Conversion to Mormonism?

[evanfaust]

I did the opposite. Raised LDS and found Mormonism to be shallow, lacking in meat, short on answers, long on directives, and illogical.

Why anyone would leave the Eucharist for Mormonism is beyond my comprehension. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, on your list that doesn’t exist in the Word of God, made present at every Mass.

Wonder Bread and water is how you starve your soul.

Rebecca,

I was starving and very hungry spiritually for 21 years in the Catholic faith, and because I was hungry I used all my energy to find food for my soul …and when I found the LDS Church I feasted in the spirit of the Lord and had in abundance. I am well fed even till this day.

But if you feel happy and are spiritually fed in the Catholic faith, then you should stay there, but for you to say that Mormons are starving is not true. How can you feel what they feel? It is impossible. Millions of Mormons are happy and well fed spiritually fed. To say otherwise is not to use empathy.

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?
Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?
Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?
Do you continue to add to the cannon of scriptures?
And of course there are many other things that you do not have. The list is very long.

 

[Stephen168]

I was starving and very hungry spiritually for 21 years in the Catholic faith,…

……I become a convert to the Mormon Church when I was 21 years old:

Beautiful Theology

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?
Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?
Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?
Do you continue to add to the cannon of scriptures?

This isn’t theology and it isn’t Christian.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

If Christ was speaking literally, then how would you explain the following verses:

Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

Does it literally mean that when we eat of the bread of Christ we will never be hungry again? Does it mean that when we drink of his cup we will never be thirsty again? …And by the way, being thirsty implies “water” and not wine, which is another argument in favor of symbolism.

The entire meaning is metaphorical, symbolic and spiritual…no implication of literal meaning here.

Some Jews and disciples were shocked of his words because eating blood was not accepted according to the laws of Moses.

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Does it literally mean that if we do not partake of the bread of Christ we will have no life in us? Of course “life in you” means spiritual life and partaking the bread is also a spiritual meaning, which is accepting the Christ and his gospel. He clarifies the spiritual meaning of his words even further when he says in verse 63

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

I think everyone would agree here that that flesh on its own profits nothing. But Christ’s flesh, we can all agree, was not ordinary flesh, was it? He makes the very explicit point that the “bread” is not just some symbolic understanding of Christ, but his very body:

"I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I* am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.**”* (4ohn 6:48-51)

We all affirm and believe, both LDS and mainstream Christians, that Jesus truly gave his body for the life of the world. He didn’t spiritually die, he actually died. His body was truly slain. And that’s the importance of Holy Communion - it affirms the truth of the actual death and resurrection of Christ.

You are right in stating that the Jewish leaders and many disciples were horrified because they thought he was speaking about some form of cannibalism. And that’s where “the spirit profiteth nothing.” Ordinary flesh is of no use, but Christ’s glorious resurrection body is not just regular flesh.

But here’s the interesting part - the disciples that abandoned Jesus left*** after *** he spoke of the flesh “profiting nothing.” He didn’t seek to dissuade them differently. Jesus is usually quick at clearing up such misunderstandings, as is John himself with other difficult concepts throughout his gospel.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Rebecca,

I was starving and very hungry spiritually for 21 years in the Catholic faith, and because I was hungry I used all my energy to find food for my soul …and when I found the LDS Church I feasted in the spirit of the Lord and had in abundance. I am well fed even till this day.

But if you feel happy and are spiritually fed in the Catholic faith, then you should stay there, but for you to say that Mormons are starving is not true. How can you feel what they feel? It is impossible. Millions of Mormons are happy and well fed spiritually fed. To say otherwise is not to use empathy.

I’m sure you can understand where she is coming from. If the LDS Church is true, then don’t you have an obligation to show the restored gospel to non-Mormons? It is for their (our?) benefit that you disseminate the restored gospel as Christ commanded.

Similarly, Christians on this forum (and I will freely admit that many of us have been fairly aggressive, probably too much although I speak on my own behalf and for no one else) are motivated by a belief that traditional Christian theology is the truth and that those who don’t have it should come to it.

