A single Biblical passage to undermine all of mormonism.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chazemataz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, sorry everyone. I know that my questions are off topic. I welcome any private messages answering my last few questions. For the future I will stay on topic.

Cheers!
BYU-BOY
 
40.png
BYU-BOY:
Brad- Thanks for your reply. I do appreciate your words. I do have one question though. If what you share is true and that God is the judge, why is there so much contempt found on these boards concerning other faiths?
Click to expand...
A lot of people in Internet fora are new to LDSism and new to apologetics. This means:
  1. They’re still somewhat shocked about all the divergent doctrines, which are so different as to be offensive. It’s the same feeling as if someone sauntered up to you and wanted to share their beliefs about the “historical” Jesus, who was really a woman. It’s part incredulity, part indignance.
  2. As amateur apologists, it’s easy to forget the #1 rule: gentle = effective. Mutual respect is the key to great apologetic discussion. Some of the liveliest debates I’ve had were with an LDS friend whom I respect very much and vice versa.
  3. On the flipside, for people who are passionate about their faith, a reasonable argument can come across as an attack. I’ve noticed this a lot in LDS. In fact, as you read the last sentence perhaps you felt a little indignant, even though it’s a reasonable expression of my experience alone. Or perhaps you didn’t, in which case, good for you. Anyway, my point is that you have to have a thick skin and act like your opponent doesn’t have any skin at all.
  4. I’m sure Satan hates apologetics, as reasoned arguments and conclusions based on study have caused the conversions of so many people, high- and low-profile alike, pastors, laity, etc. Modern outlets like EWTN, Catholic Answers, and the Internet have made this so much easier. So, as more people become apologists, he’s going to be there tempting them to pride. Basically, making being right and proving it (especially on a public venue like an Internet forum) more important than serving Christ. Michelle Arnold just wrote an excellent piece on the matter here.
That’s all I can think of, off the top of my head. I don’t know what there is to do about it, other than charitably correct people when they go too far, and try to set a good example. Heaven knows I’ve been as guilty as the next guy when it comes to this.
 
40.png
BYU-BOY:
Why is it that God is “not bound by his sacraments”?
Click to expand...
I’ll answer this in this thread, and if you have any more off-topic questions, why don’t you start a new thread?

The statement means that God instituted rituals by which He has promised to confer grace. These are the seven sacraments. I don’t know if you’re aware, but “sacrament” is a broader word in most churches than in the LDS church. What you call “ordinances,” we’d call “sacraments.” What you call “the sacrament,” we Catholics call "the Eucharist (or Holy Communion, or the Blessed Sacrament).

Anyway, taking baptism for example, God has promised that a person will be born into Him through baptism (see John 3 and Matthew 28:19-20). He says, in effect, “If you baptize a person, that person becomes Mine.” What He doesn’t say is that that is the only way for a person to be born into Him. He can give the same graces to anyone He pleases. If we want to be sure, we baptize. But baptism is a tool God gave us, and He doesn’t have to use it in order to confer His own grace.

Hope that helped.
 
So STILL, no one has answered my questions. I do not see how they could be considered anything other than relevant to this discussion.

BYU-Boy, Greetings and salutations. When I read your post I thought of Jesus teaching his disciples in the gospel of Luke. (chapter 7) This is where Jesus forgives a very sinful, but repentant woman and he points out to Simon the parable of the moneylender. Two men owe him money, one owes 500 denarii the other owes 50. Neither man can repay his debt but the moneylender forgives both debts. Jesus asks Simon who will love him more and when says the one who owed the most Jesus tells him that is correct and points out that this woman who was a HUGE sinner had washed his feet with her tears and dried them with her hair while Simon was rather complacent. Jesus said :

“Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” Luke 7:47 KJV

Just something to think about when considering the “fairness” of God. Some may cry out for justice but I pray for mercy.

Now will someone PLEASE answer my questions so that we can back on topic? :confused:
 
40.png
BYU-BOY:
majick275 the thing that you and many others consistently attack with Isaiah 43:10-16 is the Mormon doctrine of theogony. Being that LDS doctrine belongs to the family of open theology, whereas, RC doctrine belongs to the family of closed theology it is no wonder why it is difficult for us to see eye to eye. However here is an attempt to help you understand why this scripture of Isaiah doesn’t refute our faith. I don’t offer this explanation as a means to convince you because it seems quite clear where your convictions are and for this I commend you and all others that have your similar convictions.

