Ask A Mormon

[eddie_too]

would knowledgeable members of the lds agree that catholics and mormons do NOT WORSHIP the same God?

the God worshipped by Catholics is infinite, eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect in every aspect, pure act without potential, a being without beginning or end, and a pure spirit incarnated in Jesus.

while the god worshipped by mormons, had a beginning, is finite, had potential, is not pure act, is not a spirit and was created.

is that an fair representation of the differences between the God worshipped by catholics and the god worshipped by mormons?

 

[Stephen168]

It has fallen. Right when joe smith said “He has done more for the church than Christ or the apostles”

I think it fell into apostasy when Joseph Smith lead his people away from the triune God into a world of many gods.

 

[kimg901]

I think it fell into apostasy when Joseph Smith lead his people away from the triune God into a world of many gods.

Yes, that too

 

[TexanKnight]

True, thank you for the correction. We don’t claim to be the exact same as the early Church, there will be differences. The Church evolved under God’s guidance in the OT and the NT, why would you anticipate the current presentation to be exactly the same?

Because, when I was LDS, I was told that the LDS Church was the same as the original church, but I have found no evidence of that

This is the RCC position. The claim of authority being passed to the Bishops is a claim that the LDS dispute. I personally question the why of the quick transition of authority to Bishops when the Apostles had already set precedent of calling new Apostles to fill vacant positions. Suddenly Peter gives the Apostolic authority over to the Bishops? Makes little sense to me.

Really? Are the names and titles that important to you? Then where, in the OT or NT is there any mention of Stake President"? Or where is there a Patriarch to give Patriarchal Blessings in the NT? Or how about “wards”? Or Stakes? Or Elder’s Quorum? Branch President? I will have my Bible handy to look up the verses you find those terms in. I will tell you what makes less sense: Jesus starting a Church, saying He will guide them and the Church would always last, and the Apostles not being led enough to keep it going.

That is your position, I obviously disagree.

Really? So Adam IS our God? Blacks WILL turn white? The world DID end in the 1800s? And the list could go on. I had no idea you believed all those things

You are welcome and thank you.

Despite the discussions here, I loved being LDS and loved my time as a missionary. If it were true, I would gladly go back. Sadly, it isn’t

 

[TexanKnight]

Why then the disarray and discord in the Christian world? It does not appear that the revelation given in the Bible is sufficient for Man.

Sure…the problem is men like Joseph Smith and others used their own interpretations or desires to form their own churches until there are 41000 denominations in this country. We invite you all to come back to THE Church

We can argue this, but I do not see much value in such a discussion. I believe that continuing revelation is needed and you have the opposite position. I do not believe that either of us will convince the other otherwise. Please don’t pursue this as it will only come down to our personal interpretations of various scripture.

The problem with that is Jesus is not stupid. He knew that if revelations like you speak of were to continue, folks like Joseph and Ellen White and James Jones and many many others would claim revelation. By not having any at all, Jesus took the guesswork out.

 

[talter]

In LDS theology, the keys of the priesthood, and the authority thereof, are held by, and active in, the Prophet. The Twelve hold these same keys and authority, but in a dormant state while the Prophet lives. The priesthood keys and authority used by the rest of the Church are by delegation of keys and authority held by these men. Thus priesthood keys and authority disappear in the absence of the Prophet and the Twelve.

We also believe that the Twelve are special witnesses of Christ whose charge mainly includes the responsibility to maintain the proper belief in, and practice of, Christ’s Gospel. The books between the Gospels and Revelation constitutes example of the apostles doing such. The Church struggled with straying in the presence of the Apostles and Prophet. I do not know how quickly the Church fell away following the death of the Apostles, but I do not believe that the Church can survive for long without them.

We believe that anyone can be a prophet. We believe, however, that each person can only receive revelation, from God, for those whom we have authority over. Thus, I can receive revelation for my family and for those that fall under my position within the Church. With regards to those who fall under my position within the Church, I cannot receive revelation beyond the scope of said position. If I were a Sunday School teacher, the revelation I would receive would only be in regards to teaching the material, not in regards to adding to the material. Also, as a Sunday School teacher I would not receive revelation outside of teaching with regards to those in my class. A Bishop can receive revelation for his ward, but such revelation again is limited in scope as well. A Bishop cannot receive revelation that adds to, alters or conflicts with doctrines of the Church, such is beyond the scope of his position. Care should be taken with regard to personal revelation, the following is an excerpt from a talk on the subject:

I hope this answers your question.