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?
Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?
Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?
Do you continue to add to the cannon of scriptures?
And of course there are many other things that you do not have. The list is very long.

May I just ask you, Evanfaust - if the faith was “once and for all handed down to the saints” (Jude), then why would we need continued revelation from God? Isn’t the LDS prophet/president theoretically the only one who actually receives revelation from God? If the LDS restored the primitive Church, then why don’t the other apostles receive direct revelation as well? Why is there a need to continue to expand the canon of scripture?

And, on a side note, separate from your list of questions - do Mormons believe that God knows the future? Just curious.

Thanks.

 

[twopekinguys]

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?
Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?
Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?
Do you continue to add to the cannon of scriptures?
And of course there are many other things that you do not have. The list is very long.

The mormon church doesn’t have 12 apostles. There are 15. Not a number used in the Bible anywhere. So, your chuch hierarchy is non Biblical. Also, the Pope is chosen with guidance of the Holy Spirit, and not by seniority.

The Pope does not claim to talk to God like mormon prophets do. He is however, guided by the Holy Spirit, and maintains a constant, unchanging doctrine. He is infallible when speaking on matters of faith and morals. That cannot be said for the mormon hierarchy.

The Catholic Church “produced” the Bible. What more do you want? Can you produce the golden plates?

Remember when Christ said “It is finished”? Kind of self explanatory.

Keep going with your list. If these are your top 4, then the rest shouldn’t be hard to refute.

 

[evanfaust]

That is an interesting story! I appreciate you sharing that. Why did your friend suggest Mormonism? And why did you end up thinking that the Roman Catholic Church was not the true Church?

What convinces you about the initial vision of Joseph Smith? How do you handle criticism that the visions/story changed?

What was your personal revelation that convinced you of the LDS? I hope I’m not pressing too much, I’m just genuinely curious.

Fabius,

My atheist friend told me that he did not believe in God and never joined any Church, but if he ever decided to join any Church he would consider the Mormon Church. He said he liked the way people in the LDS Church treated him with respect despite his ideas and unbelief. He also mentioned some aspects of the theology, which were interesting.
That made me very curious and interested coming from an Atheist.

The Catholic Church never inspired me. Rituals, repetitions of prayers, many images, Christ was not being the center, praying to the saints. The word saint in the Catholic Church has a different meaning from what you see in the scriptures, history of the Catholic Church, celibate and other doctrines…I never felt the spirit of God there.

My spirit was very sensitive and I was very, very pure in all senses. That, plus the fact that I was very hungry for the truth, cause me to see the truth when I searched for it. The manifestation of the spirit was beyond anything I expected. I will not say the details of my conversion here. I think you understand why…this was a sacred experience and I know that there are individuals here that will try to tear down the truth and not honestly seek it. Even Christ said something about not throwing pearls to the pigs or sacred things to dogs. There is a lot of spiritual manifestation in the Mormon Church, in the Temples, in the personal lives…many people just share them with those that are reverent, respectful, and spiritual.

As far as the different versions of the first vision…I accept it because when you tell a story, many times you omit certain details. For example, I have written my personal experience several times and I have discovered as I was reading them, that I omitted certain details, and some other times I completed omit one very important aspect of it.

When you look at the story of the Paul’s conversion you will see some apparent contradictions. So, you cannot reject certain story just because there are several versions of it until it is refined and complete. For example, we know that the gospels were written many decades after it happened. Who knows how many people wrote the story of Christ and those that compiled it might have had several drafts in front of them before writing the final story that we have today.

– Acts 9:7 –
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

– Acts 22:9 –
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

–Acts 26:14 –
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me. . .

 

[Stephen168]

The list is very long.

The same guys that said the Book of Mormon was about the source of ALL the American Indians also invented:
exaltation,
polygamy,
Melchizedek Priesthood,
excommunicating Apostles,
prophets leading the church,
blood atonement, and
water baptism on behalf of the dead.

