Another Question for LDS

[SirThomasMore]

So many have been so deeply indoctrinated by the anti-Catholicism of the LDS faith that once they see how false their faith is, they will never consider Catholicism. Others, more deeply hurt by the LDS faith, will claim agnosticism or atheism, and never get beyond that.

The evidence of anti-Catholicism in the LDS faith can be seen in their persistent efforts to convert us here on our own turf.

Yes.,…and how thoughtless they are to ex-LDS. And what their leaders have taught since the inception of the LDS Church is the 1800s. LDS have always hated the Catholic Church

 

[LongJourney]

They believe that most people who leave the LDS church do so because they want to sin. They are blind to, or don’t care, that LDS culture is rife with racism, virulent homophobia, judgmental attitudes. gossip, and other sins.

As their religion develops more and more problems because of exposure of their history and questions about the BoM, some become internet missionaries, hoping to quiet their own doubts by the kind of aggressive activity seen here.

STM has honed his skills from years participating on the most virulent LDS board on the internet. He is skilled at what he does.

 

[catholic-rcia]

When you come to know Christ’s Church the rest of the world seems so small, what it can offer is peace in good times as well as in times of suffering.

Jesus does not strike out at our pride and our ego, He hangs on the Cross in order to show us, and the LDS how it is put to death. It is put to death because he loves us that much.

He shows us how to die to ourselves, our pride and our ego in order to rise in Him, through Him, through His death. Real Saints understand this and only want others to find this kind of peace, this kind of death as well, all for Jesus. Because it is in dying with and in Christ that we are risen in Him. Because He is our Lord and God.

Jesus is the life, the light of the world. The LDS have no concept of this, of whom Jesus really is, the meaning of the Cross. Yet this does not lesson them in the eyes of God. We are to love them as God loves each one of us. No argument will ever bring the LDS into the light, into the Sacraments that is Christ. Only Jesus can do this because He is the only one that can truly love them.

But they have to be willing to give up some pride and some ego, they have to become fearless in their pursuit of the truth. Be willing to loose in order to gain freedom from thier kind of sin innocent or not. Freedom from a certain kind of bondage, from lies and from deception held together in the name of the family. In essence where the family members are held hostage in the name of an altered truth.
Yes you can loose your family and your friends. But who would make such a promise? Would a mother or a father do this to his or her child? What type of church would make such a promise such as the loss of family, the loss of the eternal family?

Only when you are willing to give it all up for the sake of Jesus will you find your family in Him, and through a hard kind of love, the type that brings even death on a cross will you be able to help them as well. Because even when one has the courage to honestly look into the Catholic faith and become Catholic, this one in the end has no other choice than to help others do the same. Its not at all about who is right and who is wrong. Its all about choosing the right Jesus. Deep down we all know, but who will go there? Who will pick up that kind of cross?
www.chooseyourcross.com
www.utahmission.com

 

[SirThomasMore]

I liked your site.

I hope the LDS here will visit it. I hope they leanr compassion and charity AND to follow the true God

 

[catholic-rcia]

Thanks
Everything on the site came from others who taught me the faith. Things that hit home. Accept for the link to “forgive” on the left side. This came from my own experiances in this life. One of the best things we have done here in Utah is give tours of our Church to the LDS. They come in with pre concepts of what they have heard by second and third parties and go away as kind of first hand witnesses. I get to speak about the Crucifix and Confession. If one thinks winning a lottery may bring some sort of happiness try standing under a life sized rendition of Jesus reflecting the very moment he handed over his human life to His father and speaking about what exactly took place. Or standing in the confessional with them speaking of the joy that this Scarament commands and delivers. How we all stand in this line together, even our Pope.
Forgive:
utahmission.com/pages/Forgive.html

 

[SirThomasMore]

I wish you had pictures of the inside of your parish

 

[catholic-rcia]

You got it
Give me a minute to figure it out.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Here is two
utahmission.com/pages/Mass_Explained.html

 

[SirThomasMore]

It is Beautiful.

I have always loved the beauty of Catholic Parishes. I love the reverence inside and Spirit of God that fills it. I love the beauty of the Mass. We are truly with God.

It is a big change from the stale atmosphere of a LDS Sac Meeting. They use bread and water (ignoring Jesus, again) and then give speeches like a board meeting.

The Mass is beautiful…everything from Scripture, everything with a meaning. And we know that every single parsih in the world is reading the same readings that we are each day.

Thank you for placing a bit og Christ into a place devoid of truth

 

[Returning_Home]

Not quite. He didn’t die because he broke the law since what he did did not deserve the death penalty has given by lawless mobs of people. You are truly amazing Tom with your lack of charity. It is wonderful that you seem to defend lawlessness. As I said, mormon presses were destroyed but no one paid for their crime.Why? Was the law a little bias at that time? Of course it was.

Joseph Smith was in jail because he went to answer manufactured charges of treason against the state. He voluntarily surrendered to a state official who had guaranteed him and his brother Hyrum protection.

