any former mormons out there?

[Allweather]

…Are other threads like this? SHould we open a general Whack on Zerinus / The Mormon Threat thread?

Personally, I hope Z doesn’t feel like he’s being “whacked.” If he does, then it needs pointing out that he has only himself to blame. I’m sure he’s man enough to stand in the gap, give as good as he gets, and not take things so personally that he goes away permanently. Although I can’t for a moment agree with very much of Mormon stuff, I admire Z for being so purposeful. Someday, he’ll make one heckuva terrific Catholic.

Frankly, I don’t worry too much about the waywardness of threads. Very few threads stay completely focused on-topic, and we all know that. Especially threads with any Mormon content. If anyone starts a thread with any Mormon content whatever, it is guaranteed that Z will appear, which will then begin the thread metamorphosis, though I take my share of responsibility in regard to this thread evolution. I don’t think this off-topic tendency is a bad thing. I’m pretty sure lots of people poke in here who are considering both Catholicism and Mormonism. They don’t post, but they do read. I feel very good about the light in which each faith is cast here.

 

[Allweather]

[if you register with ldstalk…note that…
**2 - Do not post anything that is contrary to The Teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For example, it would be fine to express your view points such as, “As a Catholic, I believe in this…” However opinions and views that are opposed what the LDS Church teaches need to be posted in the Open Forum. (Anti-LDS Propaganda will not be tolerated anywhere.)

3* - Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other posters will not be tolerated. (Attacking someone’s source of information does not constitute a personal attack, unless that source is Scripture or from another Official Church publication.) *

I wonder how far you can go before their moderators step in. I mean, there appear to be various interpretations of LDS teaching. Joseph Smith says God was once a man while certain LDS members say he was wrong when he taught that. It has GOT to be maddening.

 

[Allweather]

Mormons hold that Jesus Christ is the “first-born of God,” because that is what the Bible teaches (Col 1:15; Rev 3:14).zerinus

I’d like to back up a bit and ask Zerinus for some clarification. In this earlier post, he quotes Col 1:15 as shown above, but in my KJV that verse reads “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature;”

I wonder why the difference between Z’s KJV and mine. It seems to me that there’s a difference between “first-born of God” and “firstborn of every creature.”

Especially so as you read onward in Colossians verses 16 thru 19, which I understand to be an early Christian hymn that was taken up into this letter from liturgical use.

I’m no Bible scholar, for sure. But I can see that there is a difference between what I assume to be the KJV that Z is quoting, and the one I have on my desk before me.

Z, is this an example of changes made to the Bible by Joseph Smith?

 

[truthsilence]

rmcmullan, I just want to mention that I appreciate reading your posts on this forum. Your sincere tone and temperance hasn’t gone unnoticed.

May God Bless,

~ts

 

[truthsilence]

Personally, I hope Z doesn’t feel like he’s being “whacked.” If he does, then it needs pointing out that he has only himself to blame. I’m sure he’s man enough to stand in the gap, give as good as he gets, and not take things so personally that he goes away permanently. Although I can’t for a moment agree with very much of Mormon stuff, I admire Z for being so purposeful. Someday, he’ll make one heckuva terrific Catholic.

I’ll second that.

 

[artist3189]

Allweather, first, stop using the KJV!!! It is NOT the most accurate translation, it contains additions and subtractions, whole books in fact, done is the best interest of the Reformation and the break with Rome. First things first. The Mormon translation is completely and wildly unreliable. Don’t be surprised by differences.

 

[rmcmullan]

Alright then, I’ll go for broke and throw caution to the wind on the staying on topic thing. Allweather, what I meant on there’s no Catholic doctrine to contradict was mostly focused on the plan of salvation thing.

SO far as I know, I am well within my rights as a baptised Catholic to believe we lived as spirits before we came here, that there are three degrees of glory in heaven and if I want to call purgatory the spirit prison, it’s okay. And I can read the Book of Mormon and even believe all of it unless I start claiming that it doesn’t agree with the Bible. All those filled out parts that appear on the Mormon plan of salvation chart and that do not appear on the Catholic one do not contradict because something does not contradict unknown.

I could even go way out on a limb and say that after we die and if we are faithful and washed clean that God will recruit me to help in His work–to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. If you want to call that becoming a God sobeit. I think even in the most speculative journals in the deep creeky old corners of the early church, no one has ever claimed that we stopped serving the one Eternal God.

 

[Karin]

. If you want to call that becoming a God sobeit.

Catholics dont call it becoming a God…LDS do …they (you) actually believe you have a chance of becoming a GOD
there is only one God…not 100 not 3 not 1million of them just ONE!

