An Introduction and an Invitation

[Chris-WA]

zerinus;1523419[COLOR=darkred:
[QUOTE]
That interpretation of 1 Nephi I had given was neither my own nor from Church authorities. It actually comes from the Book of Mormon itself…But to be short in writing, the expressions “a marvelous work and wonder”…and similar expressions occurs in several places in the Book of Mormon; and if these are all carefully examined and analyzed together within their contexts, it will become clear that they all refer to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. I will just confine it to a couple of quotes:

2 Nephi 25:“He will bring forth his words unto them” is an obvious reference to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.
[/QUOTE]
I get the ‘marvelous work’ prophecy you speak of. I have no doubt the BoM contains many predictions about itself coming forth in the latter days. But that is not what I was talking about. What I was talking about was your interpretation of the 1 Nephi passage, in which you claim that the BoM is trying to tell us that it will not have much external evidence to go along with it. I think that interpretation is a stretch. I understand what you mean by “the wisdom of their wise and learned shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent shall be hid.” I don’t see this, however, as a direct reference saying that historical evidence for the BoM will purposefully be hidden or nonexistent. That is a conclusion one would have to extrapolate for themselves, and without authoritative statements from church leaders confirming such an extrapolation, I think you are standing out on your own ledge here. It would be like me making my own conclusions about the end of the world from my own interpretation of certain passages from the Book of Revelation, without reading the book within the context of church authority.

This will require a deeper analysis, which I will not go into; but to be brief, it is the Book of Mormon that causes “the wisdom of the wise to perish, and the understanding of the prudent to be hid;” and it is God’s direct response to those who “draw near unto Him with their mouth, and with their lips do honor Him, but have removed their hearts far from Him”—that is, false religionists of present day Christendom (who are looking for scientific evidence!). The Book of Mormon is designed to confound them, and cause their wisdom and prudence to perish.

If the BoM is designed to confound people from finding empirical evidence supporting the existence of the ancient Nephites and Lamanites, then why do groups like FARMS have teams of researchers scouring Central America for BoM evidence?

There is no scientific proof of the fundamentals of religion in either Book. The fundamentals of religion in either book are: That there is a God who has spoken through His prophets, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that He was born of a virgin, suffered and died to atone for our sins, was resurrected on the third day, ascended to heaven, and will in like manner return to earth; and there is no scientific evidence for any of these.

True, and neither is it required for faith in such things. That’s the faith part. But that’s not all the BoM is about, is it? It’s also about two civilizations (well I guess three really) in the Americas that seem to have utterly disappeared without a shred of evidence left behind that they ever existed, which is a far cry from those of the bible. At some point, this has got to make you think.

There is nothing surprising about that, considering that we know a lot more about Old World civilizations and their languages than we do about the New World.

If you’re suggesting that’s the reason why we can’t find historical support for the BoM New World peoples and cities, I think that’s just plain inaccurate. It’s definitely not for a lack of looking. These civilizations seemed to disappear into thin air with no writing, no artifacts, no identifiable cities. But I get why you believe that God has purposefully hidden such evidence from modern researchers. It’s the only plausible explanation left why nobody can find anything from the Nephites or Lamanites. The only other explanation is outside the LDS paradigm–which is the possibility that the BoM is a fictional work.

 

[kellie]

Catholics…please…let’s keep the punches above the belt. NDM has been kind enough to indulge my invitation; please show him the respect due to a guest in our house.

I trust you’re all charitable enough to self-edit in the future. If anyone continues to be rude, I’ll report you and we’ll let the mods sort it out.

God Bless,
RyanL

In all seriousness Ryan, I haven’t seen any posts on this thread that have been rude.

We are debating our faiths, and listening to each other about the differences between Mormons and Catholics.

Did you expect NotreDameMormon to talk in here and we all just nod and agree?

Your posts asking us to be nice is really offensive, this is the 2ns one you have made about it.

Moderators watch, and will comment if they need to.

I am sure NotreDameMormon is capable of sticking up for himself.

Im enjoying the thread, and enjoying learning what Mormons believe.

Thanks

 

[NotreDameMormon]

ND,
Why do LDS feel justified in murdering the infant, just because the child’s father sinned? Your 2nd article of faith states “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.”