As Latter-day Saint we do believe that “Before me there was no God formed: and after me there shall be none.” Yet, what you do not understand is that this concept of God to us is not just an entity, power, or being, but rather a status. God has always been and will always be but who holds that title of God does change. An example of this would be the President of the United States. There has always been a President since the beginning of the formation of the States. However, who has been President has changed every four to eight years.

I know for many on this forum this ideology is heretical and I do not fault you for your opinion. Yet, I hope that it does help you understand why the whole Mormon Church doesn’t collapse when you offer this scripture as an attack. My answer may not comfort your disbelief and contempt for my faith but again, you and I are wear different glasses when we view what we hold to be truth.

Cheers!

BYU-BOY
Click to expand...
Just for the record I still want my questions answered BUT this post is certainly thought provoking. :rolleyes:

I have NEVER heard, read, seen etc. this theory proposed as LDS doctrine before. (that the “office” of God changes hands) I understood it to be more like a King rather than a president and that his heirs would “colonize” new worlds in his name and would then rule those lands as “viceroy” while he remains the monarch of an ever growing empire.

Do you believe then that the Earth will be “recycled” with new entities in the roles of God, Jesus, Satan, etc.? Can you cite references(s) showing this to be “offcial” LDS doctrine? I do not share your beliefs at all but I do read and ponder your posts as I find them very worthy of discussion. May the lord bless you and keep you.
 
To BYU-BOY’s idea that “godhood” can be transfered to different beings, let’s quote Isaiah again:
I am the Lord; that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another. Isa. 42:8
Click to expand...
 
PaulDupre I was hoping that you would return to this thread. I left so abruptly the last time we spoke that I didn’t have the opportunity to thank you for your insights. Obviously I don’t agree with you but I do find your ex-Mormon/Catholic viewpoints interesting.

By the way, good quote from Isaiah. However, you probably know that we would feel that God would never confer his title onto anyone else, for He is truly the God of his creations. Whereas, we have the opportunity to become LIKE Him and not necessarily become Him. Hope that helps.

Cheers!
 
40.png
majick275:
I have NEVER heard, read, seen etc. this theory proposed as LDS doctrine before. (that the “office” of God changes hands) Can you cite references(s) showing this to be “official” LDS doctrine?
Click to expand...
majick275 this theory was actually quite strongly shared to me by several of my BYU professors. I have since taken their teachings and studied it and adopted them. As you probably very well know the only truly “official” LDS doctrines either come from our standard works (Bib, BoM, D&C, PoP, and the Ensign). What ever is not in these writings are pretty much left up to the general congregation to search out on their own and determine what they feel to truth. This method of open theology is rather unorthodox for many outside the church because most organized religions have very set doctrines. The LDS faith does to some degree but the deeper and meatier doctrines are left for the member to search, ponder, and pray (sound familiar Bro. Dupre?).

Anyway, hope that this is helpful.

Cheers!

BYU-BOY

P.S. majick275 will you please re-post your question for answering, thanks!
 
40.png
majick275:
So let’s go back to the beginning here. The prevailing belief among the Catholics here is that Isaiah is a very important book of scripture that completely contradicts the LDS doctrine of eternal progression, the LDS doctrine on the creation, and the LDS view of the pre-existence.

The LDS response has so far resulted in more confusion (not an accusation just stating my observance that there is a misunderstanding) because we seem to be struggling in our efforts to clearly define just what LDS doctrine on this is.