 

[artist3189]

rmcmullan

Just by being a baptized Catholic doesn’t excuse you for your misrepresentations of your old faith . You obviously weren’t a very knowledgeable Catholic, which may speak to how you “apostatized”. You think you can overlay your Mormon belief onto the Catholic truths. Our souls are created upon conception, we did not LIVE before we came here. We do not become GODS, you can not trail your logic into that ridiculous conclusion. Do you really believe you can become A GOD? As a practicing Catholic, it would NOT be acceptable to BELIEVE all that is in the BOM, not at all. The Book itself is considered ‘heretical’ and it’s founder a false prophet, warned against by Christ himself. LDS is not compatible with Catholicism, it is not even a true Christian faith, which is why the LDS has such a free hand at shaping history and its own truths and its theology. It is not obligated to the Scriptures or Tradition. It is not obligated to the Judeo-Christian God. We serve God IN HEAVEN, not as our own GOD. How exactly do you ‘still serve the one eternal God’ in the ‘next life’ as far as the Mormon point of view goes? What is it that you do? The dialogue here really is between true Christian believers, in Catholics and pseudo-Christian Mormons. If you believe in the Bible and Tradition handed down by Christ and his Apostles, as the true revelation, once and for all, then you can’t be a Mormon. Only if you have doubts about the truth in the total revelation of Christ as being the Alpha and Omega, if that is not the whole truth, then you can freely believe whatever the heck you want, whatever fits best, that includes Smith and anyone else with any

 

[Allweather]

Allweather, first, stop using the KJV!!! It is NOT the most accurate translation, it contains additions and subtractions, whole books in fact, done is the best interest of the Reformation and the break with Rome. First things first. The Mormon translation is completely and wildly unreliable. Don’t be surprised by differences.

Roger that! I love the KJV and often read from it when I’m in particularly devotional mode. For general use, I prefer the New American Bible. I went to the KJV because I know that Mormons use it exclusively. I’d noticed the difference in the small verse out of Colossians that Z referred to compared to the KJV, and wanted to know if that difference is because Z is using the Joseph Smith-Modified KJV.

 

[zerinus]

SHould we open a general Whack on Zerinus / The Mormon Threat thread?

I like that!

zerinus

 

[artist3189]

Roger that! I love the KJV and often read from it when I’m in particularly devotional mode. For general use, I prefer the New American Bible. I went to the KJV because I know that Mormons use it exclusively. I’d noticed the difference in the small verse out of Colossians that Z referred to compared to the KJV, and wanted to know if that difference is because Z is using the Joseph Smith-Modified KJV.

Very Very smart!!!

 

[Allweather]

SO far as I know, I am well within my rights as a baptised Catholic to believe we lived as spirits before we came here…

Just a quick comment on this one small part of your post: Actually, no, there is no pre-existence. Catholic teaching is that God creates the individual soul at the instant of conception. My understanding is that Mormons have a notion that there are a large number of little souls somewhere, in Heaven, or on another planet or something like that, who go to inhabit human bodies as they are conceived, or at some point thereafter. I probably have that wrong, but that is my understanding. But as to the pre-existence of souls, I’m certain that God creates them at the instant of conception, and not before, and that this is the teaching of our Church.

 

[Allweather]

Alright then, I’ll go for broke and throw caution to the wind on the staying on topic thing. Allweather, what I meant on there’s no Catholic doctrine to contradict was mostly focused on the plan of salvation thing.

Roger that, and fair enough.

But, what thinkest thou regarding #67 of the Catechism, which I quoted, where it refers to the closure of public revelation, and the specific references to recent sects which have been founded upon recent so-called revelations?

 

[zerinus]

I’d like to back up a bit and ask Zerinus for some clarification. In this earlier post, he quotes Col 1:15 as shown above, but in my KJV that verse reads “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature;”

I wonder why the difference between Z’s KJV and mine. It seems to me that there’s a difference between “first-born of God” and “firstborn of every creature.”

Especially so as you read onward in Colossians verses 16 thru 19, which I understand to be an early Christian hymn that was taken up into this letter from liturgical use.

I’m no Bible scholar, for sure. But I can see that there is a difference between what I assume to be the KJV that Z is quoting, and the one I have on my desk before me.

Z, is this an example of changes made to the Bible by Joseph Smith?

I was quoting Nan S, not the KJV. “First-born of God” is her words, not the KJV’s.

zerinus

 

[geraldffff]

Alright then, I’ll go for broke and throw caution to the wind on the staying on topic thing. Allweather, what I meant on there’s no Catholic doctrine to contradict was mostly focused on the plan of salvation thing.

SO far as I know, I am well within my rights as a baptised Catholic to believe we lived as spirits before we came here, that there are three degrees of glory in heaven and if I want to call purgatory the spirit prison, it’s okay. And I can read the Book of Mormon and even believe all of it unless I start claiming that it doesn’t agree with the Bible. All those filled out parts that appear on the Mormon plan of salvation chart and that do not appear on the Catholic one do not contradict because something does not contradict unknown.

I could even go way out on a limb and say that after we die and if we are faithful and washed clean that God will recruit me to help in His work–to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. If you want to call that becoming a God sobeit. I think even in the most speculative journals in the deep creeky old corners of the early church, no one has ever claimed that we stopped serving the one Eternal God.

