Considering Leaving Mormonism For Traditional Christianity...

[SteveVH]

Starting at the bottom and working myself up, but when I heard there was no historical/archeological evidence for Christ, I started Googling to prove it wrong… except, I found, there really wasn’t.

*"The extant manuscripts of the writings of the 1st century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to Jesus in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][3]

Modern scholarship has almost universally acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James” [4] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[5][1][2][6][7][8] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist to also be authentic."* (Wiki)

Flavius Josephus was a secular historian who had no reason to make up stories about Jesus.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Hi LivingWaters,
Let me put in my two cents. You have received advice from ex-LDS and Catholics up to this point but of course as an active LDS member I have a different perspective. So let me give my thoughts which here no doubt will be questioned in every regard.

Let me write just for a moment about the Book of Mormon. This book claims to contain the word of the Lord and the testimonies of those who have seen Him. It is their personal witnesses of him. If it is true, through their words one may come to know how to approach God. It then would be the most important book to come to light since the Bible cannon was deemed closed.

Few here will agree with me on the above point because they claim it is all a fabrication. But I have yet to see an adequate explanation for the actual content of this book from anyone who doesn’t believe it is a translation of an ancient record. Oh they may comment about DNA, the method of translation, or the lack of physical external evidences. Such things concern me very little. Time will bring the truth of these matters out.

But what of the words it contains? This is what matters! Many who comment about it have not even read the book from beginning to end, much less studied it. Those who have left the church have read it more completely but I think they are untrue to what they have read. This book is much more complex then they give it credit for. They try to pass it off by saying most of it is the Bible repackaged, or that it contains repetitious phrases like, “it came to pass” over and over again. Please, what a pathetic and absolutely unfair representation of this book. It is complex and filled with Hebrew poetry. It is absolutely stuffed with insight about God. Joseph Smith could not have written this book. Nor could he with the small combination of people he associated with. If this book is what it claims to be, a record of an ancient peoples dealings with the Lord, then it should be welcomed by any serious seeker of truth, not rejected out of hand.

Moreover, I have not seen anyone who is able to convincingly argue that the three or eight witnesses did not see the gold plates. Oh they try and point out that Martin Harris saw it with his “spiritual eyes” but they ignore the many other comments he made. They try and bring doubt about the written testimonies in the front of the book but they ignore all other statements. These men, to their dying day, testified they had seen the plates.

Anyone who leaves the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints must ignore the contents of the Book of Mormon, even as they stumble over it on the way out.

Now, just a word about truth. If you feel by the testimony of the spirit that you have found a better way…. If the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants, the Temple, and doctrines of the LDS church seem false… Then I say, follow the spirit of truth as you find it. Joseph Smith once said, “It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul—civil and religious liberty to the whole of the human race. Love of liberty was diffused into my soul by my grandfathers while they dandled me on their knees. …If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.” (History of the Church, 5:498–99) This is my continued search, and if it is yours I feel confident that at some future day we will yet see eye to eye.

Thanks for your thoughts Janderich.

I agree with much of what you said. I think that studying the content of the Book of Mormon, and discerning where it came from is important. However, I also think that the things that don’t concern you are also important! I think that studies into DNA, method of translation (I have Brant Gardner’s “The Gift and Power-Translating the Book of Mormon”, and will finally read it soon), alleged anachronisms, and physical external evidences all fall into the same category: placing the events of the Book of Mormon in history. Studies into all of those areas, just like studies into the Bible, are all aimed at determining whether the Book of Mormon is detailing actual, historical events. So for me, I find those things of great interest.

I do agree that the Book of Mormon is more complex than what many critics claim about it, hence why I stay away from things like CARM. I do think that there is a decent amount of work done by critics (not antis) that have read and studied the Book of Mormon, and engage apologetic arguments. I also think that the Witnesses should be studied and looked into, from both sides.

What it comes down to is whether the Book of Mormon (as well as the Book of Abraham) is truly ancient scripture translated in more recent times, whether it really tells the story of real people, with real events. And ultimately, it comes down to whether a total apostasy of Christ’s Church, with a loss of priesthood authority and changing of apostolic beliefs, actually occurred.

