Ask A Mormon

  • Thread starter Thread starter ErinGoBragh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
why do mormons believe Jesus started a Church that He knew would mislead His people for over 1,600 years?
 
Part of repentance is restoring what you have taken. Restoring an innocent life is not possible. My point is Christ can forgive who he wants to forgive. Christ is the one that made the infinite sacrifice, I’ll let Christ be the judge.
No…repentance is not restoring…it is making reparation for what you have done.

Restoring innocent life is indeed not possible…but you can make a reparation by starting with turning your own life around…and turning others from a life of sin to a life to God…that way, you give birth to new life.
 
The problem with text is that its weakness is personal interpretation. Marshall McLuhen stated that the written text is personal in its interpretation, not communitarian.

The essence of Catholicism is communion with God and neighbor through the Eucharist.

The truth is that Christ came to us through the Oral Tradition. Christ was not passing out the King James Version Bibles 2000 years ago.

Instead He provided us not just one, but 12 apostles. When Judas betrayed Christ and hung himself, the apostles voted, not through their opinions, but threw the tossing of lots – leaving the decision to Providence, as God wills all things and works through all things in His name.

The number 12 symbolizes perfection and it symbolizes the 12 tribes of Israel. So as the 12 were already chosen, it likewise neutralizes any claim that there was any lost tribe, the lost 12th tribe in America.

If we read something, we come to our own perceptions based on our individual experience.

If we hear of an event that was witnessed by a group of people, academically speaking when there are 10 witnesses, the event is worthy of documentation, – then we can grasp and understand the event in its deliberate meaning and understanding, not our limited perception.

Christ chose 12 apostles, not one 1800 years later in an entirely different world. I was reading recently here that Western New York was known in those pioneer days of various individuals and followers of new sects making claims about Christianity that were unknown until then. So Mormonism began in such a geographical location, and for one to believe in its tenants you taking certainly a gamble of what is truth and actual event.
 
The problem with text is that its weakness is personal interpretation. Marshall McLuhen stated that the written text is personal in its interpretation, not communitarian.

The essence of Catholicism is communion with God and neighbor through the Eucharist.

The truth is that Christ came to us through the Oral Tradition. Christ was not passing out the King James Version Bibles 2000 years ago.

Instead He provided us not just one, but 12 apostles. When Judas betrayed Christ and hung himself, the apostles voted, not through their opinions, but threw the tossing of lots – leaving the decision to Providence, as God wills all things and works through all things in His name.

The number 12 symbolizes perfection and it symbolizes the 12 tribes of Israel. So as the 12 were already chosen, it likewise neutralizes any claim that there was any lost tribe, the lost 12th tribe in America.

If we read something, we come to our own perceptions based on our individual experience.

If we hear of an event that was witnessed by a group of people, academically speaking when there are 10 witnesses, the event is worthy of documentation, – then we can grasp and understand the event in its deliberate meaning and understanding, not our limited perception.

Christ chose 12 apostles, not one 1800 years later in an entirely different world. I was reading recently here that Western New York was known in those pioneer days of various individuals and followers of new sects making claims about Christianity that were unknown until then. So Mormonism began in such a geographical location, and for one to believe in its tenants you taking certainly a gamble of what is truth and actual event.
in the area Joe lived, there were several people who had visitations from God. Joe was not the only one. It was not uncommon. Not surprised that Joe heard of them and decided that something might be more lucrative than treasure seeking
 
Part of repentance is restoring what you have taken. Restoring an innocent life is not possible. My point is Christ can forgive who he wants to forgive. Christ is the one that made the infinite sacrifice, I’ll let Christ be the judge.
We cannot redeem ourselves, if we could, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ would not be necessary.
 
i think there is a difference between restoration and reparation.

although restoration and reparation can be used as synonyms, there is ultimately a subtle distinction between the two.
 
i think there is a difference between restoration and reparation.

although restoration and reparation can be used as synonyms, there is ultimately a subtle distinction between the two.
As you will soon learn, if you haven’t already, is mormons have their own definitions of many commonly used words.

You may think you are on the same wave length at times, but nothing could be further from the truth.

Good catch on the one above though. 👍
 
twopekingguys,
thanks for the acknowlegement, but what i am really waiting to hear from a member of the LDS is why they believe moroni was sent by a benevolent being instead of by a malevolent being.

clearly, it was moroni’s intent to destroy the RCC, the original Church founded by Jesus Christ. i can think of nothing more malevolent than that. which means, TO ME, moroni clearly was sent to joseph smith by a malevolent being.

i would really like a knowledgeable member of the LDS to explain why it believes moroni was a benevolent being and not a malevolent being.
 
I think we should be clear on this though, as I’m sure you know how Mormons would respond to this. They believe that Christ’s atonement does not cover murder. If someone murders, they cannot be forgiven. Now, all Christians do believe that there is an unpardonable or unforgivable sin, i.e. blasphemy against the Holy Ghost:

***Matthew 12:31-32 (and the other verses that say the same thing)

31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.***

So, Christ’s atonement covers all sins except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Mormons, for whatever reason (perhaps related to the need for “restitution” for the repentance process), add murder to that. They also believe that murderers would have to suffer for that sin in spirit prison, then go to the telestial kingdom. 🤷
But they aren’t comparable. As mytolympus as shown, LDS believe Jesus can only atone for sins for which the sinner can make full reparations. This is wholly outside of Scripture and Tradition.