And yet, you are willing to punish the poor defenseless baby with death for the sin of its father. Have you ever thought about this? What right do you have to kill a child just because his conception happened under unfortunate circumstances?

LDS are NOT pro-life.

Paul

Oh, Paul.

 

[NotreDameMormon]

Hello,

I am a student at the University of Notre Dame and a fan of Catholics everywhere. I have many Catholic friends and I attend mass on a regular basis and find it very uplifting and beneficial. The oddity most people find in this is that I am an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons, by nickname).

Despite our membership differences, my Catholic friends and I enjoy a profitable association and uplifting discussion of our mutual faith and trust in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We benefit not only from our agreement but also from discussion of the principles on which our differences are founded. It is often in discussing our differences that we come to a better mutual understanding of the truths of the Gospel and an appreciation for our common understanding and eternal goals.

In the spirit of that mutual benefit, my most esteemed and well versed Catholic associate has encouraged me to post a thread on this website to answer questions regarding the LDS faith and its relation to Catholic doctrine. While I am no LDS scholar, I am reasonably well versed in LDS doctrine and am qualified to discuss items generally. I do not speak on behalf of the Church officially. However, I am an active member in good standing and have years of Church study, teaching, and leadership experience. I believe in open and honest dialog and am happy to answer any questions that I can.

While I wish to answer every question as completely as possible, please understand that time is a factor and I may not be able to answer every question with the length and depth that I would like to. Also, I will not waste valuable time entertaining bloggers who are just looking for a fight. This post is meant to invite questions and progressive discussion, not pointless debate and argument. I appreciate your cooperation in this manner.

That being said, I throw this offering into the pile and hope to hear from you soon. May God bless you in your lives and bless our discussions with His Spirit.

My Friends,

I am going to open a new thread called “Questions for Your Notre Dame Mormon.” I’ll repost this invitation and a few more comments there.

Thanks, and I hope to hear from you soon.

 

[RyanL]

In all seriousness Ryan, I haven’t seen any posts on this thread that have been rude.

I understand that’s your viewpoint.

Did you expect NotreDameMormon to talk in here and we all just nod and agree?

I sincerely hope not!

Your posts asking us to be nice is really offensive, this is the 2ns one you have made about it.

I’m sorry if my invitations to be charitable have caused you offense.

Moderators watch, and will comment if they need to.

Why increase their workload? Why not self-regulate? I have the utmost confidence in our moderation staff, but I’d rather we take care of things ourselves (as Catholics should).

I am sure NotreDameMormon is capable of sticking up for himself.

I’m sure he’s an ***invited ***guest who shouldn’t need to stick up for himself – his place should be to stick up for his doctrines. Condescension and mockery should not be involved, and there are several instances of it on this thread. If you haven’t seen them, you should re-read. I *asked *him to be here to answer some questions for us so that we might come to a better mutual understanding. He’s not here to proselytize, simply to give knowledgeable answers to questions we have about LDS teachings. If any of his answers don’t make sense, feel free to call him on it and ask him to explain. Don’t, however, simply state, “You’re a deceiver and no thinking person would buy any of that BS.” Do you see the difference?

Im enjoying the thread, and enjoying learning what Mormons believe.

That makes me pleased, and I hope others feel the same.

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[kellie]

RyanL,
There’s no such thing as an “invited guest”.
You might tell a friend to come to these forums to talk about their faith, that’s great.
I too can do the same thing.
Once they are here, they are the same as you and I.
We are all here to share and discuss.
Your friend seems to be handling all the questions well.
Let’s leave it at that, he is your friend, and still will be, even if we do get heated in a theological debate.

NotreDameMormon,
What was the point of starting a new thread?
It would be better maybe if you opened up some threads with specific topics, such as “Mormons beliefs on abortion”.
Then we can ask you about your faith in seperate threads, and they won’t become too long, as Rachel earlier stated.

Thanks guys

 

[santaro75]

My Friends,

I am going to open a new thread called “Questions for Your Notre Dame Mormon.” I’ll repost this invitation and a few more comments there.

Thanks, and I hope to hear from you soon.