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[LivingWaters7]

Well, when you drop the idea of the great apostasy, you get into the validity of the ordinations. Unbroken transmission of Ordination without a formal breaking away leaves you two branches to look at. Catholic, and Orthodox.

Look at them both. Real presence, real ordination, real deacons, presbyters, and bishops, as mentioned in the epistles of St. Paul.

Compare how they fit to the Pauline writings’ evidence.

Compare the liturgy to that outlined in the Apostolic Constitutions (CCEL.org has them online (link) in several formats.)

Thanks. And yes, I will definitely be looking at both Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

I like how I was watching CNN earlier this morning, and Cardinal Dolan from NYC was speaking, and he said that Jesus guides His church, and ensures that a successor of Peter is always chosen, and that there is always an earthly leader of His church. That was interesting to hear.

 

[twopekinguys]

Thanks for your thoughts Janderich.

I agree with much of what you said. I think that studying the content of the Book of Mormon, and discerning where it came from is important. However, I also think that the things that don’t concern you are also important! I think that studies into DNA, method of translation (I have Brant Gardner’s “The Gift and Power-Translating the Book of Mormon”, and will finally read it soon), alleged anachronisms, and physical external evidences all fall into the same category: placing the events of the Book of Mormon in history. Studies into all of those areas, just like studies into the Bible, are all aimed at determining whether the Book of Mormon is detailing actual, historical events. So for me, I find those things of great interest.

I do agree that the Book of Mormon is more complex than what many critics claim about it, hence why I stay away from things like CARM. I do think that there is a decent amount of work done by critics (not antis) that have read and studied the Book of Mormon, and engage apologetic arguments. I also think that the Witnesses should be studied and looked into, from both sides.

What it comes down to is whether the Book of Mormon (as well as the Book of Abraham) is truly ancient scripture translated in more recent times, whether it really tells the story of real people, with real events. And ultimately, it comes down to whether a total apostasy of Christ’s Church, with a loss of priesthood authority and changing of apostolic beliefs, actually occurred.

Thanks for your thoughts!

I think that was a very fair, and level headed response.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I think that was a very fair, and level headed response.

Thanks dude.

So I’m supposed to go to the temple tonight with my ward for baptisms for the dead, but I don’t even feel like going (which is ironic because I was encouraging my Quorum last Sunday to come). I do want to stop in at St. Patrick’s, and they have the exposition of the Eucharist all afternoon (with evening devotion later on). What would the “Devotion” include? I’m debating whether I should go to St. Patrick’s for a bit (walk around, sit in front of the Eucharist, etc) then go to the temple, or just skip the temple and stay for the Evening Devotion at St. Patrick’s…hmmm…

 

[SteveVH]

Thanks dude.

So I’m supposed to go to the temple tonight with my ward for baptisms for the dead, but I don’t even feel like going (which is ironic because I was encouraging my Quorum last Sunday to come). I do want to stop in at St. Patrick’s, and they have the exposition of the Eucharist all afternoon (with evening devotion later on). What would the “Devotion” include? I’m debating whether I should go to St. Patrick’s for a bit (walk around, sit in front of the Eucharist, etc) then go to the temple, or just skip the temple and stay for the Evening Devotion at St. Patrick’s…hmmm…

Whatever your decision, do spend some time with Jesus in the blessed sacrament. Ask him for guidance first, then make your decision as to going to the Temple or not.

 

[KathleenGee]

Baptism of the dead totally invalidates the full conscious decision of faith of the living, especially offensive is targeting John Paul II and baptizing him 6 times, as well as the ‘treasure trove’ – the ill gotten gain by Mormons to baptize consecrated priests, nuns and brothers going back 1000 years.

The Vatican finally realized in 2008 what Mormons would doing with sacramental records, which they had no right to any way…a loss of discipline in the Church that is in process of being restored.

How would Mormons feel if we did that to them and their deceased?

