any former mormons out there?

[Nan_S]

These above appear to be all the Vatican has officially published about the Mormons, other than a declaration by Pope Leo XIII that polygamy as practiced by the Mormons is an offense against Christian marriage.

Nan

Oops - found one more when I took off the English filter in the Vatcan website’s search engine. This is in French, which I do not read very well at all, but it is pretty easy to puzzle out. The Vatican lists the Mormons as a pseudo-Christian group.

PLENARIA 2004

3.1 Les mouvements para-religieux :
**·**Les mouvements orientaux :
– la méditation transcendantale du Guru Maharishi, Mahesh Yogi,
– la Foi Mondiale Bahiae de Baha’ullah,
– l’association pour l’unification du christianisme mondial (secte Moon),
– l’Ordre Tchan (tendance bouddhiste),
– le Yoga.

**·**Les mouvements occultes, sociétés secrètes :
– la Franc-Maçonnerie,
– l’ordre Rosicrucien Amorc.

**·**Les mouvements pseudo-chrétiens :
– la scientologie,
– le monde à venir de Mr Herbert W. Amstrong (ou la pure vérité ou Église de Dieu Universelle),
– la parole parlée de William Branham,
**–**les mormons (l’Église de Jésus-Christ des saints des derniers jours),
– les témoins de Jehovah de Charles Taze Russel,
– les adventistes.

**·**Les mouvements pseudo-catholiques :
– les vieux catholiques,
– les Mariavites,
– les Gallicans.

**·**Les mouvements africains :
– l’Eboga,
– le maraboutisme,
– les guérisseurs anti-sorciers,
– le fétichisme,
– les confréries des sorciers.

 

[zerinus]

Thank you. However, my question is whether any independent non-Mormon sources also have or make reference to these particular additional books which are in the Mormon standard works.

That was not your question. You had asked me two questions. They were:

(1) whether the Mormons had any revelation as to what those removed important parts may have been; and

(2) whether you have any evidence outside of Mormon sources that those parts existed.

I had answered each of those questions for you separately.

It’s no great leap to say that forgotten ancient texts will be found.

I never said anything about “forgotten ancient texts will be found”. It looks like you and I have difficulty communicating. What I did say was that in modern LDS scripture it is stated that there are many more ancient sacred texts that remain to be revealed to the world, and it has been prophesied that at some point in the future they will be revealed by the will and power of God, just as the Book of Mormon has been revealed. They won’t just accidentally be “found”.

Justifying their insertion into scripture is something much more problematic. That generally would require evidence from additional ancient records that the proposed texts were meant to be in there originally but were not because of, say, being lost through fire or flood or malicious act.

All religion is ultimately a matter of faith. There comes a point at which you have to accept things on faith. We accept on faith that the modern scriptures of the LDS Church are true.

If the Pope were to announce that previously unknown works had been revealed to him by God and should be included in scripture, but did not produce anything other than an unknown manuscript drawn from the Vatican archives which he refused to hand over for independent inspection, I doubt very much that any other church would welcome the insertion. Nor would most Catholics.

And so they shouldn’t. The Pope is not a prophet, and does not claim to be.

I agree that we have already beaten to death the idea that the NT gospels are abridgements, so let’s move on.

Not so hasty. I think that is extremely significant. It does not prove that Mormonism is true; but gives very strong indication that claims made in the Book of Mormon that the NT has been tampered with and not the original work highly plausible.

Absent any manuscript or anecdotal evidence of these larger gospels, I remain unconvinced.

Unconvinced of what? We never claimed that we can convince anyone by those means. As I said, religion is a matter of faith. You either accept it on faith or you don’t. We accept them on faith because when we read them the Spirit of the Lord bears witness to us that they are true.

Internal evidence tells us that the book of OT is not complete either. There are many books missing from it. Here are some references:

1 Kings 11:

41 And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written inthe book of the acts of Solomon?

2 Chronicles 9:

29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

2 Chronicles 12:

15 Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the book of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies? And there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually.

2 Chronicles 32:

32 Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, and in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel.

These all refer to books considered sacred by the Old Testament prophets which are no longer found in the OT.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Here is the Vatican website link regarding Mormon baptism.

Yes, I was already aware of that. I have a good answer to it though. The LDS Church invalidated Catholic baptism long before the Catholic Church invalidated LDS baptism!

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) used to teach with some vehemence that Christians were doomed to hell.