Yes, it has gotten off the track of the original post.

 

[Saint_Sinner]

I’m basically ignorant of Mormon beliefs. But I do understand Catholicism pretty well…so where do we get it wrong. IOW, what are the features of Mormonism that are superior to Catholic beliefs/practices so that an inquirer would clearly understand the truth?

 

[NotreDameMormon]

I’m basically ignorant of Mormon beliefs. But I do understand Catholicism pretty well…so where do we get it wrong. IOW, what are the features of Mormonism that are superior to Catholic beliefs/practices so that an inquirer would clearly understand the truth?

Please see post #25.

I do not think of it in terms of what the Catholic Church does wrong, or where the LDS Church is superior. Both are Christ’s. At the same time, they have diffeneces, and they cannot both be what they claim.

Thanks for your question.

 

[Saint_Sinner]

Please see post #25.

I do not think of it in terms of what the Catholic Church does wrong, or where the LDS Church is superior. Both are Christ’s. At the same time, they have diffeneces, and they cannot both be what they claim.

Thanks for your question.

I agree they cannot both be right. Why do you think the LDS church is correct and the Catholic church is wrong.

 

[Saint_Sinner]

Also, do you think it matters what church some one is involved with? Isn’t it very important that we have the whole Truth?

 

[PaulDupre]

Oh, Paul.

A rather clumsy dodge, ND. Please answer the question. Why does the Mormon Church teach that abortion is acceptable if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest? Have you ever considered this question, or has the thinking already been done?

Paul

 

[NotreDameMormon]

A rather clumsy dodge, ND. Please answer the question. Why does the Mormon Church teach that abortion is acceptable if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest? Have you ever considered this question, or has the thinking already been done?

Paul

A reponse to this first question can be found on the other thread we started.

As for the second…Oh, Paul.

 

[zerinus]

I get the ‘marvelous work’ prophecy you speak of. I have no doubt the BoM contains many predictions about itself coming forth in the latter days. But that is not what I was talking about. What I was talking about was your interpretation of the 1 Nephi passage, in which you claim that the BoM is trying to tell us that it will not have much external evidence to go along with it. I think that interpretation is a stretch.

That is not what I had said. This is what I had actually said: “The Book of Mormon deliberately comes without a lot of external evidence because it is designed to separate the sheep from the goats; the chaff from the wheat; the true believers in God, and those “sign seekers” who merely bring excuses, but do not really want to believe, and would not in fact believe even if convincing evidence was presented to them. This is made clear in the Book of Mormon. Allow me to quote: 1 Nephi 14:7 . . .”

What 1 Nephi 14:7 “makes clear” is that the book of Mormon is designed to “separate the sheep from the Goats” . . . the “sign-seekers who merely bring excuses, but do not really want to believe . . .”. How does it accomplish that? It does so by demanding what all true religions and prophets have always done: by demanding faith without evidence. That is what I had said, or meant to be understood. That is not the same thing as saying that “the BoM is trying to tell us that it will not have much external evidence to go along with it”.

I understand what you mean by “the wisdom of their wise and learned shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent shall be hid.” I don’t see this, however, as a direct reference saying that historical evidence for the BoM will purposefully be hidden or nonexistent. . . .

That is not what I had said either. I had given you those additional scriptural references in order to prove to you theologically that 1 Nephi 14:7 does indeed refer to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon—which may not be immediately obvious from the context. I was trying to provide you with a brief scriptural analysis which proves that.

If the BoM is designed to confound people from finding empirical evidence supporting the existence of the ancient Nephites and Lamanites, then why do groups like FARMS have teams of researchers scouring Central America for BoM evidence?

That is not how the Book of Mormon “confounds people”. It is God confounds the wise {i.e. learned} and the prudent WITH the Book of Mormon by enabling the uneducated lad Joseph Smith to produce by the power of God a great book of scripture which none of the “wise and the prudent” of the world with all their “learning and wisdom” would have been able to accomplish. Remember that those “wise and the learned” people are the very ones whom the Lord condemns for “drawing near to Him with their lips, but their hearts are far from Him; teaching for doctrine the commandments of men; and teaching by their own wisdom and learning rather than by relying on the power of God and the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

True, and neither is it required for faith in such things. That’s the faith part. But that’s not all the BoM is about, is it? It’s also about two civilizations (well I guess three really) in the Americas that seem to have utterly disappeared without a shred of evidence left behind that they ever existed, . . .

