An EV comments on the ongoing struggle between Catholics and LDS.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mudcat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Mormon Church has always maintained that the Bible is hopelessly corrupt and untrustworthy:

From the Book of Mormon:
1 Nephi 13:
24 And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God.
25 Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God.
26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.
27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.
28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.
29 And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest—because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them.
The above passage claims that the bible we have now is not the same bible written by the prophets and apostles. Many of the “plain and precious parts” were taken away by the “great and abominable Church”. Why? "that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.

Verse 29 states that those who believe the bible with the plain and precious parts deliberately removed by the great and abominable church stumble so that Satan has great power over them.

Continued…
 
Bible corruption continued…

What do the modern LDS prophets and apostles say?

President Ezra Taft Benson wrote of
“the Bible, which passed through generations of copyists, translators and corrupt religionists who tampered with the text”
(Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 53).
Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., popular LDS author and son of the tenth president of the church, said
“The early ‘Apostate Fathers’ did not think it was wrong to tamper with inspired scripture. If any scripture seemed to endanger their viewpoint, it was altered, transplanted or completely removed from the Biblical text” (Religious Truths Defined, p.175).
Apostle Mark E. Peterson casts doubt on the reliability of the Bible and states forcefully that the corruption was intentional:
“Many insertions were made, some of them ‘slanted’ for selfish purposes, while at times deliberate falsifications and fabrications were perpetrated”
(As Translated Correctly, p.4).
“It is evident then that many of the ‘plain and precious’ things were omitted from the Bible by failure to choose all of the authentic books for inclusion, and by deliberate changes, deletions and forgeries …”
(As Translated Correctly, p.14).
The encyclopedia of Mormonism:
"Thus, the elements of mistranslation, incompleteness, and other errors weaken the Bible”
(Encyclopedia of Mormonism , Vol. 1, Bible).
Again we can see from this small sample of quotes how the conviction that the bible is corrupt and untrustworthy starts with The Book of Mormon (“the most correct book on earth” and “the keystone of our religion”) and continues to pervade Mormon thinking and writing throughout their history.

Grace to you all,
Paul (a former Mormon)
 
Ok…here’s my problem, Javi…I know that many Christians define 'Christian" in a way that does not include beliefs we hold. In fact, many Christians define ‘Christian’ in a way that includes only beliefs* they * hold, thus excluding all others from the fellowship.

My objection to the claim that LDS leaders claimed that we ‘worship a different Jesus’ from the Christian one isn’t about denying that our beliefs about Him are different in ways, great or small, from those of other Christians. Of course they are. We do, after all, claim that Christianity wandered into apostate land and the correct beliefs needed restoration. Of COURSE they would be different to greater or lesser degree. Where they are, it’s because we think everybody else is wrong. 😉

My objection is to the notion that any Latter-day Saint leader would say that their (our) beliefs are different from Christian beliefs.

I challenged the guilty misquoters to show a quote from any LDS leader actually saying those words, that we are not Christian, or that our beliefs differ from Christianity, thus divorcing us from it. That’s it…it’s not about what about our critics think, here. It’s about what we think of ourselves. We don’t think we are Traditional Christians. We don’t think we are mainline, orthodox, Orthodox, Trinitarian or many of the other adjectives appended to the word to describe the sort of beliefs that particular Christian group thinks is required to be Christian.

But we believe we are Christian, and none of our leaders has ever said that we were not, without making the adjectives the important part, as I just have.

One of the first steps that Catholics (and other critics) can take to ease that perceived "ongoing struggle’ (to get this back on topic) is, if they can’t stomach the idea of our being Christians, at least to do us the courtesy of believing that WE believe it. I’m used to having quotes taken out of context. I finally fell off my patience wagon when people started making them up.

As far as I know, B’hai’s don’t claim to be Christian, either. Again, Javi, this isn’t about whether you think we are Christians. It’s about people who misquote, and who make up quotes by, our leaders in an attempt to make it a ‘given’ that WE don’t think we are.

We aren’t traditional Christians. I don’t know many (if any) who claim to be. Again, it’s not about what you think of our Christianity, or about what Catholicism thinks or claims. It’s about people making claims about what OUR leaders have said, literally putting quotes around words that make it look as if our leaders have claimed that we are not Christian.

