Any Mormons on here read the CES Letter?

[gazelam]

Yah.
I have no time for arguing about this.
I grew up in that nonsense. Even did a mission until I saw how stupid it was. The entire BOM is just stolen from the Bible. Literally. 2 Nephi is all just Isaiah. 1 Nephi is talking stuff said word for word in the New Testament…

So now you don’t accept the CES Letter claims that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from the View of the Hebrews and First Book of Napoleon. Why the flip? Or are there portions of the CES Letter that you’ve always doubted?

 

[gazelam]

Some of those quotes have been responded to. As I’m currently reading a book that goes into the Arian Heresy in some depth, you should know that your quotations from Eusebius and Cyril of Jerusalem (and you’ll find many like them) are attacking the Arian Heretics who have arisen.

Interesting. What book is it?

For instance, Mormonism itself borrows liberally from Gnosticism and Arianism, and even a little from the aforementioned Judaizers, and Pelagianism.

How so? To my limited understanding Arianism means Christ was created out of nothing and was never divine. Latter-day Saints believe that Christ (and each of us) always existed and is today a divine. How do you believe that Latter-day Saints borrow from Gnosticism? Regarding Pelagianism, here’s what Catholic scholar Stephen Webb said:

Two corrections of common misrepresentations of Smith’s theology need to be made at this point. First, Mormons are often charged with denying the efficacy of grace and thus making salvation dependent upon the exercise of the individual’s free will. All theologians use the language of effort, reform, and growth, so this is not a fair charge… In any case, Smith describes the process of sanctification as being “from grace to grace.” Rather than replicating Pelagianism, Smith is siding with that aspect of the Christian tradition best represented by Thomas Aquinas, which says we can and must cooperate with divine grace in order to permit it to actualize our potential for divinization. (Stephen H. Webb, “ Jesus Christ, Eternal God: Heavenly Flesh and the Metaphysics of Matter” (Oxford University Press, 2012))

The problem is, it can’t point to any of them as the “true church” that was suppressed, because the elements that were existent in those real historical movements are not anything like Mormonism as a whole.

We point to the Church Jesus founded as described in the New Testament, i.e., the atonement of Christ, Priesthood Authority, gift of the Holy Ghost, the belief that God the Father has a body of flesh and bone, baptism by immersion, baptism for the dead, apostles, pastors, teachers, evangelists, seventies, etc.

And moreover, even if Mormons may sympathize with the Arians for the Arian assault on the Trinitarian doctrine (not formulated as such by that time), you should note that even THEY acknowledged that their view was an innovation.

The overwhelming number of Latter-day Saints have no clue who Arius is and what the Arian Controversy is. And even if they did, it’s a stretch to claim that Latter-day Saint would side with one false tradition over another.

 

[Prodigal1984]

I have to agree that I don’t think Mormonism is Arian.
Jehovah’s Witnesses definitely are. Even Muslims to an extent.
Mormonism is just to me now, as a former Mormon; a complete blasphemy. Satan working to lead those astray by false prophets like he has since the beginning of the church. They claim to restore the church but I fact all they do is divide it even more. The BOM, a text that I still read from time to time. I view it more like just a classic literature piece. A fictional religious novel. It is in my view like The Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost, The Pilgrims Progress, The Canterbury Tales etc etc; all of which also have some things criticizing the Church over in them. That is all it is to me. Just a nice fiction book. It is not scripture and it is blasphemous to imply it is I think. It would be like someone starting a group and running around saying Dante was a prophet.( Though the way some on here cite him on these forums it seems some think so to an extant.) But no. It is just fiction and a nice tale but it isn’t scripture. If noone implied it was I probably would recommend people read it because it is a nice fictional tale. Most of it is orthodox as well. Interestingly many things the BOM says aren’t what the church teaches. The book clearly says there is hell and eternal damnation and lake of fire and brimstone etc. The church teaches there is no hell. Such bizarre stuff.
And the prophets are constantly wrong.

 

[Prodigal1984]

27 And I, Jacob, saw that I must soon go down to my grave; wherefore, I said unto my son Enos: Take these plates. And I told him the things which my brother Nephi had commanded me, and he promised obedience unto the commands. And I make an end of my writing upon these plates, which writing has been small; and to the reader I bid farewell, hoping that many of my brethren may read my words. Brethren, adieu.