This is utter falsehood and a blatant lie. It is preposterous. The LDS Church has never made such a claim. I always considered the Catholic Church to be a respectable institution. I didn’t expect them to tell such blatant lies at the Vatican level. We live and learn!

More recently, though, they have tried to insist that they, too, are Christians.

Another falsehood. The LDS Church has never claimed to be anything other than Christian.

Given their numbers, they claim that they are one of the “mainline” Christian denominations.

That don’t make sense either. First of all it has nothing to do with numbers. Secondly, The LDS Church has always stated its position to be that it is a new dispensation of the gospel, that it is unique in that respect and is distinct and set apart form all other denominations and churches, that it is a cut above the rest, that it is the only true and living Church of God on earth, and that it is the only church on earth that has divine authority from God. No other church makes such a claim. That sets it apart from all other churches.

But Mormon theology distorts Christian doctrine on most major issues; . . .

Well, that is a separate issue and a matter of debate. I focus on what was said above.

These above appear to be all the Vatican has officially published about the Mormons, . . .

Congratulations on the falsehood and lies published by the Vatican! Thank you for showing us the true colors of the Catholic Church!

zerinus

 

[JonathanKinsman]

Congratulations on the falsehood and lies published by the Vatican! Thank you for showing us the true colors of the Catholic Church!

Why does the Mormon church imitate the Catholics all the time?

They build their edifices near Santa Barbara Mission and the Vatican. Hinckley was miffed and sent a formal protest that no representative from his ‘church’ was invited to attend the funeral Mass for Pope John Paul II.

You hate us and love us at the same time.

You put that ‘magic spirit’ Moroni on the spires of your stakes and temples.

You deny Christianity and its beliefs. You live a fraud, Zerinus, an intellectual, spiritual and scriptural fraud.

You and your buddies can not even answer direct questions regarding your baldfaced assertions of your pantheology.

Let’s continue to pray for the blind Zerinus.

 

[artist3189]

zerinus

First of all it has nothing to do with numbers. Secondly, The LDS Church has always stated its position to be that it is a new dispensation of the gospel, that it is unique in that respect and is distinct and set apart form all other denominations and churches, that it is a cut above the rest, that it is the only true and living Church of God on earth, and that it is the only church on earth that has divine authority from God. No other church makes such a claim. That sets it apart from all other churches.

Really? Starting when? 1800’s? No other church makes that claim?, how about the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church…begin in the beginning zerinus.

Congratulations on the falsehood and lies published by the Vatican! Thank you for showing us the true colors of the Catholic Church!

True colors? For stating the obvious, and the truth, it think the true colors showing belong to the LDS, and the more YOU post the more apparent that becomes. What a wild world you live in, it must exhaust you to try to explain all the nonsense.

 

[Allweather]

I think it is possible for people to be blinded by their tradition and be unable to recognize the truth. Ultimately, it is the Holy Spirit, not us, who leads people to recognize the truth. I have faith that the Lord in His own due time will bring people out of darkness. Zerinius is in darkness right now – let us continue to pray for him and all of those who are in the same situation that the Lord will be merciful to them.

Very true. Thanks you for the reminder. Do let us pray and hope.

 

[Allweather]

…What a wild world you live in, it must exhaust you to try to explain all the nonsense.

Zerinus doesn’t explain anything… he expends all his energy AVOIDING all questions rather than looking for real answers.

I’m still waiting for him to give the source for Joseph Smith’s claims that a UNIVERSAL apostasy occurred, and that we Catholics are all apostates. Not likely we’ll see any of that, though.

This seems to be standard Mormon, and general cult practice. Zerinus is a cut above the JWs, who will post one or two things and then disappear. At least Z and rmcmullen stick to it, long-term, and that is admirable, as well as useful for us Christians, who can rejoice that Mormonism’s essential confusedness is easy to see, for anyone who wants to see.

Anyways, there is good news here. My fiance’s eldest son, returned from his Mormon mission last year, has changed his mind about going to BYU, and has recently attended some Masses with some Catholic friends. Last night, we had a nice long conversation about Mary, and the sources of various Catholic doctrines. Not everyone is as hardheaded as Zerinus.

 

[Nan_S]

Anyone notice we’re on page 11 already? I wonder how long these threads are allowed to get.

 

[zerinus]

Anyone notice we’re on page 11 already? I wonder how long these threads are allowed to get.

Is that your way of getting out of a difficult situation?

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

Is that your way of getting out of a difficult situation?

zerinus

Hey Z, is that your way of avoiding answering the question about proof for the apostasy?