Yes, I understand that you don’t think I am a Christian. I don’t think you get, even yet, my objection.

It’s not about what others think we are. It’s about the fact that some are inventing quotes…outright lying, not to put to fine a point on it…from LDS leaders, claiming that they have actually said that they 'worship a different Jesus from the ****Christian ****one."

First, it’s poisoning the well.
It’s begging the question.
it’s lying.

(shrug)
OK, Diana. You made your point. I understand and I accept your position. I, for one am not a LDS, therefore I do not know the inner workings of the LDS Church. I can only go by what I read, or have read, and the word(s) of ex-LDS.

I agree with you that when an acusation is made it should be backed up with proof. But, in the LDS case from what I have come across, I find that in one case a LDS Church leader, speaking for the Church, makes a definite statement on a subject , supposedly with authority. Then later that statement is either refuted by the Church, or it is denied that it was ever made, or that the person making it was speaking for the Church. It can be quite confusing.

The LDS Church may have articles of belief, but it has neither a creed nor a canon of beliefs to support its theology. Both creed and canon are essential in formulating a theology. Without either or both, theology can run the gammut without truly meaning anything and results in rejection by outsiders. And in this case is the reason for the “attacks” on the LDS.

Since I am more interested in the “workings” of the LDS Church, I will try to refrain from “attacks” and stick to the subject of strict dialogue. Shalom.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Now that’s a bit harsh, I assume their Trinitarian theology flows from whatever revelation supported the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD
Dear Todd , I was baptized Catholic 12 years ago in Logan Utah. I have a Mormon background. About 7 years ago I had two Mormon Missionaries come to my door. We sat and discussed Jesus. Although they tried really hard to lead the discussion I was pretty excited and kept referring to the scriptures of the most Holy Bible. I mentioned the Holy Trinity and the older Missionary actually began to laugh. I knew then without a doubt that there was someone else, another force sitting at the table, trying to spin both them and I.

I looked into the eyes of this Missionary and told him he was laughing at God himself. He did go quiet.

I told him in a friendly and loving manner that the Godhead is a relationship of love, that the Father and son together are truly our One God. That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son and it is this Spirit that had been gifted to us. That its not about us, that it is all about Jesus given to us. (Life)

(Love) I will not go into more on my own revelations as to the Holy Trinity but I will say that I have a great sense of it in my own life. As they were leaving I mentioned the Holy Trinity one more time and again the elder Missionary just laughed, while the younger started saying to me “I know the Church is true etc….” I felt sad for both of them, but mostly for the younger one. The words the Holy Trinity are not found in the Scriptures yet it is laced throughout the Scriptures every where.

I assume you were baptized Catholic so you do have the Holy Spirit in you to discern these truths. Here is one of my favorite scriptures regarding our One God. Father, Son and Holy Spriit. If you want more I can pass on more. . They are undeniable. The Council of Nicaea in 325 AD was formed because Heresy was creeping in. They just had to affirm what was already beleived. Does that make sense to you?

1 Cor 12

Now in regard to spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be unaware.
2 You know how, when you were pagans, you were constantly attracted and led away to mute idols.
Therefore, I tell you that nobody speaking by the spirit of God says, “Jesus be accursed.” And no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the holy Spirit.
(You have this Spirit in you Todd)

3 There are different kinds of spiritual gifts but the same Spirit; (Holy Spirit)
there are different forms of service but the same Lord; (Jesus)
there are different workings but **the same God (God) ** who produces all of them in everyone.

Rich
www.utahmission.com
utahmission@aol.com
 
Wrong! Direct reference to the Trinity does exist in the Bible aplenty. What doesn’t exist in the Bible is any reference to the absurd Trinitarian theology of the post Apostate Christendom.
Dear Todd
This is the same spirit thatt was at my table with the 2 Mormon Missionaries. Does this make sense to you? Can you see this clearly? Its real, and when you bring a true love of Jesus foreward the mask falls off of what seems to appear really good. Think about this Todd.