Unfortunately, calling the Mormons to destroy the press did, under the letter of the law, constitute treason. I don’t necessarily buy it, but it’s the same way that under certain state laws, Colorado, for example, simply snatching the phone away from someone, can be considered wire-tapping.

The call for the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor was not taken by “Joseph Smith,” but by the Nauvoo city council, of which Joseph was a member. The council—which included non-members of the Church—voted to suppress the Expositor as a public nuisance.

And since the city council was primarily, if not entirely, LDS, why would it be declared a nuisance for telling the truth about Smith and what he was doing? We know that he church was active in polygamy at the time and that they were denying it, doing so in their own works, don’t we?

The video will not tell you that some scholars have argued that the city council’s action was legal according to Nauvoo city charter. Nor will they tell you that the council’s concern was that the paper was so inflammatory that it might stir up violence.

The fault here is Smith’s; had he not been deceitful, he wouldn’t have found himself in that situation.

The viewer also won’t be told that Joseph was released by the Nauvoo municipal court on 13 June 1844. Anti-Mormons claimed this court was biased, so Joseph and others again appeared before non-Mormon judge Daniel H. Wells on 17 June, who discharged them (he did not have power to acquit them, so this was deferred). The DVD will not reveal that Joseph was twice released by legal courts. It will not reveal that he was out on bail awaiting trial in a third court when he was rearrested by a religious enemy. Governor Ford broke his promise to protect Joseph and Hyrum, and the Carthage Grays conspired to help murder Joseph.

I don’t know where you get the notion that no one knows this; it states this very clearly in my copy of Latter Day History. But overall, this much is obvious. Had the courts indicted Smith, he would’ve gone ot jail pending trial and he probably wouldn’t have had to deal with the lynch mob in the first place

It almost sounds as if the video is endorsing what happened to Joseph, or saying he “deserved it.” Such an attitude shows contempt for the law and Christian ethics.

Again, how is killing two men defending yourself when you don’t want to die part of the Christian ethic? It certainly doesn’t fit in with the defintion of martyr…

 

[dianaiad]

Again, how is killing two men defending yourself when you don’t want to die part of the Christian ethic? It certainly doesn’t fit in with the defintion of martyr…

It’s part of the Christian ethic because Christians have been defending themselves against evil for centuries.

…and no Catholic…or ‘semi-Catholic’ coming from the history of violence that is one of the hallmarks of Catholic/Christian history, has any right whatsoever to claim that defending oneself against 200 men out to murder one is against ‘Christian ethics.’

Joseph Smith qualified for ‘martyr’ status in OUR view when he deliberately allowed himself to be in that position when he didn’t have to, knowing that he would not come out of it breathing. Since you are, evidently, conversant with the history, you know THAT, too.

Please pardon me if, since you don’t believe he was a prophet, that your opinion of his martyrdom is moot. Since Mormons are not now, and never have been, pacifists to the degree Quakers are/were, and see no problem at all in battling injustice and acting in defense of family and self, then why do folks like you insist that any of us, even Joseph Smith, et. al, run to meet your peripetetic goal posts?

 

[why_me]

And since the city council was primarily, if not entirely, LDS, why would it be declared a nuisance for telling the truth about Smith and what he was doing? We know that he church was active in polygamy at the time and that they were denying it, doing so in their own works, don’t we?

…

The newspaper was writing inciteful wording which was meant to stir up the mobs even more. It was founded by an exmormon with an axe to grind. The mormon population of Nauvoo was concerned that the newpaper would incite the non-lds communities to rise up and destroy the city. Thus, the order to close down the newspaper. The mistake was in destroying the print.

However, there was absolutely no problem when mobs destroyed mormon presses. The charges were trumped up with the nauvoo expositor. Joseph, to my knowledge, offered to pay for the damages but…there was a more sinister agenda by the law.

It wasn’t a question of reporting news but inciting people. The mormons of nauvoo knew about polygamy to my understanding.

 

[why_me]

The fault here is Smith’s; had he not been deceitful, he wouldn’t have found himself in that situation.

…

Well, if you are surrounded by mobs that want to destroy you and other mormons and force them out or burn them out…stating the obvious might lead to many people dying. By the time mormons reached Nauvoo, they had been through a lot. Many died and private property destroyed. Joseph was also running for president at the time and that angered certain groups of people too. Actually when JS was murdered, he was not just a leader of a church but a presidential candidate. It could also be considered an assasination when he was killed.

 

[campeador]

By the time mormons reached Nauvoo, they had been through a lot.

Oh yes, they had.

From Wife no. 19, or, The story of a life in bondage:, page 61:

At one of these meetings, William Law electrified and almost stunned his listeners by testifying that the Prophet had made dishonorable proposals to his wife, Mrs. Law, making the request under cover of his asserted " Revelation," that the Lord had commanded that he should take spiritual wives, to add to his glory. He also stated that Smith made his visit to his wife in the middle of the night, when he knew her husband to be absent.