Seriously? adieu? What the the plates came with instruction to translate it into French?

 

[gazelam]

Seriously? adieu? What the the plates came with instruction to translate it into French?

adieu is also an English word per the 1828 Websters Dictionary.

 

[Prodigal1984]

Good to know he had a dictionary.

 

[Stephen168]

Two pertinent Ignatius quotes…

Apart from these [the bishops, deacons, and presbyters], there is no Church . Ignatius, Trallians 3, in ANF 1:67.]

Remember in your prayers the Church in Syria {i.e. his own church at Antioch}, which now has God for its shepherd, instead of me. Jesus Christ alone will oversee it… (Ignatius, Romans 9, in ANF 1:77)

Ignatius acknowledges that after his departure there would be no authorized servants at Antioch, and therefore no real church.

I hope this helps…

No, your conclusion is incorrect. Ignatius never acknowledged there would be no authorized servants at Antioch. While you took less than two sentences from two different letters in an attempt to make Ignatius say something he ever said, even the two and half sentence you provide never said what you claim he did.

There is no proof of priesthood authority being taken from the earth and no proof of a Great Apostasy. This is only in the minds of anti-Catholicism which is the foundation of Mormonism.

 

[OKComputer]

This is only in the minds of anti-Catholicism which is the foundation of Mormonism.

Yup. The foundations of the Mormonism are lies. And, the foundations of all anti-Catholic teachings are, well, either lies or gross misunderstandings.

 

[Prodigal1984]

Without an apostasy none of these groups could exist.
They cherry pick one sentence someone said in the early Church completely disregarding the overall context, or use Bible versus like Amos which refer to the diaspora and which refers to the Jews who were scattered and already had come back by the time Christ was born for the most part.
Without an apostasy these groups have no foundation so a big part of their theology is based on a reason they exist.
In the BOM I believe in 2 Nephi, it speaks about like John and the Book of Revelation. What about the fact it just barely made it into the Canon? Seriously, to this day the churches of the east don’t read from it in liturgy.
All signs point to a 19th century Protestant anti Catholic bigot who wrote the book. Really that is all it is.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Mormonism isn’t purposely any form of ancient heresy. Sure, why not go with that, but let’s not ignore the fact that Mormon authors cherry pick from ancient heretical writings in an attempt to cobble something together that resembles Mormonism.

Also, it’s the old, nothing new under the sun. Mormons, particularly Smith & Co. produced the same heretical ideas, and repackaged them is all. It does have a gnostic streak, in particular the denial of the Son as coeternal and consubstantial with the Father. Mormons come around her quoting Arian writings, on a regular basis, as though it supports Mormonism.

And the whole emphasis on secret knowledge only found in Mormon temples, as having eternal purposes that no one else can know, is also very gnostic. Plus the knowledge of Jesus Christ as essential to salvation is a very insistent thing in Mormonism. It isn’t knowledge of Jesus Christ that saves, it is Jesus on the Cross, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, who has saved us. Ignorance of this event doesn’t remove one from God’s salvation. Requiring knowledge for salvation or,heavenly benefits, is the very definition of gnostic, which means “knowledge”.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Arandur:

For instance, Mormonism itself borrows liberally from Gnosticism and Arianism, and even a little from the aforementioned Judaizers, and Pelagianism.

How so? To my limited understanding Arianism means Christ was created out of nothing and was never divine. Latter-day Saints believe that Christ (and each of us) always existed and is today a divine. How do you believe that Latter-day Saints borrow from Gnosticism? Regarding Pelagianism, here’s what Catholic scholar Stephen Webb said:

Pelagianism - Wikipedia

“ Pelagianism , also called Pelagian heresy , is the Christian theological position that the original sin did not taint [human nature](Human nature - Wikipedia) and mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid or assistance. This theological theory is named after the British monk Pelagius (c. AD 360 – 418), although he denied, at least at some point in his life, many of the doctrines associated with his name. Pelagius taught human will, as created with its abilities by God, was sufficient to live a sinless life, although he believed God’s grace assisted every good work.”