I saw a small patch of daffodils in full bloom in front of the state temple I pass by several times a day, and often times at night, and always see a good number of cars there…I always intuited something was going on there that did not give me a good sense.

Christ did not come to save the dead. He came to heal and save the sick…

I have been praying for you several times a day, LW7. Again, sorry if I came on hard on you…but there are just too many things in Mormonism…

What you need is the Holy Spirit to come to you as God did to an ancient prophet…through the quiet gentle breeze…in quiet and reflection…His truth speaking to you before His presence in the tabernacle. I prayed for you and the Mormons today at Mass to come to the truth in Jesus Christ and His remaining presence among us.

 

[lynnettejane]

So, basically, you feel you have to sit down with the bishop and explain it?
Is it your ego? Your pride? Wanting others to think good of you (ie your reputation?) Are you embarassed? Feel shame for being duped?

Like I asked before, how important is spiritual truth and realities to you? More important than your ego? pride? something? etc?

Just something to meditate on

Just remember that our Lordsaid that if we put anyone before him, even mother and father, then we are not worthy of him…he wants your trust.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Whatever your decision, do spend some time with Jesus in the blessed sacrament. Ask him for guidance first, then make your decision as to going to the Temple or not.

Thank you. What would the Evening Devotion entail? Is this the Benediction? Its been awhile

 

[twopekinguys]

Whatever your decision, do spend some time with Jesus in the blessed sacrament. Ask him for guidance first, then make your decision as to going to the Temple or not.

What he said!!

 

[twopekinguys]

Thank you. What would the Evening Devotion entail? Is this the Benediction? Its been awhile

With the Pope stepping down (already has) today, their schedule may be a little different.

Give them a call.

 

[SteveVH]

Thank you. What would the Evening Devotion entail? Is this the Benediction? Its been awhile

Yes, it woul be be Benediction. As twopekinguys said, you might want to call first. This is an extraordiany and historical day in our Church.

 

[LivingWaters7]

OK, just got back.

So I decided not to go to the temple (I’ll just go another time), as I really felt a “pull” to just give in and go to the cathedral. The schedule was the same as normal (though apparently one of the Masses was a special one for Benedict XVI and the next Pope). They had news trucks everywhere, though the cathedral wasn’t packed or anything.

So I walked around, and sat in front of the exposed Eucharist for awhile. I said a prayer in that chapel area, then lit a candle after. By the time I was done exploring, praying, and meditating, it was time for daily Mass, so I stayed for that. I said some of the things along with everyone else (I knew about the “and with your spirit” instead of “and also with you”, but the other changes I didn’t really know), while other things I didn’t join in (like the creed, “Lord, I am not worthy…”, etc, and of course didn’t partake of the Eucharist). Then after that, they had the Evening Devotion. There was incense, which I’ve missed (including its Biblical symbolism)! I didn’t stay for the whole thing, as it was going on longer than I expected to stay, but it was great. I was glad to see a good amount of young Catholics that seemed to be stopping in on their way home from work, as it’s always better to be around people your own age instead of being one young guy surrounded by old people, haha. Oh and I did bless myself entering and leaving with holy water.

So all in all, I’m really glad I went, it was a great experience. I thought a lot about the cross and the symbolism of the cross (what with all the making the sign of the cross, the crucifix, etc). There was also a sign that said to pray for Pope Benedict XVI, and it quoted Matthew 16:18, which was interesting. The whole time I was thinking about the continuity of true Christianity, and whether it would really be possible for a total apostasy to have occurred immediately after the establishment of the ancient Church. I also thought about what it means to partake of the body and blood of Christ, spiritual food, etc. I also stopped at the Michael the Archangel chapel (he’s my patron from my Confirmation way back when), and said a spontaneous prayer essentially saying, if you can really hear me, please help me in this spiritual battle that I’m in right now. Oh and there was a Holy Face of Jesus (I think that’s what it’s called) shrine area, so I’m gonna have to look into what that’s about, it had this interesting image there.

Next time I go will be during Holy Week!

