Anti-Mormonism.....

[why_me]

The bank was started by the leaders of the lds church. It failed very quickly and people lost money, including Joseph Smith. The national economy was in a bubble in 1837 and the bubble burst. It does sound familiar, doesn’t it? It also tried the faith of the Smith family. See Richard Bushman Rough Stone Rolling published by Knopf in 2005 and in paperback in 2007 pages 328-332

 

[majick275]

we’ve read bushman. have you read Quinn yet? Joseph was the monarch of a thriving city in Nauvoo. I agree he was a poor businessman and squandered quite a lot of the LDS church wealth. But he was definitely living as well the LDS church could afford him too.

 

[cascherman]

nothing you have said has disagreed with what I said,

Joseph Smith and his accomplices using his prophecy that the bank would be the largest in the world, swindled peoples money, including his followers. You have to understand, when you are a self proclaimed prophet, and your followers believe you are starting the future largest bank because of your prophesy, and you take their money and lose it, you are not a prophet, just a thief. Why would he have to run from the state and why would he lose a large following after this incident if there wasn’t foul-play?

 

[cascherman]

“Warren Parrish, who had been an officer in the bank and had apostatized from the Church, made this statement: “I have listened to him * with feelings of no ordinary kind, when he declared that the AUDIBLE VOICE OF GOD, INSTRUCTED HIM TO ESTABLISH A BANKING-ANTI BANKING INSTITUTION, who like Aaron’s rod SHALL SWALLOW UP ALL OTHER BANKS (the Bank of Monroe excepted,) and grow and flourish and spread from the rivers to the ends of the earth, and survive when all others should be laid in ruins.” (Painesville Republican, February 22, 1838, as quoted in Conflict at Kirtland, page 297)”
from: utlm.org/onlineresources/josephsmithsbank.htm

if you read on, you will read about how the bank was NOT legal (was refused a bank charter), was circulating illegal tender, and was not good for the amount it was worth. That is called unethical business. Now if one ignores the illegal side of it, you still have the prophetic side that did not come to fruition. So was Joseph Smith a prophet? I’m not convinced.

as well,
“Deuteronomy 13 warns that a prophet must teach correctly about God. Chapter 18 tells us the prophet’s prophecies must come to pass. Paul tells us in Galatians 1:8-9 that even angels can appear with a wrong message. We are to compare the message with the teachings of the apostles.”
utlm.org/onlineresources/howdowetestaprophet.htm*

 

[rmcmullan]

Why me, if it’s any consolation, Catholics usually are very kind, especially to missionaries. During my two years (mission) in Southern California, we rarely encountered Catholics who gave us a hard time. The Baptists and the non-denominational/evangelical churches were murder though. They published reams of anti-Mormon literature and seemed to have some kind of special program for dealing with the Mormon “threat”. There were also a lot of apostate groups. These apostates (people who had been subjected to church discipline) were the most intractable. But the Catholics were almost always pleasant. Take heart! And thanks for being a good example.

 

[Good_Daughter]

“Warren Parrish, who had been an officer in the bank and had apostatized from the Church, made this statement: “I have listened to him * with feelings of no ordinary kind, when he declared that the AUDIBLE VOICE OF GOD, INSTRUCTED HIM TO ESTABLISH A BANKING-ANTI BANKING INSTITUTION, who like Aaron’s rod SHALL SWALLOW UP ALL OTHER BANKS (the Bank of Monroe excepted,) and grow and flourish and spread from the rivers to the ends of the earth, and survive when all others should be laid in ruins.” (Painesville Republican, February 22, 1838, as quoted in Conflict at Kirtland, page 297)”
from: utlm.org/onlineresources/josephsmithsbank.htm*…

…if one ignores the illegal side of it, you still have the prophetic side that did not come to fruition. So was Joseph Smith a prophet? I’m not convinced.

as well,
“Deuteronomy 13 warns that a prophet must teach correctly about God. Chapter 18 tells us the prophet’s prophecies must come to pass. Paul tells us in Galatians 1:8-9 that even angels can appear with a wrong message. We are to compare the message with the teachings of the apostles.”
utlm.org/onlineresources/howdowetestaprophet.htm

I’m starting to suspect a huge glitch in Mormon/Catholic relations involves defining the term “prophet”. If anyone is up to the challenge, (I’m thinking of posters who are knowledgeable in both Mormonism and Catholicism) would they please provide a working definition of this term from both a Catholic and LDS point of view?