So let’s try to answer some basic questions (some with follow ups) so that we can all reach greater understanding:
  1. Does Heavenly Father have a Father? (and if so is He a God as well?)
  2. Will mortals from this Earth who reach the highest degree of Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom continue to have Children in the Celestial Kingdom? (if so will these children need to come down to earth or some other planet to receive physical bodies and work out their own salvation? if yes, who will be there savior? who will tempt them so that there is “opposition in all things”?)
  3. is(are) there (a) heavenly mother(s)? (if yes, is she a God/Goddess?)
I believe that if we have definitive answers to these questions then it will become obvious wehter or not this scripture invalidates LDS doctrine. THEN, we can debate if this scripture is correctly translated, interpreted, etc.
Click to expand...
BYU Boy, here you go.
I wonder if your BYU professors are in danger from Boyd K. Packer imposing the same punishment as he is reputed to have done to various LDS historians for their “open” doctrine.

I consider myself to be quite well read on LDS materials, have many friends and relatives in your church and am in fact ex-LDS through RCIA myself. I do not claim any epertise in LDS doctrine because of that but I do consider myself “familiar” with LDS teachings. I am still very surprised at your doctrinal view of Godhood and after your last post to Paul somewhat confused.

Are you saying that Godhood is “rotated” like terms in office and what do you consider to be “becoming like God?”

…and I still want my questions answered 😃
 
Now let say my neighbor is Roman Catholic and though he believes in the Church and her traditions he rarely lives a life that one would say is outstanding in righteousness. He is not a bad man but he really isn’t a good man either. Tonight as both my neighbor and I go to sleep we die. Now as I try to get into heaven I am stopped and told that I chose the wrong religion. Due to my choice I am damned to a world of suffering. Whereas, my neighbor, who lived a mediocre life is allowed to be adopted into God’s presence and live a life of eternal bliss and happiness.

(…) As a Mormon I try to truly live a life that I feel is in harmony with God. I worship the Savior to the best of my understanding; I try to have charity; and to be fair in my actions. On top of this, I willingly sacrifice 10 percent of my income; I do not drink, smoke, do drugs, or have pre or extra-marital sex. I do not do things to make myself better than others but rather because I sincerely believe that the Divine has lead me to the true Church.
Click to expand...
**Luke 18
**

10"Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11The Pharisee stood up and prayed abouta] himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ 13"But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

14"I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.

Pride is dangerous. If you truly are better than the “mediocre” next door neigbour, it is due to the grace of God working in you, and then you have nothing to boast about. Without that grace, you’d still be dead in your sins.

Furthermore, only God can see the heart of your neibour.

And of course, as has already been pointed out. According to the Catholic Church you may very well be saved despite erroneous beliefs if your ignorance of the truth is not your fault, and you otherwise live according to your consicence. But then you will be saved despite false beliefs, not because of them.

Vidar
 
40.png
BYU-BOY:
As you probably very well know the only truly “official” LDS doctrines either come from our standard works (Bib, BoM, D&C, PoP, and the Ensign).
Click to expand...
The Ensign? You’re kidding, right?
 
I am really starting to wonder here as I still haven’t gotten any LDS answers to my questions.

Surely these are valid things to ask. this isn’t hateful or disrepectful this is about properly defining doctrine so that our discussion starts with a factual basis rather than speculation.

I believe that what I asked truly shows the main difference in our religious paradigm. Why wouldn’t we want to know the truth about that?

Romans 1:16 (KJV)
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.”
 
40.png
majick275:
So let’s go back to the beginning here. The prevailing belief among the Catholics here is that Isaiah is a very important book of scripture that completely contradicts the LDS doctrine of eternal progression, the LDS doctrine on the creation, and the LDS view of the pre-existence.

The LDS response has so far resulted in more confusion (not an accusation just stating my observance that there is a misunderstanding) because we seem to be struggling in our efforts to clearly define just what LDS doctrine on this is.