 

[gazelam]

And ultimately, it comes down to whether a total apostasy of Christ’s Church, with a loss of priesthood authority and changing of apostolic beliefs, actually occurred.

Here are a couple of suggestions along these lines. Google “Cardinal Rebiba”. When you do you’ll find out that the 90% of Catholic Bishops trace their priesthood lineage through him and that it is unknown who ordained Cardinal Rebiba. Also, I recommend reading “Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity” by Hugh Nibley. I wish you well in your search for the truth.

 

[Pepband_Mom]

It would seem the Holy Spirit is tugging at your heartstrings & you have awaken to something you have never known.

your post starting this thread, in my estimation you have already starting shifting from the beliefs of which you came; questioning strongly is evidence to me you are on a new journey my friend.

Keep very close to Christ Jesus, the Father & His Spirit. They have a job for you! May you turn to Love itself - keep your eyes squarely on the Way, the Truth & the Life and you will never regret it! He WILL guide you

My Lenten prayer: Jesus, my Security & the prayer of Sister Faustina of Poland "Jesus, I Trust in Thee!

Blessings! Pepband Mom

 

[pablope]

Here are a couple of suggestions along these lines. Google “Cardinal Rebiba”. When you do you’ll find out that the 90% of Catholic Bishops trace their priesthood lineage through him and that it is unknown who ordained Cardinal Rebiba.

Also, I recommend reading “Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity” by Hugh Nibley. I wish you well in your search for the truth.

Really??? From someone who believes in the book of Abraham and the papyrus…fiom one comment…“He points out clear connections between ancient Christianity and Egyptian temple ceremonies that one would not expect to see.”

 

[Pepband_Mom]

Historians (with integrity) and there are plenty of them worldwide will tell you there has never been a so-called “apostasy”. See in particular Thomas Woods history of the Catholic Church. Also, William Jurgens 3 volume series “The Faith of the Early Fathers” You can find on Amazon’s site. If you are fluent in German, you can go into greater detail.

The writings extant of the Early Church Fathers speak for themselves. There are thousands of writings surviving to this day, too much history to simly say it went apostate. These writings are from Africa, Middle East, etc. The proof is there for those how are interested to read for themselves instead of relying on an worn urban legend or old wives’ tale…

Once again, God is calling you…

 

[BA11]

The problem with the LDS is that, unlike catholics, protestants and orthodox, they deny the TRUE nature of God and Jesus Christ. Additionally, all use a historical text that is known to be remarkably historically accurate as far as historical documents can prove such things are. It takes Wikipedia and a half-hour to punch a hundred historical holes in the book of Mormon.

The biggest thing, and I know this sounds harsh, is that that Mormonism was founded by a horse-thief, con man and supposed pedophile. It’s just a lie, like all his other lies, and it’s sad that so many great people are sucked into that perversion of Christ.

 

[BA11]

Historians (with integrity) and there are plenty of them worldwide will tell you there has never been a so-called “apostasy”. See in particular Thomas Woods history of the Catholic Church. Also, William Jurgens 3 volume series “The Faith of the Early Fathers” You can find on Amazon’s site. If you are fluent in German, you can go into greater detail.

The writings extant of the Early Church Fathers speak for themselves. There are thousands of writings surviving to this day, too much history to simly say it went apostate. These writings are from Africa, Middle East, etc. The proof is there for those how are interested to read for themselves instead of relying on an worn urban legend or old wives’ tale…

Once again, God is calling you…

I don’t believe there was an apostasy, but citing the early church fathers as proof of one singular belief or doctrine is just blind dogma from anyone who does it. Their beliefs were so varied and changed so often that it is merely an exercise in selective quotations.

 

[pablope]

The problem with the LDS is that, unlike catholics, protestants and orthodox, they deny the TRUE nature of God and Jesus Christ. Additionally, all use a historical text that is known to be remarkably historically accurate as far as historical documents can prove such things are.

It takes Wikipedia and a half-hour to punch a hundred historical holes in the book of Mormon.
.

Well…why don’t you share this on this thread…forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=751892&page=14