Thank you for your response! So to be clear and concise, only the leader of the church can receive revelation (guidance) for the church as a whole, bishops can only receive for their ward, patriarchs for their family and individuals for themselves. So there can only be one prophet of the church at any given time. The fact that Thomas Monson is (LDS thought) the current prophet of the church then any other “prophet” that attempts to speak to or guide the church is either the new true prophet and Monson is no longer or Monson is the true prophet and the new guy is false. Correct? An in order for the church to be able to hold fast to it’s teachings there must be a prophet and apostles. Correct? Only those called to those positions can have revelation unto whom they have authority over.

 

[LDSYep]

Because, when I was LDS, I was told that the LDS Church was the same as the original church, but I have found no evidence of that.

I think that this is overstated in the LDS Church. I don’t believe that it is the exact same. I don’t think this is the position of the Church itself regardless of the statements of the laity. I do believe that ordinances like the sacrament, baptism, etc. are the same, though, and I believe these to be what is referenced by the claim of being the same. But, we will disagree on that as well.

Really? Are the names and titles that important to you? Then where, in the OT or NT is there any mention of Stake President"? Or where is there a Patriarch to give Patriarchal Blessings in the NT? Or how about “wards”? Or Stakes? Or Elder’s Quorum? Branch President? I will have my Bible handy to look up the verses you find those terms in. I will tell you what makes less sense: Jesus starting a Church, saying He will guide them and the Church would always last, and the Apostles not being led enough to keep it going.

No, but the Bishop was a position beneath the Apostles at the time the claim of the passing of authority occurred, it is a claim to ecclesiastical restructuring as well as authority. Shift from the Apostle to the Bishop would be akin to if the LDS Church shifted authority to the Seventy or the Stake Presidents, such would not make sense.

Really? So Adam IS our God? Blacks WILL turn white? The world DID end in the 1800s? And the list could go on. I had no idea you believed all those things

Again, we will disagree in semantics and in interpretation. I have reconciled LDS history in my belief, you will not agree, so I will not bother arguing the point. And Adam-God theory is a construct that isn’t LDS in origin, it is a misinterpretation of so many statements that it isn’t funny.

 

[LDSYep]

Thank you for your response! So to be clear and concise, only the leader of the church can receive revelation (guidance) for the church as a whole, bishops can only receive for their ward, patriarchs for their family and individuals for themselves. So there can only be one prophet of the church at any given time. The fact that Thomas Monson is (LDS thought) the current prophet of the church then any other “prophet” that attempts to speak to or guide the church is either the new true prophet and Monson is no longer or Monson is the true prophet and the new guy is false. Correct? An in order for the church to be able to hold fast to it’s teachings there must be a prophet and apostles. Correct? Only those called to those positions can have revelation unto whom they have authority over.****

I believe you have stated it correctly. I would omit the bolded portion though.

Just so I know the syntax, how would I have simply done a strike through on that rather than bolding it?

 

[LDSYep]

would knowledgeable members of the lds agree that catholics and mormons do NOT WORSHIP the same God?

I don’t believe all would state it in this manner. I believe the difference is the same as the difference between Jews and Catholics, we all claim to believe in the same God, but what God is is where divergence enters. So to that point I would say that your statement would be correct, no further.

the God worshipped by Catholics is infinite, eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect in every aspect, pure act without potential, a being without beginning or end, and a pure spirit incarnated in Jesus.

This seems at conflict with other descriptions of the Trinity that I have read and heard.

while the god worshipped by mormons, had a beginning, is finite, had potential, is not pure act, is not a spirit and was created.

is that an fair representation of the differences between the God worshipped by catholics and the god worshipped by mormons?

I will try to respond better when I have time.

 

[kimg901]

Again, we will disagree in semantics and in interpretation. I have reconciled LDS history in my belief, you will not agree, so I will not bother arguing the point. And Adam-God theory is a construct that isn’t LDS in origin, it is a misinterpretation of so many statements that it isn’t funny.

So whos theory is it? And why is everything a “misinterpretation” in the lds church? There are documents that state these things but they are misinterpretations?

 

[kimg901]

I don’t believe all would state it in this manner. I believe the difference is the same as the difference between Jews and Catholics, we all claim to believe in the same God, but what God is is where divergence enters. So to that point I would say that your statement would be correct, no further.

This seems at conflict with other descriptions of the Trinity that I have read and heard.

I will try to respond better when I have time.

No need. Eddie, joe smith said something like this “As men are, god once was” Lets not forget the lds men believe they will become gods themselves and inherit a planet. This is why they are not christian. They believe in multiple gods.

 

[eddie_too]

is there a mormon catechism?

if there were a mormon catechism, it would put an end to all of these misinterpretations and incorrect understandings that are being preached by the mormon missionaries.

if the organization would put its teachings down on paper, everyone at least would be at the same starting point.

 

[talter]

I believe you have stated it correctly. I would omit the bolded portion though.