So let’s try to answer some basic questions (some with follow ups) so that we can all reach greater understanding:
  1. Does Heavenly Father have a Father? (and if so is He a God as well?)
I don’t think anyone knows the answer to that question except Heavenly Father…hence you might not get an answer from LDS. It would be pure personal speculation, and we are told not to speculate, but to study the scriptures. I think when some people study the scriptures a lot and get to know them, they start thinking how things might be and speculating.
How would you answer the question? I personally believe He is as He says He is the first and last and the One God the Father. But, since I am still on this earth and have not met him face to face, I have to rely on what he told us in the scriptures, to include Isaiah.
  1. Will mortals from this Earth who reach the highest degree of Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom continue to have Children in the Celestial Kingdom? (if so will these children need to come down to earth or some other planet to receive physical bodies and work out their own salvation? if yes, who will be there savior? who will tempt them so that there is “opposition in all things”?)
We don’t know that, we do believe that life will continue, there is only one savior, Jesus Christ. There will never be another, and after the millenium and resurrection, I believe I have read that Satan will have no more power to tempt.
  1. is(are) there (a) heavenly mother(s)? (if yes, is she a God/Goddess?)
I don’t know, we speculate that we may have a mother in heaven, as that would be the natural process of producing spirit children, but we do not know.

I believe that if we have definitive answers to these questions then it will become obvious wehter or not this scripture invalidates LDS doctrine. THEN, we can debate if this scripture is correctly translated, interpreted, etc.
Click to expand...
Many Mormons speculate on the unknown, but that does not make it Church doctrine. This scripture does not contradict our beliefs in any way as far as I can see. We believe it, God is the One and only.
As far as BYU-Boy’s speculation on different Gods as we have different presidents, I am blown away by that. Never heard it and think he is trying to throw in a little fun. Knowing that the Catholics would jump all over that one, and really have something to be in an uproar about.
I hope you can read my answers, I still don’t know how to separate things out from the quote. I am a dinasaur, sorry.

BJ
 
BJ you are doing just fine.

I understand the difference between member speculation and actual doctrine. I have to believe though that LDS doctrine does exist on this subject. Surely the LDS church has defined the nature of God and the “plan of salvation” to the point where these questions can be factually answered.

I see what you have stated as your own belief (one God only, etc.) and I would agree that Isaiah does NOT contradict that. However, as you stated “Many Mormons speculate on the unknown, But that does not make it Church Doctrine.”

So once again…Would someone Please provide answers to my questions that are accepted as doctrine by the LDS church?
 
40.png
BYU-BOY:
majick275 this theory was actually quite strongly shared to me by several of my BYU professors. I have since taken their teachings and studied it and adopted them. As you probably very well know the only truly “official” LDS doctrines either come from our standard works (Bib, BoM, D&C, PoP, and the Ensign). What ever is not in these writings are pretty much left up to the general congregation to search out on their own and determine what they feel to truth. This method of open theology is rather unorthodox for many outside the church because most organized religions have very set doctrines. The LDS faith does to some degree but the deeper and meatier doctrines are left for the member to search, ponder, and pray

So, the very nature of God(what Joseph Smith called the 1st principle of the Gospel) is “pretty much left up to the general congregation to search out on their own and determine what they feel to truth”, but you can’t decide on your own if it’s ok to have a beer with your pizza? I’m sorry but this is bass-ackwards. I would go as far to say this is warped thinking.
Click to expand...
 
I apologize if I seem uncharitable here but is this really going to be left to our own speculation?

No LDS person is going to answer these questions? (specific doctrinal answers)

Is it because there is no answer? (no defined church doctrine on these critical issues? I find that hard to believe)

Is it because you don’t want to answer? (I am sorry if that sounds mean, I’m asking if this is perhaps something sacred like temple ceremonies or a “pearls before swine” or even a “milk before meat” type thing that you just don’t discuss…although that would surprise me…)

Surely we aren’t just going to leave this thread dangling like this. :confused:
 
I wasn’t able to read all the replies since this thread has become so long, so I apologize if the question has already been answered. Anyway an answer for Isaiah 43:10 is that first the Bible only deals with us, as people who have/are/will live on Earth. As it says in Genesis, “In the beginning…” it means the beginning of Earth and the people who will live on it, not the beginning of all beginnings (if there is such a thing) because God and heaven were already in existence before the Earth was created. Second, no matter how many gods have existed before us or any of that stuff we as humans, and residences of this Earth have only one God. We worship only one Almighty Heavenly Father and that will never change. When Isaiah is saying that there is only one God as far as we are concerned that is completely true. This Earth has only one God and we have only one God.

-Andrew
 
40.png
majick275:
BJ you are doing just fine.

