Answering Mormon Objections

  • Thread starter Thread starter Youngconvert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Precisely!

As for the Mormons, they can’t say they belong to The Single true church of Jesus Christ, because “all other Churches are an abomination to my eyes” (stated by Mormon Jesus), and at the same time say that the schism was a great historical event that took place. After all, an abomination that has been split from another abomination is, therefore, an abomination nonetheless. So, in this case, what’s the use of celebrating the Catholic schism, as Mormons do?
 
Last edited:
And no Mormon has seriously considered this:


It’s a great site that refutes these kinds of Mormon apologetics, but particularly the kind you see on sites like Fair Mormon.

Mormonism is the greatest religious scam in history. Anybody with any shred of intellect would understand that. You claim to have come to Mormonism though intellectual study. Really? All you did was read Mormon apologetics. Have you ever seriously sat down and considered how much is stacked up against you? Because it’s like a lot… To the point where no truly rational arguments can actually be made. I mean, you do realize that no serious historian consider the Book of Mormon to be an ancient document recording the early history of the Americas, right? It’s conceded that the stories were created by Joseph Smith specifically to create a false narrative.
 
Last edited:
"Stephen168 said:
"Stephen168:
The ECF are Catholic, never Mormon.
Click to expand...
40.png
TOmNossor:
Nobody before Augustine believed in “Original Sin”
Click to expand...
Note: Augustine was an early church father.
Click to expand...
I am glad you now agree that Augustine was the ECF who was the INNOVATOR who came up with the modern Catholic doctrine of “Original Sin.”

Perhaps your statement should have been read as “SOME of the ECF were Catholic, never Mormon.” Concerning “Original Sin” few of the ECF embraced the Augustinian view and most embraced the Eastern and LDS view.
"Stephen168 said:
40.png
TOmNossor:
LDS and Eastern Orthodox accept the “Fall of Adam” or “Ancestral Sin” or even “Original Sin.”
Click to expand...
Note: Mormonism teaches the fall was a good thing which was never believed by

Christians.
Click to expand...
Again, I must question your familiarity with the ECF. I am not a Patristic scholar, but I was quite convinced this was wrong. Lest you accuse me of quote mining here is from LDS apologetic paper.
https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/no-weapon-shall-prosper/fortunate-fall-adam-and-eve
While much of traditional Christianity views the Fall of Adam and Eve as a necessary evil at best or an avoidable abomination at worst, there is evidence that some of the early Christian fathers, select members of the Christian clergy, and several ancient and modern scholars have embraced views more consistent with Latter-day Saint theology. St. Ambrose (AD 337–97), one of the most influential leaders of the early Catholic Church, wrote that the Fall of Adam and Eve “has brought more benefit to us than harm” and that “sin is more fruitful than innocence.” Pope Gregory the Great (AD 540–604) stated, “And certainly, unless Adam had sinned, it would not have behooved our Redeemer to take on our flesh. Almighty God saw beforehand that from that evil because of which men were to die, He would bring about a good which would overcome evil.”

The idea of a fortunate fall is also expressed in a portion of Catholic Liturgy called the “Exultet,” whose authorship is often attributed to St. Ambrose, and continues today in connection with the tradition of lighting of the paschal candle during the celebration of Easter. The part of the Exultet that refers to the Fall reads as follows: “O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer!” One of the Latin phrases of interest in the Exultet is “felix-culpa,” which literally means “blessed fault,” “happy fault,” or “fortunate fall.” It is also significant to note that St. Ambrose’s description of the Fall included both the words happy and necessary.
Click to expand...
 
So what you ask of me since you clearly are here for a malicious purpose. ( I would have been banned from Mormon forums trying to promote the Catholic faith in theirs) , is that I should believe Christ is a liar, that’s what he is if he tells the Disciples at the great commission “I will be with you always until the end of the age”.
Also what makes Joseph Smith so special? I could just as easily bring up the tilma which is a miracle in itself, the apparitions of Mary and Christ to children. Yes children, many children who were Smith’s age as well. Our Lady of Fatima or Lourdes or Knock or Zeitoun or Guadalupe or the countless other ones never said a word about joining another Church or anything about Joseph Smith or an apostasy. Many older have had experiences as well. Here’s the difference. We are not required to believe in it even if it is approved because private revelation can never add or subtract what the Apostles already taught by word and writing.

I don’t know what your intentions are here but it seems to me it can’t be good. Otherwise you’d be on a Mormon site talking to like minded people. Clearly from this post you see ex Mormons talking about how many issues are at hand. I only studied Mormonism because I was interested in NRMs and the whole Mormon root is exactly like the founding of so many NRMs in the 19th century. Apocalyptic end of days, charismatic leader claiming to have visions, a restoration to primitive Christianity. It is a text book phenomenon of the religious attitudes in 19th century America. Most died off. I assume Mormonism survived in part because they were persecuted against and gave them more resolve even after most of the original members left and theres another apostasy. Joseph Smith, just like Ellen G. White were false prophets. Wolves in sheep clothing. And that is the gist of it. I own the Old Testament Pseudiographia books by Wentworth. 4 Esdras is in it but it is also in the appendix of the Latin Vulgate with 3 Esdras and the Prayer of Manessah. All of them are in the 1611 KJV with the other deuterocanonical books except they are numbered 1 and 2 Esdras as Ezra and Nehemiah are 1 and 2 in the Vulgate. Joseph Smith more than likely knew of 2 Esdras. The book of Abraham is the end game for me where it goes from heresy to comical. That and his racism and polygamy. The man was a horrifying person if you actually read the history on him.