My impression is that Mormons will follow the words of a Mormon prophet as if they were God’s words and then, in some instances, stop following those words, claiming the prophet was speaking only as a man. I’m open to correction if this is a false impression.

Just so everyone is clear on my views, I’m decidedly pro-rmcmullan.

 

[fellowChristian]

Prophets
As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are blessed to be led by living prophets—inspired men called to speak for the Lord, as did Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, Nephi, Mormon, and other prophets of the scriptures. We sustain the President of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator—the only person on the earth who receives revelation to guide the entire Church. We also sustain the counselors in the First Presidency and the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators.

Additional Information

Like the prophets of old, prophets today testify of Jesus Christ and teach His gospel. They make known God’s will and true character. They speak boldly and clearly, denouncing sin and warning of its consequences. At times, they may be inspired to prophesy of future events for our benefit.

We can always trust the living prophets. Their teachings reflect the will of the Lord, who declared: “What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same” (D&C 1:38).

Our greatest safety lies in strictly following the word of the Lord given through His prophets, particularly the current President of the Church. The Lord warns that those who ignore the words of the living prophets will fall (see D&C 1:14–16). He promises great blessings to those who follow the President of the Church:

"Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

"For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

“For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory” (D&C 21:4–6).

—See True to the Faith (2004), 129–30

lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menuitem.3933737ad2ff28132eb22a86942826a0/?vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=c6549c57af139010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____

Is this what you meant?

 

[fellowChristian]

Prophecy, Prophet, and Prophetess

newadvent.org/cathen/12473a.htm

newadvent.org/cathen/12477a.htm

 

[zerinus]

I’m starting to suspect a huge glitch in Mormon/Catholic relations involves defining the term “prophet”. If anyone is up to the challenge, (I’m thinking of posters who are knowledgeable in both Mormonism and Catholicism) would they please provide a working definition of this term from both a Catholic and LDS point of view?

My impression is that Mormons will follow the words of a Mormon prophet as if they were God’s words and then, in some instances, stop following those words, claiming the prophet was speaking only as a man. I’m open to correction if this is a false impression.

Just so everyone is clear on my views, I’m decidedly pro-rmcmullan.

What fellowChristian had copied and pasted from the LDS website, I agree with. However, to tailor my reply more specifically to your question, a prophet is the mouthpiece of God here on earth. He speaks to us what God wants us to hear.

Strictly speaking, anyone who has the “spirit of Prophecy” (or “gift of prophecy,” which is one of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, see 1 Cor 12:4–11), may be called a prophet; but when we refer to the President of the Church as “the Prophet,” we have someone of a much greater authority in mind. He is someone more like Moses, who gave the law, and the word and will of God to all Israel.

Indeed, his true title not “Prophet” at all. His true official title, as designated in scripture, is “President of the High Priesthood of the Church;” or, “Presiding High Priest over the Priesthood of the Church” (D&C 107:65–66). He is called “Prophet” by popular demand. That is what people (both in the Church and out of it) tend to like to call him, and that title has stuck. All of the First presidency and the Twelve Apostles are designated as “prophets, seers, and revelators” to the Church. A “seer” is a greater calling than a prophet.

I am not familiar with how the Catholic Church defines a prophet. You have to ask your Catholic friends to give you an accurate definition for that.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

My impression is that Mormons will follow the words of a Mormon prophet as if they were God’s words and then, in some instances, stop following those words, claiming the prophet was speaking only as a man. I’m open to correction if this is a false impression.

I overlooked this part of your post, and forgot to address it, so I will do so now.

We believe that prophets are men, hence they are not infallible. They are liable to make mistakes. This is true not only of modern LDS prophets, but also of Old Testament prophets and New Testament ones. The fact that any errors in doctrine that they might have made is not recorded in the Bible, that does not mean that they never made them. The Bible contains only what was considered by them to be scripture, not everything they ever said. If you are under the impression that just because someone is a prophet, he should never make any mistakes in doctrine, or in anything else, you are very much mistaken. However, there is an inbuilt mechanism in the Church for such errors to be recognized and corrected; and in any case, the number of instances that such mistakes have been made by the past leaders of the Church have been extremely rare, considering the amount of spoken and written literature that they have left on record.

zerinus

 

[Jerusha]

He was never lds but he was rlds. And I do believe that he is thinking of joining the lds (long shot) or establishing a RLDS branch if it were possible.