I understand the difference between member speculation and actual doctrine. I have to believe though that LDS doctrine does exist on this subject. Surely the LDS church has defined the nature of God and the “plan of salvation” to the point where these questions can be factually answered.

I see what you have stated as your own belief (one God only, etc.) and I would agree that Isaiah does NOT contradict that. However, as you stated “Many Mormons speculate on the unknown, But that does not make it Church Doctrine.”

So once again…Would someone Please provide answers to my questions that are accepted as doctrine by the LDS church?
Click to expand...
I guess I really don’t understand your question.
I have said we believe in one supreme God. He is God the Father.
Associated with the Father are his Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost.
These three constitute the Godhead, the governing council of the universe.
The personages in the Trinity are distinct personalities, but they are as one because they are united in all things of faith and action.
This is Church doctrine,
now if you do not accept it as Church doctrine, I do not know what else you want to hear. I have stated this in this post and many others, and still you say the question has not been answered. What is your question?

The other things you asked about like if we have a mother in heaven, and does Heavenly Father have a father, are not Church doctrine and are only speculated upon by people who want to speculate about the possibilities of the unknown. You can speculate all you want about those things, but it is not church doctrine. We simply do not know the answers anymore than you do about those things.
Majick275, if you do not like to speculate on these things, what makes you think we like to. If you know the answers, why ask us. We do not know the answers to anything you have asked, except we believe in one God as defined above. Anything else you asked about is pure speculation, and you can speculate and answer the questions you asked as well as anyone. So don’t leave us dangling, let us hear your answers.
Do we have a mother in heaven? Is she a God or Godess? Is her name Mary?
Does Heavenly Father have a Father? and whatever other questions you asked.
If you don’t know the answers why do you expect LDS to know?
We are not taught those things and do not know anymore about that than you do.
We do believe in eternal progression, but you already know that. That is all there is to it. I hope you can accept that, and be at peace with the answer. BJ
 
40.png
Tmaque:
So, the very nature of God(what Joseph Smith called the 1st principle of the Gospel) is “pretty much left up to the general congregation to search out on their own and determine what they feel to truth”, but you can’t decide on your own if it’s ok to have a beer with your pizza? I’m sorry but this is bass-ackwards. I would go as far to say this is warped thinking.
Click to expand...
Todd, really, a little humility and charity are called for here, don’t you think? How far do you think you are going to get by attacking LDS and stating the thoughts are warped? I refer you to your previous posts to me. 😃
 
BJ Colbert:
I guess I really don’t understand your question.
I have said we believe in one supreme God. He is God the Father.
Associated with the Father are his Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost.
These three constitute the Godhead, the governing council of the universe.
The personages in the Trinity are distinct personalities, but they are as one because they are united in all things of faith and action.
This is Church doctrine,
now if you do not accept it as Church doctrine, I do not know what else you want to hear. I have stated this in this post and many others, and still you say the question has not been answered. What is your question?

The other things you asked about like if we have a mother in heaven, and does Heavenly Father have a father, are not Church doctrine and are only speculated upon by people who want to speculate about the possibilities of the unknown. You can speculate all you want about those things, but it is not church doctrine. We simply do not know the answers anymore than you do about those things.
Majick275, if you do not like to speculate on these things, what makes you think we like to. If you know the answers, why ask us. We do not know the answers to anything you have asked, except we believe in one God as defined above. Anything else you asked about is pure speculation, and you can speculate and answer the questions you asked as well as anyone. So don’t leave us dangling, let us hear your answers.
Do we have a mother in heaven? Is she a God or Godess? Is her name Mary?
Does Heavenly Father have a Father? and whatever other questions you asked.
If you don’t know the answers why do you expect LDS to know?
We are not taught those things and do not know anymore about that than you do.
We do believe in eternal progression, but you already know that. That is all there is to it. I hope you can accept that, and be at peace with the answer. BJ
Click to expand...
It was agreed upon on this forum that LDS doctrine states that God was once a finite man and had to eternally progress. Therefore it is reasonable then for a Catholic confronted by such a statement foreign to Catholic thinking to ask how was this finite first man created. Where did he come from if the only Creator Catholics are aware of is actually a finite being?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top