…which is Mormon doctrine as well (2 Nephi 2:27, 25:23)

Regarding claiming Mormonism is following Aquinas, well, that would be a change. The Mormon church taught clearly that “after all we can do” meant working on ones own salvation as hard as possible and the difference would be made up by Jesus.

It is only more recently (relatively) that Mormons are now leaning towards the right understanding of salvation, that is, it is not possible to repay Jesus.

Now y’all just have to figure out that you are not worthy of, and never will be, of God’s greatest gift. When you do, it’s ok by me (for what that is worth) to claim that’s hows it’s always been.

Better understanding, is better, and a gift of grace.

 

[Arandur]

The Apostasy That Wasn’t by Rod Bennett. No, it wasn’t made specifically in refutation of Mormonism. And it really focuses on the Arian crisis as the main historical evidence, as it is the crucial time period related to most accusaions against the Church.

RebeccaJ touched on some of the Pelagian aspects of Mormonism. Arian in that the central contention of Arianism is that Son was not of the same substance as the Father, but rather was created in some fashion. The “iota of difference” in homoousion vs homoiousion. Mormonism mimics Arianism in several ways of that regard, as do others in various ways, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Muslims (another religion with many very strong similarities to Mormonism…).

While many ideas crop up in various ways throughout history due just to rehashing of different thought processes, there may well be spiritual elements at play – and malign spiritual powers driving the deceit. I believe there is an element of that in most heresies that keep cropping up. So it doesn’t matter that LDS don’t know about Arius. They followed similar erroneous thought processes, and were possibly inspired by similar deceitful spirits (personally, I find the Islam/Mormonism similarities striking enough to be indicative of the same spirits at work).

My other point here was that there’s simply no evidence in history of the Mormon distinctives. Nowhere is recorded anything like their distinctive beliefs, structure, or interpretations of Scripture. You can insist all you want on interpreting Scripture a certain way and claiming that it was your church represented in that writing, but if we find no trace of it outside Scripture, it’s clear that was just a novel interpretation invented whenever your church came up with it, never evidenced before, never held by the true Church Jesus founded.

 

[Arandur]

As for Gnosticism, well Gnosticism is a pretty diverse set of variant beliefs, but shares some common elements. RebeccaJ mentioned the “secret knowledge” thing that is pretty central. JS was big on that. Masonry/freemasonry was deeply Gnostic, and JS ate that stuff up. He was also deeply into the occult, with many of his ideas coming from the melange of folk and hermetic magic that had come together in that region from immigrants from all over Europe, but probably especially Germanic. Some interesting reading there.

More specifically, the emphasis on “spirit bodies,” “eternal intelligences,” “eternal elements,” “eternal progression,” degrees of heaven, an obsession with languages and translation, prophecy and hidden writings to be revealed, fascination with Enoch and Enochian writings, even with angels and sealing and all that. Lots of gnosticism going on in all that. IIRC, even Adam/Michael and Adam/God theory stuff is has gnostic/occult origins.

Smith actually wasn’t quite as original as it may seem. Just had many influences. There are other fiction writers of recent times who have done fantastic syntheses and twists on many influences much like Smith has done, though with better writing and imagination.

 

[gazelam]

“ Pelagianism , also called Pelagian heresy , **is the Christian theological position that the original sin did not taint human nature and mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid or assistance.

1. Alma 42:5-9, 14 plainly teaches that all mankind is in a fallen state.
2. Moroni 7:16 teaches "For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil. Everyone who has ever lived was born with special divine aid - the Spirit of Christ

Pelagius taught human will, as created with its abilities by God, was sufficient to live a sinless life, although he believed God’s grace assisted every good work.”

The Restored Gospel teaches that no one lives a sinless life.

Moses 6:55 And the Lord spake unto Adam, saying: Inasmuch as thy children are conceived in sin, even so when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good.

1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

…which is Mormon doctrine as well (2 Nephi 2:27, 25:23)

Which it isn’t as I’ve just shown. The full text of the verses say:

2 Nephi 2:27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and call things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.

Christ is the ultimate “special divine aid”.

2 Nephi 25:23 For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.

The verse states what all we can do is, and that is to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God

So, ixnay on the Latter-day Saint Pelagianism.