Talk about “getting out of a difficult situation.”

 

[zerinus]

Hey Z, is that your way of avoiding answering the question about proof for the apostasy?

Talk about “getting out of a difficult situation.”

That answer has been given enough. No need to give it again.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

That answer has been given enough. No need to give it again.

zerinus

I’m sorry, but I missed that answer. If you don’t want to state it again, could you please refer me to your previous posting of that answer? Was it in a recent thread? Or something dating back to your earlier incarnation under a different unername?

I do think I recall a time or two when you’ve made reference to a “belief” that you have that the Great Apostasy is “true” but I don’t recall ever seeing anything concrete about it. If this is what you mean by saying “…the answer has been given” then, obviously, that answer cannot be accepted or even taken seriously.

Seeing as how the Mormon religion stands or falls on the truth or lie of the apostasy, you Mormons surely have something concrete with which to demonstrate it, and don’t rely solely upon burning bosoms?

 

[Allweather]

That don’t make sense either. First of all it has nothing to do with numbers.

On the contrary. Anyone who has ever had a conversation with a Mormon has been notified by that Mormon that there are so-and-such many millions of Mormons in the world. The last Mormon apologist I met insisted that the number is now TWENTY MILLION even though the LDS only claims a little over 12 million, and we all know that that number is highly questionable due to the fact that the LDS authorities tend to count even those who don’t practice Mormonism anymore, who simply haven’t bothered to resign. No, numbers are very important to Mormons, as they are to all Protestants. They need these large numbers as validation that they are growing, which growth is essential, because, if they’re not growing, they’re dying.

Secondly, The LDS Church has always stated its position to be that it is a new dispensation of the gospel, that it is unique in that respect and is distinct and set apart form all other denominations and churches, that it is a cut above the rest, that it is the only true and living Church of God on earth, and that it is the only church on earth that has divine authority from God. No other church makes such a claim. That sets it apart from all other churches.

Well. Hello. “No other church makes such a claim.” No other church, except, that is, every cult and sect that is in existence or ever has existed. Here Zerinus makes a claim for Mormonism’s uniqueness in that it is, according to his mistaken idea, the ONLY church that claims that it is the true church and “that it is a cut above the rest” and that “it is the only true and living Church of God on earth” Ya Da Ya Da Ya Da.

Zerinus, you really need to get out more. You spend way, way, way too much time in front of that computer. Maybe next semester take a course in comparative religion.

Congratulations on the falsehood and lies published by the Vatican! Thank you for showing us the true colors of the Catholic Church! zerinus

Aw, poor Zerinus doesn’t like the fact that the Catholic Church has got Mormonism all figured out. As if, it were a hard thing to figure out. Evidently the only people who have a hard time figuring out Mormonism, are Mormons themselves.

 

[JonathanKinsman]

Do you have a link? All I see is a short paragraph saying Mormon baptism is invalid with no other comments about the “Christianity” of Mormons.

Christianley;

Sorry to get back so late. I went to the Vatican website, clicked on English, typed in ‘mormon baptism’ in the search window (upper right). It sent me to a short list and then I clicked on the ‘English language’ link. That’s how I did it.

Jonathan

 

[artist3189]

Christianley;

Sorry to get back so late. I went to the Vatican website, clicked on English, typed in ‘mormon baptism’ in the search window (upper right). It sent me to a short list and then I clicked on the ‘English language’ link. That’s how I did it.

Jonathan

From the Vatican website.

RESPONSE TO A ‘DUBIUM’
on the validity of baptism conferred by
«The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints»,
called «Mormons»

Question: Wheter the baptism conferred by the community «The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints», called «Mormons» in the vernacular, is valid.

Response: Negative.

The Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved the present Response, decided in the Sessione Ordinaria of this Congregation, and ordered it published.

From the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 5 June 2001.

• Joseph Cardinal RATZINGER
  Prefect

 

[artist3189]

(1) whether the Mormons had any revelation as to what those removed important parts may have been; and

(2) whether you have any evidence outside of Mormon sources that those parts existed.

I never said anything about “forgotten ancient texts will be found”. It looks like you and I have difficulty communicating. What I did say was that in modern LDS scripture it is stated that there are many more ancient sacred texts that remain to be revealed to the world, and it has been prophesied that at some point in the future they will be revealed by the will and power of God, just as the Book of Mormon has been revealed. They won’t just accidentally be “found”.

