J
Jerusha
Guest
LOL. You are talking like a Catholic. Are you sure you aren’t one? God bless you.
- Status
N
NewSeeker
Guest
We’re all at different places in our spiritual journeys. Some are fine with feelings of the heart; others need intellectual supports to believe. I, for one, need both. When I gave up on Mormonism and other exclusively feelings-based approaches to finding truth, all I had left was intellectual “mumbo-jumbo”, as you put it. The profundity of Catholic philosophy and theology (the intellectual mumbo-jumbo the anti-intellectual Mormons in my life love to decry) was a huge draw for me. I had no clue what having God in my life “felt” like, having never felt his presence. But, at last, now I had an eminently reasonable, logical foundation on which to base a new faith that God is real, and that Jesus is his son. I value the fact that Catholicism is theological and philosophical. The intellectual “mumbo-jumbo” that you seem to denigrate is what brought me back to Christ. And now I feel that sense of peace at Mass that I longed for for so many years as a faithful Mormon. I love that Catholicism is both brain-based and heart-based. Mormonism, on the other hand, uses the heart to trump the brain, usually in spite of the evidence. But since there never were any gold plates, Nephites, or temple-endowed early Christians, I suppose good feelings are all a Mormon has to go by. There sure isn’t any evidence besides “good feelings” that any of those things ever existed.
NS
P
ParkerD
Guest
NewSeeker,
It sounds like the Catholic church was a perfect fit for you. I’m not anti-intellectual, but I am pro-Biblical doctrine, thoroughly not just cherry-picking. But I think if you found what you were looking for, and need such an intellectual basis for believing in God, then you needed to do what you did for your own peace of mind. It’s all good. The CK is faith-based, not intellectual-based. Everyone doesn’t want that. That is the whole idea of this life–for us to choose what we want.
Peace to you.
It sounds like the Catholic church was a perfect fit for you. I’m not anti-intellectual, but I am pro-Biblical doctrine, thoroughly not just cherry-picking. But I think if you found what you were looking for, and need such an intellectual basis for believing in God, then you needed to do what you did for your own peace of mind. It’s all good. The CK is faith-based, not intellectual-based. Everyone doesn’t want that. That is the whole idea of this life–for us to choose what we want.
Peace to you.
R
Religio71
Guest
is there a website or book that goes over the Biblical or historical (early primitive Church) basis for the unique beliefs of the LDS Church, such as:
-sealing for time and eternity
-the need for temples
-the pre-mortal existence
-Jesus=Jehovah
-prophets as the head of the Church
-Peter=not only an Apostle, but a Prophet
-non-liturgical worship
-Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods for all men
-three tiers of Heaven
-Heavenly Mother
-sealing for time and eternity
-the need for temples
-the pre-mortal existence
-Jesus=Jehovah
-prophets as the head of the Church
-Peter=not only an Apostle, but a Prophet
-non-liturgical worship
-Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods for all men
-three tiers of Heaven
-Heavenly Mother
P
ParkerD
Guest
Religio71,
The website fairlds.org gives thorough discussion about each of those, I think, though I don’t look at that website myself very much (perhaps twice in my life) as I like the scriptures as my source for answers to questions. I’ll try to give Biblical scriptures in another entry here.
K
kevangreen
Guest
for a person to convert to the mormons church they must give up jesus because he has already made a church on earth when he was alive, the mormons church is another fake church that dosent mean the people are not nice or that there not going
to heaven
to heaven
M
mormonboy
Guest
That just is funny…
In the Catholic church, where does the need to have a pope come from?
N
NewSeeker
Guest
Parker,
Yes, the Catholic Church does suit me well. Besides what I’ve already mentioned, other things that appealed to me are the fact that the Eucharist (the bread and the wine) really is Jesus, as he promised, and that I can approach him and receive him sacramentally so he can work on me from the inside out. I love the fact that that sacred rite is at the end of Mass, and that everything else points to it, prepares for it, and leads up to it. It is the culmination of our worship, rather than having it placed midway between announcements and talks from teens and other ward members, almost as if Jesus is just part of the story, instead of the whole story. I also love that when Jesus comes to us during Mass we all kneel, rather than just sit there comfortably on padded pews with our legs crossed. It seems to me that Catholic worship truly is worship, of a God who not only demands our worship, but deserves it. We should kneel before our God. This is how Gods people have always worshipped God, until European Protestants (and their American descendants) did away with the practice, making God out to be our pal or, in the case of Mormonism, our elder brother.
Those are a few of the other things I love about my Catholic faith. Thanks for the kind words, Parker. Peace and God’s blessings to you as well!
NS
P
ParkerD
Guest
Religio71,
-sealing for time and eternity:
Matthew 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Malachi 4:5 ¶ Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
-the need for temples:
Malachi 3: 1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.
2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap:
3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.
4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years.
Isaiah 2:1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
(It is clear from Old Testament common usage that “mountain of the Lord” and “house of the God of Jacob” refer to a holy place, a place set apart from the world.)
-the pre-mortal existence:
Jeremiah 1:4 Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
6 Then said I, Ah, Lord God! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
7 ¶ But the Lord said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
8 Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord.
9 Then the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.
10 See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.
Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
By the way, Religio, that means you were there also, shouting for joy.
R
Religio71
Guest
thanks. What about the Prophet being the head of the Church? Is there evidence of this in the Bible and/or writings from the primitive Church? Or that Peter was an Apostle and a Prophet? Or that there is also a Heavenly Mother? Forget three tiers of Heaven, I remember where that is from. Thanks again.