Go here Todd, this is your Church
utahmission.com/pages/Welcome.html

In Christ Jesus
Rich
 
Dear Todd
This is the same spirit thatt was at my table with the 2 Mormon Missionaries. Does this make sense to you? Can you see this clearly? Its real, and when you bring a true love of Jesus foreward the mask falls off of what seems to appear really good. Think about this Todd.
Yes, there are people in both religions of ‘ill spirit’ that I wish would stop their failed efforts in apologetics
Go here Todd, this is your Church
utahmission.com/pages/Welcome.html
I thought the story was touching, a reminder that whomever we think we are in this world, we are still sinners in God’s eyes
 
Wrong! Direct reference to the Trinity does exist in the Bible aplenty. What doesn’t exist in the Bible is any reference to the absurd Trinitarian theology of the post Apostate Christendom.
Sorry Zerinus. I don’t know which Bible you use but in the Bibles I use ( Catholic and Protestant ) they DO NOT have a direct reference to the Trinity. Our “absurd” Trinitarian theology is taken direct from scripture without assuming anything. What is really absurd is the LDS idea of a “chimera Trinity”. Christians do not believe that when Jesus prayed that He, as a human, was praying to Himself, as God, when He prayed to the Father in the garden. Nor do we believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are connected to each other or are different manifestations of the one God. Nowhere in scripture, either the OT or the NT, is there any reference whatever of “chimera”. If there is please show it to me.

By the way, I would still like anyone from the LDS to show and prove to me about this “Apostacy” as to when it occured and to what is different between the teachings of the Early Church and today’s Church. Thank You.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
The Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed do not support, or teach, Trinitarianism, or the Trinitarian theology of present day Christendom. That came later in the history of the development of Christian theology.
And again you err. The Christian understanding of the Trinitarian theology was known and understood long before the council of Nicea. All the council actually did was to confirm it. Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and others make reference to the Trinity in their Epistles. Read the Early Church Fathers and the heresies that developed back then because of a misunderstanding and rejection of the divinty of Jesus and the existence of the Holy Spirit.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Zerenius,

I would submit that anyone who believes that God had a dad and that both God and his dad werre once sinful men is the true Apostate. Your Church is a false church following false prophets. That has been shown time and time again.

I pray you throw away the blinders Satan has on your eyes and see the truth before it is too late.
 
Sorry Zerinus. I don’t know which Bible you use but in the Bibles I use ( Catholic and Protestant ) they DO NOT have a direct reference to the Trinity. Our “absurd” Trinitarian theology is taken direct from scripture without assuming anything. What is really absurd is the LDS idea of a “chimera Trinity”. Christians do not believe that when Jesus prayed that He, as a human, was praying to Himself, as God, when He prayed to the Father in the garden. Nor do we believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are connected to each other or are different manifestations of the one God. Nowhere in scripture, either the OT or the NT, is there any reference whatever of “chimera”. If there is please show it to me.

By the way, I would still like anyone from the LDS to show and prove to me about this “Apostacy” as to when it occured and to what is different between the teachings of the Early Church and today’s Church. Thank You.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
You misunderstood what he was saying on “spirit chimera”. Zerinus and Todd were claiming that the traditional Catholic belief on the Trinity is analogous to the chimera, which is a mythical monster that has parts of three animals. He then mentioned “one substance” and “three persons in one God” as alleged evidence of this. Unfortunately for him, this shows that he has no clue what the actual Trinity doctrine teaches. “Substance” does not refer to a physical thing, and therefore does not imply that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are physically one (i.e. that they are attached to each other). Such notions are heretical.

The only thing absurd is Zerinus’ and Todd’s laughable understandings of Trinitarianism.
 
Zerinus:

I may have a misconception and misunderstanding of Mormonism, but after reading your posts I see that you also have a misconception and misunderstanding of mainline Christianity with Catholicism in particular. I am here to dialogue and learn ( although I have gotten into some arguements, for which I apologize ) and I hope that you are too. You give your beliefs and I will give you mine at which point we then compare and correct the errors that we have of each other’s beliefs. It really should go no further.

In the dialogue we should all be honest and provide proof when requested. Manytimes hearsay and rumors are all each one of us has to go on. The onus is then on us to make the correction, without anger. It is true I, and many others ( on both sides ), have not followed this way, but we all should make every effort to do so. I hope you, and others, agree. I, for one, will again try my best to abide by this.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Jesus said there would be no apostasy.

So, was jesus wrong?
(response to Post 59)

Apostacy will precede the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Thesalonians 2 v 3 [KJV]

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Also, during Jesus’ ministry some followers left Him because of what he was saying - see John 6:22-64] They believed him at first then apostasized.