Not so hasty. I think that is extremely significant. It does not prove that Mormonism is true; but gives very strong indication that claims made in the Book of Mormon that the NT has been tampered with and not the original work highly plausible.

Unconvinced of what? We never claimed that we can convince anyone by those means. As I said, religion is a matter of faith. You either accept it on faith or you don’t. We accept them on faith because when we read them the Spirit of the Lord bears witness to us that they are true.

Internal evidence tells us that the book of OT is not complete either. There are many books missing from it. Here are some references:

1 Kings 11:

41 And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written inthe book of the acts of Solomon?

2 Chronicles 9:

29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

2 Chronicles 12:

15 Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the book of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies? And there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually.

2 Chronicles 32:

32 Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, and in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel.

These all refer to books considered sacred by the Old Testament prophets which are no longer found in the OT.

zerinus

I’m not sure how this proves anything. This is all wrong. Zerinus’ use of these quotes is confused to say the least. Using the OT, which YOU say is unreliable to bolster some half baked claim that unknown books of sacred scripture may yet be revealed, is odd to say the least. You say, quote “I never said anything about “forgotten ancient texts will be found”. It looks like you and I have difficulty communicating.” end. But you USE what YOU claim to be ‘forgotten ancient texts’ to prove your point. Wow. Very illogical. Firstly zerinus.

Your first quote from Kings…does not refer to some unknown book called the “Acts of Solomon” , and most translations say “chronicles of Solomon” which clearly refers to 2 Chron. Either way its the same thing. All the information I have read is CLEAR on this. Sorry, but your wrong.

Your two quotes from 2 Chron refer to the same event, written at different times and placed in different parts of the book, but none the less are the same, referring to the death of Solomon. They are not two different things. Simply because a ‘prophet’ as one is called, recorded something somewhere DOES NOT put them on the same par as the ‘Great Prophets’ of Jewish history. Your translation in 2 Chron 12 is off. After ‘Iddo the seer’, most translations put, in parentheses, (his family recorder}, not “concerning genealogies” as you put it, but either way the reference is to some official. Shemaiah could have been anyone, just a name doesn’t prove the existence of some GREAT body of work still unknown, what a stretch you have to make to believe that, just to prove your own wild ideas.

Your last quote from 2 Chron, your inference that “the Vision of Isaiah the prophet” is again, some unknown book waiting to be found is total nonsense. Read Isaiah for the love of Mike, what’s it about, the rest of the story of Hezekiah, just like it says. The Book of Isaiah, IS the book referred too, not something else.

You’re really something. How can you do this day after day to yourself. Why do you play these mind games with yourself. Is this what being a Mormon is? Constant juxtaposing of facts and shifting definitions of truth and history. Is the OT corrupted or not, then why quote it. You are one confused person my friend, please pray that you will see the light soon.

 

[Tonks40]

You’re really something. How can you do this day after day to yourself. Why do you play these mind games with yourself. Is this what being a Mormon is? Constant juxtaposing of facts and shifting definitions of truth and history. Is the OT corrupted or not, then why quote it. You are one confused person my friend, please pray that you will see the light soon.

Don’t fault him. He only learned what he did from Joseph Smith - who I hear is famous for doing the above.

 

[artist3189]

I was trying to post this answer when the forums network went down this morning. Took a while to assemble and type it, too. Grrrr.

What I want to ask is whether the Mormons had any revelation as to what those removed important parts may have been, and whether you have any evidence outside of Mormon sources that those parts existed. We have archaeological records with vast libraries of ancient documents from the Middle East that never made it into the Holy Bible, yet the Mormon standard works do not seem to be among them.

It’s very curious. I’m not saying that I would necessarily believe in the reliability of the Mormon standard works if they were in the independent ancient Middle Eastern records, but I would be considerably more likely to give them a serious inspection. Can you help me with identifying these records?

Traces of many non-Mormon documents exist in a variety of forms, including complete and partial manuscripts and fragments. In some cases only anecdotal evidence remains, such as the Shepherd of Hermas, the Assumption of Moses, and, until just recently, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, yet they are still well-known. In anecdotal cases it is harder to p(name removed by moderator)oint the actual works being referenced, because certain book names were used by the Early Church Fathers and were re-used by the gnostics for their own works. Yet the names still survive.