He has interesting material on his website and he deserves much credit. However, his theory about the book of mormon lacks foundation but he does have good hypothetical illustrations what could be, should be or would be, if…

His theory posits a “Nephite” record that contributed to the BOM. My work expands on it. I sincerely hope that reform is possible, within, perhaps, the RLDS framework, acknowleging the general events of the BOM within a different framework of time and ethnicities.

I certainly cannot see the Catholic Church absorbing all the people fleeing from a church which encourages “Mormon Personality Disorder”

My work certainly confirms the goodness within Catholicism.

 

[why_me]

I certainly cannot see the Catholic Church absorbing all the people fleeing from a church which encourages “Mormon Personality Disorder”

My work certainly confirms the goodness within Catholicism.

And what exactly is Mormon Personality Disorder? As you know, many catholics have left the faith. I have to wonder just how other churches are coping with catholic personality disorder?

I have this opinion that it is much better to be a good catholic than a ‘bad’ mormon. If a lds can get closer to god by joining the catholic faith, I think that is great. But I also have the same opinion for a ‘bad’ catholic who joins the lds church and becomes a better christian. :yup:

 

[dosdog]

And what exactly is Mormon Personality Disorder? As you know, many catholics have left the faith. I have to wonder just how other churches are coping with catholic personality disorder?

I have this opinion that it is much better to be a good catholic than a ‘bad’ mormon. If a lds can get closer to god by joining the catholic faith, I think that is great. But I also have the same opinion for a ‘bad’ catholic who joins the lds church and becomes a better christian. :yup:

Diagnostic criteria:
At least four of the following are necessary for a diagnosis

1,has a grandiose sense of self-importance
2.is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3.believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by other special people
4.requires excessive admiration
5.strong sense of entitlement
6.takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7.s often envious or believes others are envious of him or her
8,arrogant affect.

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), a term first used by Heinz Kohut in 1971, is a form of pathological narcissism acknowledged in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1980, in the edition known as DSM-III. Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by extreme focus on oneself, and is a maladaptive, rigid, and persistent condition that may cause significant distress and functional impairment

 

[Good_Daughter]

zerinus and fellowChristian, thank you for all the information. I’m taking some time to read it over more carefully.

We believe that prophets are men, hence they are not infallible. They are liable to make mistakes. This is true not only of modern LDS prophets, but also of Old Testament prophets and New Testament ones. The fact that any errors in doctrine that they might have made is not recorded in the Bible, that does not mean that they never made them. The Bible contains only what was considered by them to be scripture, not everything they ever said. If you are under the impression that just because someone is a prophet, he should never make any mistakes in doctrine, or in anything else, you are very much mistaken. However, there is an inbuilt mechanism in the Church for such errors to be recognized and corrected; and in any case, the number of instances that such mistakes have been made by the past leaders of the Church have been extremely rare, considering the amount of spoken and written literature that they have left on record.

zerinus

I understand that the gift of prophecy is not equal to infallibility and/or sinlessness. There is however, no evidence that any OT or NT prophet ever gave a prophetic word containing error.

A prophet of God will never err while giving a prophetic word. If he does, his inspiration is necessarily called into question.

Catholic doctrine is determined by proper Church authority, not necessarily prophets. Prophesy and infallibility (ie.,in determining doctrine) are separate gifts.

Can you give an example of any of the “extremely rare mistakes” by past leaders of the Mormon Church you mention? How are such mistakes determined and corrected?

Do you see any difference between giving a prophetic word and determining/teaching doctrine?

 

[zerinus]

I understand that the gift of prophecy is not equal to infallibility and/or sinlessness. There is however, no evidence that any OT or NT prophet ever gave a prophetic word containing error.

A prophet of God will never err while giving a prophetic word. If he does, his inspiration is necessarily called into question.

Catholic doctrine is determined by proper Church authority, not necessarily prophets. Prophesy and infallibility (ie.,in determining doctrine) are separate gifts.

I am not sure what you mean by “prophetic word”. LDS doctrine is determined by what is contained in the scriptural canon of the Church—the standard works. I have already discussed that in at some length in this post.