Because of this thread I am learning a little about Mormanism. My reason for making this post is, the obvious pride taken in the above statement rmcmullan. Could it be that the appeal to rmcmullan"s pride in a previous statement generated these claims the there is an existence before conception. If I believed in that existance then I would need to believe I was like God in having no beginning and no end. Is it fear of death that causes the Mormons to believe what they believe? For me it is the love of the Lord who defeated Death that causes me to believe. So the prexistance of the soul and the need to believe in that, would Cause people to forsake the Saving Jesus?.

 

[majick275]

Well, it was going pretty well on page 1 until the testimony of the Holy Ghost came up and then that had to be discussed and then there was this thing over DNA evidence and then there was a big broo-ha over Zerinus’ name and then there was one or two former Mormons who were actually on topic and then there was a good deal of beating on Zerinus again and then there was a couple of cool graphics. The ebb and flow on some of these threads is too strong to resist and, ahem, yes, they can loose focus from time to time. Are other threads like this? SHould we open a general Whack on Zerinus / The Mormon Threat thread?

Only if we include the amgid threads/posts since they are the work of zerinus as well.

Seriously though, while I’m sure it’s a great ego boost fro a/z to think of himself as a “threat” it isn’t true. He hasn’t proven anything to anyone here except that mormonism is false. Some have seen this that didn’t already know it and have now started down the path to Christ as a result.

I don’t have a problem with thread “drift” as long as folks still focus back when asked a relevant question.

rmcmullan seems a reasonable person so I’m up to discuss anything you like here.

 

[rmcmullan]

You obviously weren’t a very knowledgeable Catholic, which may speak to how you “apostatized”.

That might be true, I’m just putting you on when I flash my Catholic credentials. It all goes back to that painful “calling out” experience I suffered earlier on in this thread!

You think you can overlay your Mormon belief onto the Catholic truths. Our souls are created upon conception, we did not LIVE before we came here. We do not become GODS, you can not trail your logic into that ridiculous conclusion. Do you really believe you can become A GOD?

I think I got you here. SFAIK (So Far As I Know) the Catholic church is silent on this. I think the big misunderstanding is over exactly what that means. Take a look at Rev 5, especially v 10 and you’ll see it’s within Bible teachings.

As a practicing Catholic, it would NOT be acceptable to BELIEVE all that is in the BOM, not at all. The Book itself is considered ‘heretical’ and it’s founder a false prophet, warned against by Christ himself.

Huh? Surely this is all your personal opinion.

LDS is not compatible with Catholicism, it is not even a true Christian faith, which is why the LDS has such a free hand at shaping history and its own truths and its theology. It is not obligated to the Scriptures or Tradition.

The pot calling the kettle black.

It is not obligated to the Judeo-Christian God. We serve God IN HEAVEN, not as our own GOD. How exactly do you ‘still serve the one eternal God’ in the ‘next life’ as far as the Mormon point of view goes? What is it that you do? The dialogue here really is between true Christian believers, in Catholics and pseudo-Christian Mormons.

Now you’re stealing all our ideas, claiming you’re the only true church. With 2,000 years of tradition, I hoped you’d be more original.

If you believe in the Bible and Tradition handed down by Christ and his Apostles, as the true revelation, once and for all, then you can’t be a Mormon. Only if you have doubts about the truth in the total revelation of Christ as being the Alpha and Omega, if that is not the whole truth, then you can freely believe whatever the heck you want, whatever fits best, that includes Smith and anyone else with any

Blah, blah, blah, more personal opinion. I could say the same thing too and be just as justified. I’m going to have to take this as a venting post and not any kind of serious discussion. But that’s okay, feel free to vent.

 

[rmcmullan]

Just a quick comment on this one small part of your post: Actually, no, there is no pre-existence. Catholic teaching is that God creates the individual soul at the instant of conception. My understanding is that Mormons have a notion that there are a large number of little souls somewhere, in Heaven, or on another planet or something like that, who go to inhabit human bodies as they are conceived, or at some point thereafter. I probably have that wrong, but that is my understanding. But as to the pre-existence of souls, I’m certain that God creates them at the instant of conception, and not before, and that this is the teaching of our Church.

You could be right on that, that’s why I prefaced with “So far as I know”. I have been taught as a youngster (a Catholic youngster) that the soul was the union of the body and the spirit but as I got older I think I encountered some people who did not agree with this. If it’s true though or at least not heresy, then I think it’s okay for there to be a pre-existence.

 

[rmcmullan]

My reason for making this post is, the obvious pride taken in the above statement rmcmullan. Could it be that the appeal to rmcmullan"s pride in a previous statement generated these claims the there is an existence before conception. If I believed in that existance then I would need to believe I was like God in having no beginning and no end.

Ask any of the knowledgeable ex-Mormons that frequently post here, the pre-existence is standard Mormon doctrine (I’m not supposed to be proselytizing!) Check the charts on the last couple of pages, they all include a pre-existence.