That is not true. There are plenty of archaeological remains left of ancient American civilizations. We believe that they are the remains of the Book of Mormon people. But a clear link between them and the Book of Mormon has not yet been established.

zerinus

 

[NotreDameMormon]

My Friends,

I have not “left the building.” But thanks for your concern. I had a couple of meetings yesterday, an activity last night, and a job interview today. I have been busy. However, I am happy to resume our discussions.

Based on some feedback, I think we may have a solution to our troubles here.

Based on the discussion and your personal messages (thank you all, by the way), I think we can adapt the structure of these question/answer and discussion attempts to allow for a more accurate discussion of LDS and Catholic doctrines.

I accept responsibility for my part in any miscommunications or inaccuracies in the responses I gave. While I tried to qualify my ability to respond, I could have done more to ensure an accurate and more authoritative response was given, particularly by taking time to locate and post the authorities from which my positions and understanding were derived. Unfortunately, time was a factor.

I believe my attempts to answer every question and to do so quickly and off the top of my head have proven to not be of much benefit to anyone. It is hard to debate and discuss an abstraction or summary that is not demonstrated in actual Church authority, particularly when we want to compare that position to other statements that may or may not also be taken as authority.

In order to accomplish a more accurate statement and dialog in the limited time I have to offer this forum, I will take questions regarding the LDS religion in the form of personal messages. Every weekend I will review those questions and select the most prevalent question or topic and post a response Sunday night. Before posting the response, I will research the official Church statements or positions on the topic from its handbooks, scriptures, manuals, etc., and include the citations or links in the response. If there is no official position on point, I will pull quotes from various authorities relating to the topic and attempt to summarize, as best I can, the LDS view given those statements. If I am unable to find any statements on point, I will give my own understanding of the LDS teachings (identifying it as such) given my experience and cite supporting authority.

I think this will work to everyone’s satisfaction. The postings should more accurately state the official LDS view and provide all that is needed for an accurate discussion of the Catholic view of the LDS belief (or an attack on my characterization of it). This ought to work out well for the edification of those who seek edification and sport for those who seek sport, light for those who seek the truth and an opportunity for all to shine the light of truth!

So, once again, I am accepting all questions you may have regarding the LDS faith and religion. Send them to me in the form of a personal message. I may not repoly to your particular question initially, but hopefully we will get to it eventually. I appreciate your patience.

I will post a response to the questions Sunday night under the thread, “Your Notre Dame Mormon on ( topic) .”

Thank you, again, for your questions, comments, and good will.

May God bless our discussions with His Spirit.

 

[Writer]

First, welcome! I hope you can excuse the rushed post, but my lunch break is almost over. Three quick questions for you. First, I understand that there is new genetic evidence that makes the migration/New World claims of LDS completely impossible. If you are familiar with what I am referring to, how do you respond? Second, why the opposition to the cross and any kind of artwork in your churches? Third, how do you explain Joseph Smith’s ideas being very similar to a fiction writer with whom he lived?

Oops… I missed your last post. Answer, if you wish…

 

[whosebob]

Hello, I am a student at the University of Notre Dame and a fan of Catholics everywhere … In the spirit of that mutual benefit, my most esteemed and well versed Catholic associate has encouraged me to post a thread on this website to answer questions regarding the LDS faith and its relation to Catholic doctrine. While I am no LDS scholar, I am reasonably well versed in LDS doctrine and am qualified to discuss items generally. I do not speak on behalf of the Church officially. However, I am an active member in good standing and have years of Church study, teaching, and leadership experience. I believe in open and honest dialog and am happy to answer any questions that I can.

JMJ + OBT​

NotreDameMormon, welcome to the Catholic Answers Forums! May Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ bless you in your continued pursuit to conform your heart, soul, mind and will to His Holy Will and Truth, and may the prayers of the Blessed Virgin Mary obtain for you the graces draw ever closer to the Sacred Heart of her divine Son.