I am not replying to this anymore. I don’t know what you are doing on these forums but it seems you are trying to make people question the true Church. Sure people in America said Catholics weren’t Christian but that’s just good old American ignorance. As if Protestants made Christianity up. The only Church that can claim to go back to Christ are the Catholic and Orthodox. All others were created by men, scrupulous men. There was no reformation. What did those guys do in the 16th century what did they reform? Nothing. They made it go from one Church to thousands.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your time but I do not think you are on here for good purposes and are trying to be the lone Mormon apologist when theres plenty of ex Mormons on here talking about how ridiculous it is. And sure Catholics turn to that community but only because catechsis is so horrifyingly bad in the Church right now and it’s people who don’t even know their faith.

Farewell now and may God save your soul.
 
YHWH_Christ said:
And no Mormon has seriously considered this:

https://cesletter.org/

It’s a great site that refutes these kinds of Mormon apologetics, but particularly the kind you see on sites like Fair Mormon.

Mormonism is the greatest religious scam in history. Anybody with any shred of intellect would understand that. You claim to have come to Mormonism though intellectual study. Really? All you did was read Mormon apologetics. Have you ever seriously sat down and considered how much is stacked up against you? Because it’s like a lot… To the point where no truly rational arguments can actually be made. I mean, you do realize that no serious historian consider the Book of Mormon to be an ancient document recording the early history of the Americas, right? It’s conceded that the stories were created by Joseph Smith specifically to create a false narrative.
Click to expand...
LDS have written responses to that so the idea that no LDS has considered it is just inaccurate.
If you would like a link to one of the responses, I am sure I can dig it up for you.
You should look at the Mosser and Owen paper I linked above.
Charity, TOm
 
All the threads about Mormonism are the same. I don’t know why they are on this forum anymore.
 
Exactly. I know from experience if I went into a Mormon forum and spewed this talk about the Catholic Church being correct I would have been banned. Catholic Answers is to lenient . Catholics get banned for using terms like heretic yet allow these people to spew this nonsense.
 
All it is is a bunch of Mormons taking the high ground in order to manipulate users into thinking their beliefs aren’t incredibly absurd and ridiculous and refuted by an overwhelming amount of actual real data we have about the Book of Mormon. All of this is really a standard Mormon apologetic strategy. Mormon apologetics run in the same stream of revisionist and psuedo-intellectual apologetics as young earth creationism does propagated by sites like Answers in Genesis.
 
Last edited:
You know what happened when I read the Book of Mormon? I thought it was a nice work of fiction.
 
The KJV is a beautiful work of English literature, so is the Book of Common Prayer. However, it does not mean I worship from it.
Mormons go around saying the KJV is the oldest English translation. For one this isn’t true. The heretic John Wycliffe did that in the 14th century.
Second, the KJV first came out in 1611. I own the 1611 version which includes all of the deuterocanonical books though referred to as "Apocrypha ". The only ones in it Catholics do agree as being not scripture in that group are 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manessah ( Though they are in an appendix to the Clementine Vulgate as 3 and 4 Esdras and in editions of the Douay Rheims up to 1752. )
With that said, once the missionaries were telling me they believe it is the truest because it is the oldest and oh God wanted to tell him that probably nice since that would have been the only version of the Bible for the most part in America at the time.
Here’s where it gets comical again. The Douay Rheims Bible came out, not all at once but the New Testament was released in 1582 in Rheims and the Old Testament was released in Douay in 1609 including the three books in the appendix. Hence the complete Douay Rheims was released two years before the KJV.

Also, they don’t even use the original KJV which is very old English but a later version.

And the shady beginning of the Joseph Smith translation which is probably as reliable as the NWT the Jehovahs Witnesses use.🤣
 
Last edited:
Theprodigalson84j said:
It is mortal because you are taking the Lord your Gods name in vain.
Click to expand...
So, how might a typical confession go?

The penitent would say, “Forgive me Father for I have sinned. I said the formal name of the Mormon Church.”

What penance would the priest give to the penitent?
 
Theprodigalson84j said:
Mormons go around saying the KJV is the oldest English translation. For one this isn’t true.
Click to expand...
I’ve been a Latter-day Saint all of my life and I’ve never The Church of Jesus Christ leadership formally declare that the KJV is the oldest English translation of the Bible.
 
Mi_Rose said:
I don’t know why they are on this forum anymore.
Click to expand...
Perhaps there are Latter-day Saints on this forum specifically because CAF invites those of all faiths to participate, and because this specific forums is a debate forum. Debate on!!!
 
It isn’t a church. I would say I acknowledged a false religion as being true by word. Much the same as if I took a class of Scientology.
Smith was a Freemason whose goal was to destroy the Church. That fact alone and all of the similar natures of Mormonism and Freemasonry should be grounds to not allow this language on here. It is a mortal sin for Catholics to knowingly join the Freemasons.
 
Last edited:
Yes. They are welcome not to come argue and mock the true Church but like many Mormons come on here as you can see above ex Mormons who came to see the truth. No Catholic on here is coming on here to be taught false beliefs.

You wanna go spew your false feelings with like minded people go to a Mormon forum board.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top