Jesus taught here, attributing a miracle from God to demons, is a sin against the Holy Spirit. Which, doesn’t have anything to do with reparations. It is sin that denies God’s work among creation. This is a matter of one’s orientation towards God, and is similar to the first sin of Adam and Eve, that is, not trusting and obeying God.

Even then, I haven’t heard of the Church ever excommunicating someone with a condition that they can never return via the Sacrament of Reconciliation because they have committed a sin against the Holy Spirit. This would require a priest be able to discern a person’s orientation towards God, and would also require the priest judge whether or not the person had understood their actions were sin in the first place.

LDS excommunicate members who are convicted of murder, and will not, ever, re-admit them to their membership via a second baptism. There isn’t anything in Catholicism that compares to this.
 
Also, LW7 🙂 the LDS church defines the sin against the Holy Spirit as apostasy from itself. That is the single worst sin, besides murder, that a Mormon can make.

In Catholicism, a sin against the Holy Spirit is defined in two ways: Either believing you can sin as much as you like and God will forgive you anyway (sin of presumption). Or, the sin of despair, which is believing that your sin is so great that God can never forgive you.

If you think about it, forgiveness becomes impossible in either of these sins, not because God is incapable of forgiving, but because the person isn’t oriented towards either recognizing their sin (presumption) or accepting forgiveness (despair).

The LDS view of murder, as being unforgivable, sounds like the sin of despair to me.
 
As for the other 2, very logical and sound points. I would first like to see the claim (by the LDS church) of these doctrines and it’s official statement and then the counter argument (if you’d like to) on why these doctrines are against Christ’s teachings. This is more or less for my self, i would love to know your responses.
“We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. These are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did, and I will show it from the Bible” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp.345-346. Italics in original).

Joseph Smith said there are many gods.
“Hence, the doctrine of a plurality of Gods is as prominent in the Bible as any other doctrine. It is all over the face of the Bible . . . Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many . . . but to us there is but one God–that is pertaining to us; and he is in all and through all,” (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 474). “In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 5).
 
Part of repentance is restoring what you have taken. Restoring an innocent life is not possible.
But it’s totally cool when Nephi has to kill a helplessly drunk man?

I have a hard time understanding how you can’t see why Catholics go to such a great length to differentiate between the LDS version of God and the God Jesus preached. The traditional Christian God would never command someone to break the law that He put into place. He would NEVER say “hey, I know I said not to do that… But totally do that, Kay?”

I take comfort in the fact that God will never require me to violate my conscience to follow Him. Ever.
My point is Christ can forgive who he wants to forgive. Christ is the one that made the infinite sacrifice, I’ll let Christ be the judge.
Is that your personal opinion? Because that isn’t what the LDS church teaches and you know it. If you’re speaking as a representative of the LDS church, then please clarify when you decide to throw something like this out there. On another front, if you have views that disagree with the LDS church, maybe it’s time to reexamine your membership…?
 
mtolympus;10680493:
Part of repentance is restoring what you have taken. Restoring an innocent life is not possible.
But it’s totally cool when Nephi has to kill a helplessly drunk man?
Or your unborn child that was conceived by rape. LDS could argue that Laban, the drunk Nephi murdered, was not innocent but you can’t make the same argument with an unborn child. LDS theology is a mess and it’s really weak when it comes to a complete and consistent moral framework.
 
Please stop arguing and bashing, ErinGoBragh mtolympus are doing us a favor here! They offered to answer our legitimate questions not be badgered; that’s un-Catholic! If you have a legit question ask it, but don’t attack. They have the right to believe what ever they want.
 
Please stop arguing and bashing, ErinGoBragh mtolympus are doing us a favor here! They offered to answer our legitimate questions not be badgered; that’s un-Catholic! If you have a legit question ask it, but don’t attack. They have the right to believe what ever they want.
correcting bad doctrine is not bashing. It is doing what God called us to do.
 
i am not sure “right” is the correct word to use when speaking about a person’s ability to believe in a falsehood. perhaps, “power” would be a better choice?

does anyone really have a “right” to believe in a lie?

is not everyone called to seek the truth?

all exercises of free will are not a right.
 
Please stop arguing and bashing, ErinGoBragh mtolympus are doing us a favor here! They offered to answer our legitimate questions not be badgered; that’s un-Catholic! If you have a legit question ask it, but don’t attack. They have the right to believe what ever they want.
Nobody is bashing, arguing, etc. etc., and I’m not really sure how you came up with that. This has been one of the more civil mormon threads.

Would you like me to give you some real examples? I’ve got plenty stored up.

Something else you have failed to consider is that many of us in this thread have a mutual posting history. We understand each others style. What may appear to be an argument to you is simply even handed debate.

But hey, thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut.
 
i am still waiting for an answer to my question of why mormons believe that the angel moroni was sent to joseph smith by a benevolent being instead of by a malevolent being? this is particularly relevant to a discussion of mormonism for those of us who believe it was moroni’s intent to destroy the RCC, the primary source of God’s grace in the world.
 
O.o interesting not heard this before any links for me to read more of!
"In the pre-mortal life, Adam was the archangel Michael."Link

“In Mormon theology, Gabriel is believed to have lived a mortal life as the prophet Noah.” Link

“I met with a very remarkable personage who had represented himself as being Cain … I suddenly noticed a very strange personage walking beside me … for about two hours. … He wore no clothing but was covered with hair. His skin was very dark. … I rebuked him in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by virtue of the Holy Priesthood, and commanded him to go hence and he immediately departed out of my sight.“ Link
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top