I have heard that a key component of weekly LDS church services is the personal testimony and witness of little children, teens, and adults which often begins with a statement like, “I know the teachings of our church are true because …” And following that the person recounts how God touched their heart, he/she felt a warmth within his breast, his confidence in the LDS teachings was made more firm, etc.

Now that’s all well and good, and Catholics and other Christians certainly appreciate how such witness can build up their own faith communities. But, as Catholics, we take a great deal of pride in being able to examine the writings of the Early Church Fathers, the decrees of Church councils from the first few centuries (A.D.) unto today, the continuous line of successors of the Apostle St. Peter in the See of Rome, etc. and find that our Catholic Faith and Church today are the same Faith and Church from the 1st Century A.D. to the 21st Century A.D. In other words, we have mountains of both objective and subjective evidence that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself.

Do you, as a Mormon, understand your Church and its teachings to have as objectively a solid foundation as the Catholic Church and its teachings?

In the Hearts of Jesus and Mary.

IC XC NIKA

 

[zerinus]

First, welcome! I hope you can excuse the rushed post, but my lunch break is almost over. Three quick questions for you. First, I understand that there is new genetic evidence that makes the migration/New World claims of LDS completely impossible. If you are familiar with what I am referring to, how do you respond?

Yes, I am aware of that. My response to that is that I am not able to comment. I am not an expert in this field of science (and I presume you aren’t either); and it appears to be a very specialized field as well; and I would rather leave that debate to those who have the expertise in this field—on both sides. Fortunately, there are LDS who do have the necessary expertise in that area of science, and they have given their rebuttals, and it can be found on the Internet. I would rather refer you to them. My area of expertise (if it can be called such) is in the field of theology, religion, and scripture, where religious debate most properly belongs, and I would rather stir closer to that.

Second, why the opposition to the cross and any kind of artwork in your churches?

We do not “oppose” the cross. If you want to use it, we have no opposition to you doing so, and respect it as such. We do not use it ourselves because we believe that the cross is the symbol of Christ’s suffering and death, whereas we celebrate His resurrection and life, and the fact that He yet lives, and has once again intervened in the affairs of mankind to restore His true Church on earth. The current Prophet and President of our Church, Gordon B. Hinckley, has already expressed the Church’s view on that very eloquently, so I refer you to that. Here is a link you can try:

library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1975.htm/ensign%20may%201975.htm/the%20symbol%20of%20christ.htm

We certainly have no opposition to “artwork” in our churches; and such art work can be found in them. But our churches generally are designed with simplicity in mind, and we do not like to overly emblish them with artwork.

Third, how do you explain Joseph Smith’s ideas being very similar to a fiction writer with whom he lived?

I presume you are referring to the Spalding theory. That theory has already been discredited. I have not read Spalding’s book myself, but those who have inform us that there is such vast differences between them that there is no way one could have been the source of the other.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I have heard that a key component of weekly LDS church services is the personal testimony and witness of little children, teens, and adults which often begins with a statement like, “I know the teachings of our church are true because …” And following that the person recounts how God touched their heart, he/she felt a warmth within his breast, his confidence in the LDS teachings was made more firm, etc.

Actually, our fast and testimony meetings are much more varied than that. It does not just fall into that kind of monotonous pattern. People tend to get up and speak freely about their personal lives, and any faith promoting experiences they have had which they feel can edify and uplift others.

Now that’s all well and good, and Catholics and other Christians certainly appreciate how such witness can build up their own faith communities. But, as Catholics, we take a great deal of pride in being able to examine the writings of the Early Church Fathers, the decrees of Church councils from the first few centuries (A.D.) unto today, the continuous line of successors of the Apostle St. Peter in the See of Rome, etc. and find that our Catholic Faith and Church today are the same Faith and Church from the 1st Century A.D. to the 21st Century A.D. In other words, we have mountains of both objective and subjective evidence that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself.

We have our doubts about that. See my posts regarding the Apostasy of the early church in this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=111484

Do you, as a Mormon, understand your Church and its teachings to have as objectively a solid foundation as the Catholic Church and its teachings?

I believe it is more so, otherwise I would be a Catholic not a Mormon.

zerinus