John 6: 65-66 [KJV]

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
 
(response to Post 59)

Apostacy will precede the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Thesalonians 2 v 3 [KJV]

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Also, during Jesus’ ministry some followers left Him because of what he was saying - see John 6:22-64] They believed him at first then apostasized.

John 6: 65-66 [KJV]

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Ok…now, show me where it says a TOTAL APOSTASY…A TOTAL falling away. No twisating, no silly interpretations. Show where it says TOTAL. There has already been a “falling away” it started in the 1500s and includes the following of false prophets like Joseph Smith.

No…the verse does not come close to saying what you need it to say
 
(response to Post 59)

Apostacy will precede the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Thesalonians 2 v 3 [KJV]

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Paul, here, is warning against the rise of the antiChrist and false teachers. He is not refering to apostacy of the Church. If any apostacy occurs it will be the individual and not the Church. The Catholic Church today still teaches the same truths and Holy Traditions that Jesus and the Apostles taught 2000 years ago. It cannot be proved otherwise.

These verses can also be looked upon as anticipating the Book of Revelation.

Also, during Jesus’ ministry some followers left Him because of what he was saying - see John 6:22-64] They believed him at first then apostasized.
They did not apostasize. They rejected Jesus and His teachings and reverted back to Judaism. There is a BIG difference
John 6: 65-66 [KJV]
And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Again, they reverted.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
(response to Post 59)

Apostacy will precede the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:

2 Thesalonians 2 v 3 [KJV]

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Also, during Jesus’ ministry some followers left Him because of what he was saying - see John 6:22-64] They believed him at first then apostasized.

John 6: 65-66 [KJV]

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Am I reading this wrong here Cass?

And the 12 stayed and rewarded with the Last Supper, the body and blood of our Lord and God Jesus, our Church, the Catholic Church.
utahmission.com/pages/Mass_Explained.html

It is the Churches very own diary you are trying to interpret. The one who wrote down their own words into their own diary is the one you should look to for proper interpretation. As to the New Testament that would be the Catholic Church.

Rich

www.utahmission.com
 
To All LDS:

No reply or answer to our questions and comments? 🤷??

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
And again you err. The Christian understanding of the Trinitarian theology was known and understood long before the council of Nicea. All the council actually did was to confirm it. Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and others make reference to the Trinity in their Epistles. Read the Early Church Fathers and the heresies that developed back then because of a misunderstanding and rejection of the divinty of Jesus and the existence of the Holy Spirit.
No, it was debated long before the council of Nicea, but it took the council to settle matters, and articulate aspects of the Trinity that were not self evident in the Bible.
Yes, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are evident in Scripture.
No, the three separate persons of one Nature is not evident in the bible.
Result: it enabled the church to speak of three distinct gods yet remain monotheistic (influence of Greek philosophy and the need to appeal to intelligencia of the time)
 
you may want to scroll down to the point where it says:

The Announcement of the Universal Apostasy.
 
…]
Again, who are “we”? As a Mormon I feel I have a lot more in common with Catholics than with Evangelicals. I don’t fancy being lumped together with the Evans, if that is alright with you.
Just want to add one thing here:
I have read the BoM - and to be perfectly honest: In my opinion is the BoM alone (without knowing the other LDS-Scriptures) a VERY, very Protestant Book:

Salvation through grace alone, Repentance, Credo-Baptism to name a few.

So I think that you LDS have FAR MORE in common with the Evangelicals than with the Catholics.
In my opinion, if you’d switch religions, you would feel far more “at home” among Evangelicals (i.e. Baptists) than among Catholics. - This shouldn’t be an attempt to prosytelize anyone. This is just a fact because of the huge similarities in doctrine (at least in the early doctrine - the one that the CoC and other Restorationists have).
I have found many parts in the BoM of which I thought: Wah, that would be practical if it would stand in the Holy Bible because this is exact what I (as an emergent Baptist) believe - and it would be practical to have it for evangelization or so…

EDIT: I am not familiar with the whole LDS doctrine and practice. The things I read are more RLDS origin. ('Though I have the Triple Combination at Home: BoM, D&C and Pearl of Great Price!)

Please also refer my other post because it somehow relates to this one: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7016997#post7016997 #156

In Christ,
Esdra
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top