You too, Shem Atwater and Alex!
Silkworm
I’m going to randomly select a few of your quotes, just enough to show that deception is part & parcel of the Mormon way.
Robert A. Heinlein. Science fiction writer & Atheist
Further comment unnecessary
Karl Barth a Swiss theologian & TRINITARIAN.
You quote
“The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence.”
What you fail to quote
“The doctrine of the Trinity is what basically distinguishes the Christian doctrine of God as Christian, and therefore what already distinguishes the Christian concept of revelation as Christian, in contrast to all other possible doctrines of God or concepts of revelation.”
St. John of Damascus was an 8th Cent. Theologian & TRINITARIAN
I quote from one of his discourses
“And when I say God, it is evident that I mean the Father and His Only begotten Son, our Lord, Jesus Christ, and His all-holy Spirit, our one God”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology:
“The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity.”
What you leave out
“But the NT does contain the fixed, three-part formula of 2 Cor. 13:13 (EVV 14) in which God, the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit are mentioned together (cf. I Cor. 12:4 ff.). The Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit occurs only in the baptismal formula in Matt. 28:19.”
John L. McKenzie; theologian & TRINITARIAN, McKenzie also says;
“Without an explicit formula the NT leaves no room to think that Jesus is Himself an object of the adoption which He communicates to others. He knows the Father and reveals Him. He therefore belongs to the divine level of being; and there is no question at all about the Spirit belonging to the divine level of being.”
Dictionary of the Bible. P. 899
EVERY quote that you have given is either from an atheist source, is taken out of context or is a deliberate attempt by you to deceive. You really don’t do the Mormon church any favours with such tactics, indeed it’s fair to say that you actually destroy what little credence it may have.
As I don’t have the time to provide any more information I’ll leave links to a couple of the articles you mention. The readers can decide who is being honest.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm
http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3424503177/trinity.html
FOF
I noticed you ignored the OTHER statement that went along with McConkies, by Stephen Richards. How droll of you. And it doesn’t change the meaning at all to quote more of McConkie’s statement. IT MEANS THE SAME THING. It just helps my argument more, thank you. If I had the phamplet, I would have quoted more. (Thanks for doing so). There is nothing wrong with using a quote of someone from an internet page. Only you would have such a hissy fit over it.
McConkie even adds the same quote that I used from the Book of Mormon! And that is not the whole quote, that you cut and pasted from http://hismin.com/content/what-mormons-think-christ. (You must have been REALLY DESPERATE to try and make me look bad to get it from there and use it here!) That’s a GREAT website! Thanks for bringing it to everyone’s attention!
So who is the hypocrite here? I think we know. It makes no difference at all to quote more of McConkie. In fact, if you want to get your own copy, you can go here and then you can see the ENTIRE QUOTE without the ellipses. I guess you weren’t bright enough to notice them, and thought it was the whole quote even though it does say “excerpts”. Hilarious.
You can’t change the meaning of what Mormon salvation is because you want it to be something different.
This has been what I’ve been saying all along, and what Mormonism teaches, you only get a resurrection. Here is Milton R. Hunter, saying the same thing, using your quote from the D&C (which I didn’t ignore – I told you it changed nothing (you can read, can’t you?)
Notice the BUT… in bold? With Mormonism there is always a BUT… Here is Hunter AGAIN a few years later:
What was that he said? Did you catch that?
He did rise from the grave, and he did put into operation, so to speak, a universal law of resurrection so that every man, woman, and child who ever lives upon this earth will rise from the grave and thereby receive immortality. The wicked as well as the righteous shall be resurrected and, through the grace of ‘Christ and by the authorization of the Father, receive immortality.
Jesus death only gets you and everyone else a resurrection. Here is Anthony W. Ivans,
Given the privilege of a resurrection… which allows you then to EARN Exaltation. EARN It. That means that Grace only gets you the resurrection. I could not have said it better myself. To sanctify yourself you must do all that yourself. My, my, FOF, looks like the Mormon “apostles” and “prophets” aren’t buying what you are trying to sell. Henry D. Moyle,
What? What did he say? The atonement of Christ redeems us FROM THE DEAD. (Resurrection in case you don’t understand what he meant). And then what, then what does he say? Oh yeah, exactly the OPPOSITE of what you say: REDEMPTION FROM OUR OWN SINS DEPENDS ON US. WE ARE NOT SAVED FROM OURSELVES BY GRACE ALONE AS WE ARE FROM ADAM’S TRANSGRESSION.
Is this getting through genius? He even adds,
Is it getting through yet? Or do you need more. I think you do.
I can go on and on. Why don’t YOU read some Conference Reports genius, so that you can catch up to your daughter who I AM SURE, knows way more about Mormonism than you do.
Jesus did not bleed from every pore in the Garden of Gethsamane. He was praying there, because he was weighed down and sorrowful, “unto death” with what he knew was coming on the cross. Luke does not say that he bled from every pore.
Where do you get this stuff from? Oh yeah. Jo Smith.
Luke uses the word hōsei which is also translated to “like” So his sweat was like drops of blood. It was dark in the Garden that night. It would have looked like blood.
His sweat looked like drops of blood in the darkness of the Garden. Every time this word is used in the New Testament it indicates similarity, but not actuality.
If Jesus sweat all that blood, why is there no mention of bloody clothes? He would have been covered in blood. No one mentions this in their accounts. Especially if it was like Jo Smith said, that he bled out of every pore.
Jesus took upon himself the sins of the world on the Cross of Calvary. Peter says so. I believe Peter, not Jo Smith.
Nothing funny about that.
Silkworm,
I had to shake my head at what you’ve attempted to do with the quotes you used . I’m sure it’s
your testimony that these are accurate since you would’nt use misrepresentations to bolster
your anti -Trinity belief , right ? Now it’s very late so I’ll look at only a few of those quotes .
1. Illustrated Bible Dictionary : What you printed out failed to include what the next sentence
says : ” It is , however, the distinctive and all-comprehensive doctrine of the Christian faith”.
2. The New International Dictionary of N.T. Theology : see what you printed ? Notice the word
” developed ” ? Perhaps you should have looked at what this Dictionary further said about this
and the Trinity .
3. The New Encyclopedia Britannia : look at what you printed , notice the elipses(….) just after
” Deut 6:4 ” ? Here’s what was left out of the same paragraph by those elipses : after quoting
Matt 28:19 and then 2Cor 13:14 , it says , ” thus the New Testament established the basis for
the doctrine of the Trinity.” Silkworn , how do you feel so far ? Are you comfortable with this?
4. The New Catholic Encyclopedia : see what you printed? Well, you should have noticed
what is said a few pages further on . After stating that the doctrine of the Trinity was not taught
in the O.T. , it says , ” The revelation of truth of the triune life of God was first made in the N.T.
where the earliest references to it are in the Pauline Epistles . ”
5. The Encyclopedia Americana : this quote you printed is under the article on “Unitarianism” .
that religion denies Jesus is God and that He died for our sins to protect us from God’s wrath .
Why did’nt you try and find some info to twist and use against the Trinity by looking under
“Trinity” ? Quite frankly all these quotes are not an authority for me on the Trinity , and
you sure did’nt help your cause by the way you used them . I’m sure you had a inner witness
that they were in context and but such was not the case .
How can I trust you when , in your efforts to deny a Biblical truth , you use this material ?
Your testimony against this doctrine is examined and found wanting .
Please exchange your apostles for the real ones , the ones who taught the true salvation message ,
it’s in the New Testament —it’s about Jesus not a modern day prophet, nor secret temple rituals.
Please turn to Jesus alone . You can do it, God will help .
I’m praying for you to make that decision soon .