From No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, page 371 (wiki link):

Robert D. Foster came home and caught Smith having dinner alone with his wife, and after a confrontation where weapons were drawn, Mrs. Foster fainted and then said Smith had proposed to her…

 

[pinay]

Hello SirThomasMore, peace be with you.

You have mentioned several times that you are an ex-LDS. I read in one post that you have served a mission. Therefore, it is confusing for me when you say or agree with the following statements made in this thread:

1.) LDS hates Catholics
Even primary-aged LDS members know that the Articles of our Faith makes this impossible.

If you forgot the Articles, I’m cut-and-pasting them here for you:

• We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
• We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

The truth of the matter is, there cannot be a restoration lest there is an apostasy. And since the church is set upon the rock of priesthood authority, then it must have apostolic succession. The only church that claims the same doctrine is the Catholic church. The only way one can put faith in the restoration is if the apostasy applies to the apostolic succession of the Catholic church. This puts the LDS and the Catholics on opposing sides of doctrine. This, however, DOES NOT make LDS hate Catholics.

2.) Jesus Christ is NOT THE CENTER of LDS doctrine

An ex-LDS would know that the church is called The Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-day Saints. It’s not The Church of Joseph Smith…

3.) LDS members are trying to convert people in a Catholic forum

An ex-LDS, especially one who has served a mission, knows for a fact that NOBODY can convert anybody. None whatsoever. You can explain, you can defend, you can argue, you can discuss… but you cannot convert. Only the Holy Ghost can cause conversion.

 

[SirThomasMore]

It’s part of the Christian ethic because Christians have been defending themselves against evil for centuries.

Yes…long before Joseph was digging for buried treasure

…and no Catholic…or ‘semi-Catholic’ coming from the history of violence that is one of the hallmarks of Catholic/Christian history, has any right whatsoever to claim that defending oneself against 200 men out to murder one is against ‘Christian ethics.’

Sure we do. You suffer from that need to compare 1800 ethics to ethics hundreds of years ago. It won’t work no matter how hard you need to try.

Joseph Smith qualified for ‘martyr’ status in OUR view when he deliberately allowed himself to be in that position when he didn’t have to, knowing that he would not come out of it breathing. Since you are, evidently, conversant with the history, you know THAT, too.

He broke the law. He tried to run.He was shamed into returning. He went to jail, where he belonged for breaking the law, armed himself, also against the law, and was wrongfully murdered in a gun battle. Murdered? Yes. Wrongtfully? Yes. Martyr? Not by a long shot (no pun intended)

 

[SirThomasMore]

The newspaper was writing inciteful wording which was meant to stir up the mobs even more. It was founded by an exmormon with an axe to grind. The mormon population of Nauvoo was concerned that the newpaper would incite the non-lds communities to rise up and destroy the city. Thus, the order to close down the newspaper. The mistake was in destroying the print.

However, there was absolutely no problem when mobs destroyed mormon presses. The charges were trumped up with the nauvoo expositor. Joseph, to my knowledge, offered to pay for the damages but…there was a more sinister agenda by the law.

It wasn’t a question of reporting news but inciting people. The mormons of nauvoo knew about polygamy to my understanding.

None of the mobs were legal. But that did not give Joe the right to break the law. You claim we justify the mobs, then you try to justify to justify Joe Smith and HIS mobs because “they did it first!”

At least that is the side of the fence you are on today

 

[SirThomasMore]

Hello SirThomasMore, peace be with you.

You have mentioned several times that you are an ex-LDS. I read in one post that you have served a mission. Therefore, it is confusing for me when you say or agree with the following statements made in this thread:

1.) LDS hates Catholics
Even primary-aged LDS members know that the Articles of our Faith makes this impossible.

Yet, McKonkie claimed the Catholic Church was the “great and abominable Church”. And go read some of the quotes from early Church leaders. I have posted them. Yes, Mormons have traditi0onally hated Catholics

The truth of the matter is, there cannot be a restoration lest there is an apostasy.

Whew…and since we know Jesus is not weak or a liar, we know there was no Apostasy.

2.) Jesus Christ is NOT THE CENTER of LDS doctrine

I Iknow that. In fact, Jesus will not decide who goes to heaven. BY said NO ONE gets to heaven without the permission of Joseph Smith

3.) LDS members are trying to convert people in a Catholic forum

I know. That is their mandate. Every member a missionary. And when they see they are failing they get rude…when the rudeness is given back, they report. When that fails they say we do not know what we are talking about. When we prove them wrong with quotes and evidence, they ignore it or somehow try to run from it.

 

[catholic-rcia]

here is one who gave all
utahmission.com/pages/cJouges_page.html

This Catholic missionary / Saint brought me to Jesus as well. He still brings the LDS and many others to Christ each year.

 

[SirThomasMore]

that is wonderful