M
mormonboy
Guest
The fact that the there was a head leader is our proof there was/still is prophets… Moses, Abraham, Isaiah, etc. There was always a head leader of the primitive organization. Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
3 kingdoms of glory
1 Corinthians 15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory
R
Religio71
Guest
thanks but does that mean that the Prophets were above the Apostles? Is this historical/biblical evidence that Peter was not only an Apostle, but a Prophet? Also what about the Heavenly Mother, is there evidence that the early Church believed in the Heavenly Mother?
M
mormonboy
Guest
Joshua was a prophet, he chose his twelve… They worked under his direction, while even the prophet was directed by God.
Joshua 4:4
Then Joshua called the twelve men, whom he had prepared of the children of Israel, out of every tribe a man:
"Jesus was in technical terms considered the prophet because it was organized by him even though we know Jesus was more than a prophet. He called his twelve and ordained them according to John 15:16
(Jesus was talking directly to the apostles)
“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my dname, he may give it you.”
Ephesians 2:20-21
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
In answering your question about Peter, a prophet must be given the “keys” as said in Mathew 16:19
“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
I cannot answer the question on heavenly mother, that will require me to do a little bit of research… I am sorry… I will let you know what I can find or maybe another LDS can answer that for you on this forum.
N
NewSeeker
Guest
Modern LDS church leaders frequently write such things like “Go the temple and be sealed to your spouse for time and all eternity.” The proof texts mentioned on this thread regarding the importance of temples (as well as the other unique LDS doctrines, e.g. prophets, degrees of glory, priesthood keys), are all very vague and can be interpreted many different ways to support many different points of view. For instance, 1 Cor 15 mentions Celestial and Terrestrial in relation to the bodies we will receive in the resurrection, but this is interpreted by Mormons to mean that Paul was referring to kingdoms - even though the word kingdom is not mentioned in the text. The verse does not come out and say “Celestial Kingdom” and “Terrestrial Kingdom”, as Mormons hope it would. All of the LDS proof texts in this thread are of a similar character: very vague in relation to LDS doctrine, and hardly definitive in a discussion of whether the first Christians believed what Mormons believe. If temple marriage and the endowment were part of early Christian temple practice, then I would expect clear reference to those practices to be found somewhere in the NT greek, or the greek and latin writings of the early Church fathers. Where is the greek phrase translated as “temple marriage” or “degrees of glory” or “first presidency” or “heavenly mother” in the earliest Christian writings? If those are crucial doctrines of true Christianity, as Mormons claim, then why are those terms completely absent in the ancient documents? If Mormonism is true, why would the first Christians never talk about or make reference any of those crucial doctrines, except in apparently vague and unclear terms - unlike modern LDS church leaders, who make clear and obvious reference to these doctrines as a matter of course in their sermons and writings. The fact is, there is nothing whatsoever in any of those early sources that clearly support the idea that early Christians were proto-Mormons. Instead, there are only a few proof texts that don’t necessarily mean the things Mormons think they mean (e.g. reference to celestial and terrestrial bodies becomes reference to celestial and terrestrial kingdoms in the Mormon mind, though the word kingdom isn’t even mentioned by Paul in the original greek text).
So - I’d still like to know who among the first Christians wrote specifically and unequivocally about temple marriage, degrees of glory, the importance of the endowment, church organization that includes a First Presidency, and other unique LDS doctrines?
NS
So - I’d still like to know who among the first Christians wrote specifically and unequivocally about temple marriage, degrees of glory, the importance of the endowment, church organization that includes a First Presidency, and other unique LDS doctrines?
NS
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
In the screwed up world of mormonism, lack of these writings indicate the Catholic Church removed them. Because you know, that has always been the goal of the Church, to remove as much as possible in order that mormonism could be “restored”.
P
ParkerD
Guest
Religio71,
If you re-read Acts 10, you will note that an angel told Cornelius to go to Peter to know “what thou oughtest to do” since he was a “devout man”, though a Gentile. Peter has a vision prior to Cornelius’ visit. It is a prophetic vision, a revelatory vision about the Gentiles’ acceptance in the eyes of God: “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” (v. 15)
Peter and Cornelius finally meet, and Cornelius kneels because he misunderstands Peter’s role, and Peter corrects him:
25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
27 And as he talked with him, he went in, and found many that were come together.
28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
29 Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?
30 And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing,
31 And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.
32 Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.
33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.
34 ¶ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
Peter soon realizes that this assembly of Gentiles has had the Holy Ghost poured out on them, and realizes that they need to be baptized, so he says:
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.
This experience was very important in the primitive Church. Christ was (and still is) the leader of the Church, its living Head, but Peter was the one whom Christ had selected as the first apostle, and had had the vision with James and John which no other apostles had (Matthew 17:1-9). Peter received the doctrinal change that the gospel should now be freely given to the Gentiles. This was the pattern for revelation to guide the Church.
N
NewSeeker
Guest
…it also supports the pattern of Apostolic Succession, with Peter as the first Pope. The verse can be used to support either view. It would be helpful if Peter was referred to as “The Prophet” and as a member of “The First Presidency”. The lack of such terminology is not encouraging to the LDS view.
NS
NS
N
NewSeeker
Guest
True, the verse also does not say Pope Peter. But the evidence from Acts (and Paul’s letters and the writings of the early church fathers) lend more weight to the idea of a gradual emergence of a hierarchical Church with Bishops and Deacons at the helm (i.e. Catholic) rather than a church given whole and entire by Jesus with a First Presidency at the helm.
NS
NS
L
LDSGuy
Guest
and yet we don’t find the words Trinity, Bible, Pope, etc. in the Bible. Peter was the first prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ, and we continue to have apostles and prophets.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
False, as they are.
- Status