Just so I know the syntax, how would I have simply done a strike through on that rather than bolding it?

So you think it should read as such?

“The fact that Thomas Monson is (LDS thought) the current prophet of the church then any other “prophet” that attempts to speak to or guide the church is -]either the new true prophet and Monson is no longer or Monson is the true prophet and the new guy is/-] false.”

• The syntax for strike through is - instead of b. Your bold didn’t work because it should have been /b at the end, you were missing the /.

 

[kimg901]

is there a mormon catechism?

if there were a mormon catechism, it would put an end to all of these misinterpretations and incorrect understandings that are being preached by the mormon missionaries.

if the organization would put its teachings down on paper, everyone at least would be at the same starting point.

It wouldnt work Eddie. So much has been changed thus far that by making their own little book would require changes and if they did, way to many people would see their claims as false. The lds also like to say its not doctrine, but a teaching. But when you look up the word doctrine, it tells you the word itself means a teaching. I suggest reading the other threads Eddie about the lds like “Is the lds a cult?” You will see what im talking about and all the “teachings” we have posted from mormon sources.

 

[campeador]

is there a mormon catechism?

if there were a mormon catechism, it would put an end to all of these misinterpretations and incorrect understandings that are being preached by the mormon missionaries.

if the organization would put its teachings down on paper, everyone at least would be at the same starting point.

The LDS dare not lay down any set rules or interpretations. This has caused much division (apostasy) in the LDS Church in the past. The Journal of Discourses is a prime example of this. The LDS have officially declared the JofD ‘unofficial’, because too many of their past beliefs are no longer held by current LDS understanding.

 

[kimg901]

The LDS dare not lay down any set rules or interpretations. This has caused much division (apostasy) in the LDS Church in the past. The Journal of Discourses is a prime example of this. The LDS have officially declared the JofD ‘unofficial’, because too many of their past beliefs are no longer held by current LDS understanding.

J.o.D, lol. They tell their followers not to worry about what is written in it, just pray.

 

[TexanKnight]

I think that this is overstated in the LDS Church. I don’t believe that it is the exact same. I don’t think this is the position of the Church itself regardless of the statements of the laity. I do believe that ordinances like the sacrament, baptism, etc. are the same, though, and I believe these to be what is referenced by the claim of being the same. But, we will disagree on that as well.

lol…so…we disagree on the false things you cannot defend. That is certainly ONE way to handle the issues that prove your church false. Bottom line, your church is NOTHING like the original church. Your church is manmade.

No, but the Bishop was a position beneath the Apostles at the time the claim of the passing of authority occurred, it is a claim to ecclesiastical restructuring as well as authority. Shift from the Apostle to the Bishop would be akin to if the LDS Church shifted authority to the Seventy or the Stake Presidents, such would not make sense.

It makes perfect sense. As the Church grew, the positions grew. You have been unable to defend the titles your folks bear and the changes it made, yet it seems hard for you to accept apostles being called Bishops. And you seem willing to accept that Jesus just was not very bright and His Spirit was even less intelligent
Again, we will disagree in semantics and in interpretation. I have reconciled LDS history in my belief, you will not agree, so I will not bother arguing the point. And Adam-God theory is a construct that isn’t LDS in origin, it is a misinterpretation of so many statements that it isn’t funny.

There is NO need for dishonesty. We have posted numerous times the whole doctrine espoused by your alleged prophet. There is no semantics issue or interpretation issue. Should you persisit in this dishonesty, I will post it all again. I will also post the other false doctrines that have nothing to do with semantics or interpretation. I understand your fear or hesitance to argue the issue. It is an argument you will not win. And, I agree…the false doctrines are not funny

 

[TexanKnight]

I don’t believe all would state it in this manner. I believe the difference is the same as the difference between Jews and Catholics, we all claim to believe in the same God, but what God is is where divergence enters. So to that point I would say that your statement would be correct, no further.

Not true. We believe in the Eternal God. The One who never changes. You believe in the god who used to be a man. Those are DIFFERENT Gods.

 

[TexanKnight]

So whos theory is it? And why is everything a “misinterpretation” in the lds church? There are documents that state these things but they are misinterpretations?

When Mormons are faced with their false doctrines of the past…they have little choice but to claim it was not said or that it was not said the way it was really said.

 

[zaffiroborant]

This is the RCC position. The claim of authority being passed to the Bishops is a claim that the LDS dispute. I personally question the why of the quick transition of authority to Bishops when the Apostles had already set precedent of calling new Apostles to fill vacant positions. Suddenly Peter gives the Apostolic authority over to the Bishops? Makes little sense to me.

.

His office let another take.’ 21 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us–one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection."

Your apostles don’t fulfill the requirements.