Regarding claiming Mormonism is following Aquinas, well, that would be a change. The Mormon church taught clearly that “after all we can do” meant working on ones own salvation as hard as possible and the difference would be made up by Jesus.

I know virtually nothing of the writings of Aquinas so I’ll just trust what the good professor said.

It is only more recently (relatively) that Mormons are now leaning towards the right understanding of salvation, that is, it is not possible to repay Jesus.

Please share quotes of latter-day Saint leaders talking of repaying Jesus.

 

[gazelam]

Now y’all just have to figure out that you are not worthy of, and never will be, of God’s greatest gift. When you do, it’s ok by me (for what that is worth) to claim that’s hows it’s always been.

Only the worthy will inherit Eternal Life. The worthy are those who have cleansed themselves of sin through the Atonement of Christ.

Revelation 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

 

[Prodigal1984]

I always thought Mormonism is more similar to Iglesia Ni Cristo in the Philippines or La Luz Del Mundo in Mexico. Claiming apostasy and modern day apostles and such. At some point it almost gets comical.

 

[Arandur]

Mormonism dispenses with Original Sin. It requires “after all that you can do” (an impossibility; you can always do more) amount of works. Even the tests of reading the BoM (the beginning part of the reading) are suspiciously semi-pelagianistic.

But this, like many beliefs in various BoM-believing movements, are scattered in with contrary ideas. Smith was very disorganized and wanted to be everything (when he got deeper into Freemasonry, he said his works were the “True Masonry,” for example). He really worked in whatever thoughts or influences he liked, adopting both sides when it suited, and to assuage critics.

As opposed to the Catholic “both/and,” most of these areas of thought just show disorganization, scattered all of the place, rather than consistency, rigor of thought, and nuanced consideration of how this is true in light of that.

Also, dramatic evolution of thought is evident in Smith’s works, which explains why the restorationist sects vary so much. The LDS are probably best followers of Smith by the end of his life, and BY. But CoC/RLDS were more mainstream/core (then influenced by the world and mainline Protestantism’s evolution in the U.S.), and the restoration/remnant branches are more strict adherents of early JS. But they bitterly oppose the huge doctrinal differences with LDS – which are more dramatic than the vast majority of differences among other Christian denominations. Which is very odd, isn’t it, from such a recent “restoration,” and looking at only a couple of decades of early material?

Really goes to show how confused JS was, how much his teachings changed, and how they were all over the place, open to dramatic variance.

 

[Prodigal1984]

The Community of Christ doesn’t even require its members to believe the Book of Mormon anymore.
The BOM at its core is quite orthodox besides some things. But they are few. It is more the stuff you find in the lesser known canon of the group, Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, where you really begin to see some bizarre teachings. The BOM clearly teaches hell and eternal damnation, yet the church does not. It is self contradicting. In fact I believe in Alma it says that those who think anyone can be saved as one of the false prophets in the book claim, are from the devil. Yet Mormons teach it. It is bizarre.
It is like the more power Smith felt the more extreme his teachings went. Probably had a big part in the dissections of most of the witnesses. Sure a lot of them returned, but if one really witnessed the stuff the book says they witnessed I can’t perceive how they ever would leave.

 

[RuthAnne]

Forgive me folks, I’m getting whiplash trying to follow what seems to me to be contradicting statements.

Is it easy to leave/get kicked out of/excommunicated from the Catholic church or hard?
Is it easy to leave/get kicked out of/excommunicated from the restored church of Jesus Christ or hard?

I don’t know much about this subject, but seriously I have been reading this topic and there appears to be a big difference between getting kicked out of the Mormon church and leaving the Mormon church. Your words seem to indicate they are the same thing.

 

[RebeccaJ]

RebeccaJ:

It is only more recently (relatively) that Mormons are now leaning towards the right understanding of salvation, that is, it is not possible to repay Jesus.

Please share quotes of latter-day Saint leaders talking of repaying Jesus.

See Boyd Packer’s conference talk titled “The Mediator”, where he uses a made up story to describe what Jesus has done for humanity.

“Then,” said the benefactor, “you will pay the debt to me and I will set the terms. It will not be easy, but it will be possible. I will provide a way. You need not go to prison.”