Can you give an example of any of the “extremely rare mistakes” by past leaders of the Mormon Church you mention?

No! I would rather focus on the 99.99% of the stuff that they taught that were correct, than on the 0.01% that was mistaken.

How are such mistakes determined and corrected?

See the above post I had linked to. You will find your answer given there.

Do you see any difference between giving a prophetic word and determining/teaching doctrine?

I don’t know what you mean by that.

zerinus

 

[Marc1152]

A Jewish buddy of mine asked me about all the enmity Christians have towards Mormons… He noticed this due to all the attention Mit Romney is getting.

At first I tried to explain how Mormonism differs from the beliefs commonly held by most Christians , especially Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. He really couldn’t follow my explanation because being Jewish, he didn’t know what the theology of Christianity is in the first place.

So I tried a different tact, I said:

Okay, lets say there was a sect of folks identifying themselves as being Jewish. They point out as evidence of their Jewishness that they look like other Jews in terms of certain practices. They wear yarmulkes, they keep the -Sat. Sabbath and keep kosher."

However, when you ask them about the nature of God they will quickly tell you…

“God is a goat”

“God’s a goat??? Surely this a metaphor of some sort.”

“Nope, God is actually a Goat… A she Goat as a matter of fact and we can prove it with special scriptures we have, the 14th and 15th book of Moses”

Then I asked my friend; Are these people following Judaism?

He laughed and said he gets it now.

 

[majick275]

I am not sure what you mean by “prophetic word”. LDS doctrine is determined by what is contained in the scriptural canon of the Church—the standard works. I have already discussed that in at some length in this post.

No! I would rather focus on the 99.99% of the stuff that they taught that were correct, than on the 0.01% that was mistaken.

See the above post I had linked to. You will find your answer given there.

I don’t know what you mean by that.

zerinus

don’t forget mormon scriptures change. things get added and things get removed in order to meet the current doctrinal needs.

 

[zerinus]

A Jewish buddy of mine asked me about all the enmity Christians have towards Mormons… He noticed this due to all the attention Mit Romney is getting.

At first I tried to explain how Mormonism differs from the beliefs commonly held by most Christians , especially Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. He really couldn’t follow my explanation because being Jewish, he didn’t know what the theology of Christianity is in the first place.

So I tried a different tact, I said:

Okay, lets say there was a sect of folks identifying themselves as being Jewish. They point out as evidence of their Jewishness that they look like other Jews in terms of certain practices. They wear yarmulkes, they keep the -Sat. Sabbath and keep kosher."

However, when you ask them about the nature of God they will quickly tell you…

“God is a goat”

“God’s a goat??? Surely this a metaphor of some sort.”

“Nope, God is actually a Goat… A she Goat as a matter of fact and we can prove it with special scriptures we have, the 14th and 15th book of Moses”

Then I asked my friend; Are these people following Judaism?

He laughed and said he gets it now.

That is a red herring. The real reason for the hatred of other Christians towards the Mormons is that historical Christianiry, in all its shapes and forms and variations, is an apostate institution; whereas Mormonism is a new dispensation of revealed religion, and a restoration of the true gospel of Jesus Christ in the latter days; and apostate religions have always hated and faught against true revealed relition, until they were defeated by it. In the process they have only managed to dig a pit for themselves in hell where they will abide forever.

zerinus

 

[Marc1152]

That is a red herring. The real reason for the hatred of other Christians towards the Mormons is that historical Christianiry, in all its shapes and forms and variations, is an apostate institution; whereas Mormonism is a new dispensation of revealed religion, and a restoration of the true gospel of Jesus Christ in the latter days; and apostate religions have always hated and faught against true revealed relition, until they were defeated by it. In the process they have only managed to dig a pit for themselves in hell where they will abide forever.

zerinus

I know I have no “hatred” towards Mormons at all. However, I also understand that what they teach is not Christianity .
Asl long as they intend to try to get folks to apostatize, then it’s fair to educate people about how their idea’s differ from Christianity and why actual Christianly is far better.

Oh and if all the Saints and Fathers of the Church are in Hell…
then I chose to be there with them…

 

[zerinus]

Oh and if all the Saints and Fathers of the Church are in Hell…

No, their persecutors are in hell, just as the persecutors of Mormons will be some day.

then I chose to be there with them…

I am sure your wish will be granted.

zerinus