The records of the Early Church Fathers show considerable argument in the selection of books for canonization into the New Testament, and the lists the Fathers prepared date back as far as the dawn of the second century AD, when the Great Apostacy was just beginning. Some of the Fathers advocated on behalf of the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, and the Apocalypse of Peter, as well as other books. Yet none of these lists propose inclusion of any of the Mormon standard works in the New Testament

The list of books in the Septuagint Old Testament was likewise fixed before the time of Christ and remained unchanged; the Masoretic Old Testament canon also did not recognize any books not in the Septuagint. Neither do any of the Mormon standard works make an appearance in any other established Jewish canon.

And yes, I am aware that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham from and Egyptian papyrus scroll. Curious, though, that apparently only that particular papyrus had that particular text, as the scrolls were routinely included with mummies, and Egyptologists can now read the language. If it still exists, I would like to see Joseph Smith’s scroll lent to a prominent Egyptologist for an independent translation and validation of the text, now that we can read the language. Such a gesture would go a very long ways in validating the texts and claims from the Mormons.

Can you help me with this?

Nan

Wow Nan, this is amazing, I just got to read this and you nailed it!

 

[JonathanKinsman]

That was not your question. You had asked me two questions. They were:

(1) whether the Mormons had any revelation as to what those removed important parts may have been; and
(2) whether you have any evidence outside of Mormon sources that those parts existed.
I had answered each of those questions for you separately.

I never said anything about “forgotten ancient texts will be found”. It looks like you and I have difficulty communicating. What I did say was that in modern LDS scripture it is stated that there are many more ancient sacred texts that remain to be revealed to the world, and it has been prophesied that at some point in the future they will be revealed by the will and power of God, just as the Book of Mormon has been revealed. They won’t just accidentally be “found”.

Internal evidence tells us that the book of OT is not complete either. There are many books missing from it. Here are some references:

These all refer to books considered sacred by the Old Testament prophets which are no longer found in the OT.​

zerinus

1. "I had answered each one of those questions for you separately."

Do us ALL a favor, Zerinus, give us the EXACT link to the EXACT answer to these questions. Not another one of you wild goose chases about “I answered this before many times on other threads” feint. The LINK, Zerinus, the LINK!

2. "What I did say was that in modern LDS scripture…"

WHAT “modern LDS scripture?” And how convenient for changing goofy beliefs when the ‘mormon faithful’ raise those difficult questions about that non-Biblical doctrines of the LDS sect.

Got a problem with LDS doctrine?? Hang around a few years, we’ll change it.:whacky:

And yes, Zerinus, in your own words you say that these (to quote Nan) “forgotten ancient texts will be found.” What words are those? "it has been prophesised that at some point in the future they will be revealed by the will and power of God, just as the Book of Mormon was revealed."

Of course, Zerinus, the Book of Mormon was predicted in…what book of the Bible was that???

3. "Internal evidence tells us that the book of OT is not complete either."

Catholics do not ‘believe’ in Sola Scriptura, Zerinus.

There is no statement by ANY OT prophet that certain scrolls make up the OT. The OT was compiled from the Septuagint because Jesus taught from it (through paraphrase), quoted from it (directly) and certain books of the Jewish scriptures pertained to the Cycle of Redemption and the coming of the Savior for all mankind.

Get over your legalistic, bible-code, secret rites, holy underwear constraints. They DO NOT matter in Christianity.

The Church put together the Bible (I tell you this simple fact because simple facts escape you, such as your assertion on another thread that there existed “great Arabic literature prior to the Koran.” An assertion which you never backed up with sources).

What the Church (and Christians) take for scripture is complete for the purposes of what Jesus taught and what God has planned for us and for what we Christians need to do and believe to attain the Kingdom of Heaven.

This is Christianity (simplified) but obviously beyond your ken and understanding.

Mormons are not Christian. They have always been identified as being a sect (Pope Leo XII in 1880, for example).

Dennis Prager (from way back in the 80s) had a radio show that became syndicated here in the US. It was called “Religion on the Line.”

Never was there a Mormon ‘bishop’ or ‘priest’ (any male over the age of ??) on the show. No Mormon representative what so ever.

Why? Because Prager (a devout Jew) believed (as we all do) that Mormonism is not Christian, not in the Christian tradition, and is void of intellectual honesty and spiritual value.

Check his website. He still believes this way. So do I.

Pax Christi.

 

[Nan_S]

Mormons are not Christian. They have always been identified as being a sect (Pope Leo XII in 1880, for example).

Jonathan,

Leo XII was pope from 1823 to 1829. Leo XIII was pope from 1878 to 1903.

Nan