None of these have ever been Christian practices or teachings. Mormonism is an invention of Joseph Smith not a restoration.

 

[andrewstx]

Edwin Hatch was Anglican, so, that skews his views quite a bit. Especially when you consider that the book was made from his edited lectures, and was published after his death. Since they were “edited” after his death, you really can’t rely on them now can you?

Carl Jung was a practicing clinician and considered himself to be a scientist, much of his life’s work was spent exploring tangential areas such as Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and sociology, as well as literature and the arts

Not really a theologian now is he? He was more noted for dream analysis than anything else.

Wiki can be your friend.

What makes this even more odd is that the large majority of Anglicans have always accepted the Real Presence but without defineing it exactly as Transubstantiation. But also rejecting the symbolic only teaching of Zwingli.

Was Mr Hatch more recent? It seems that nowadays everything goes in Anglicanism.

 

[mlz]

And you have no idea…or maybe you do…how wonderful it is.

I go to Mass and I never want to leave the Building…so much reverence…so much peace and Jesus is THERE…

Wow

Oh yes, I agree! His presence is so REAL in the Catholic Church!!!

mlz

 

[Butaperson]

I know that Mormons could be considered to have some weird ideological ideas from a cradle Catholic perspective, but reading this thread I wonder if we aren’t more alike than we think.

We agree on the central authority of the Church, which sets us apart from mainstream Protestant denominations. I wonder if maybe that’s not why so many people are saying that it was either the Mormon church or the Catholic church.

My own grandmother, born and raised and forever hard-core Catholic, once said that if she weren’t Catholic, she would be Mormon. I agree with that. She said it was about having a family-oriented religion, but for me, I think it more has to do with the fact that in order for a church to survive, it needs a central authority - otherwise you get splits and branches and factions left and right and up and down.
I spent a few months as a Sola Scriptura Protestant and I’m not afraid to say, it almost ruined my life. I’ve never been more confused about my life because there were about a dozen or more different churches all telling me that THEIR interpretation of the Bible is correct, don’t listen to the other fifty-freaking-thousand churches that are trying to tell you about a DIFFERENT story. I was a brand-new Christian living in an atheist household in an atheist portion of America with nothing but the internet to hold me afloat…and trying to figure out the Bible under those circumstances was literally impossible. I figured out, eventually, that there needs to be a center of the church that has to authority to tell you what the heck is going on.

There’s two prominent churches, as far as I can tell, with that sort of central authority: the Morman church and the Catholic church. Once you realize that Sola Scriptura is completely flawed, you’ve only got two places to turn.
If it were not for how I felt about Jesus, I could have just as easily turned to Mormonism as Catholicism. I really just needed a church that could help keep the chaos to a minimum, which Mormonism does, from what I see, just as well as Catholicism.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Fabius,

My atheist friend told me that he did not believe in God and never joined any Church, but if he ever decided to join any Church he would consider the Mormon Church. He said he liked the way people in the LDS Church treated him with respect despite his ideas and unbelief. He also mentioned some aspects of the theology, which were interesting.
That made me very curious and interested coming from an Atheist.

Thank you for your story. This is very interesting. Has your friend ever reconsidered his atheism?

My spirit was very sensitive and I was very, very pure in all senses. That, plus the fact that I was very hungry for the truth, cause me to see the truth when I searched for it. The manifestation of the spirit was beyond anything I expected. I will not say the details of my conversion here. I think you understand why…this was a sacred experience and I know that there are individuals here that will try to tear down the truth and not honestly seek it. Even Christ said something about not throwing pearls to the pigs or sacred things to dogs. There is a lot of spiritual manifestation in the Mormon Church, in the Temples, in the personal lives…many people just share them with those that are reverent, respectful, and spiritual.

I think that’s fair enough. What do you think about people who have had spiritual experiences in other churches who claim to be convinced of their faith as well? Do you find them to be less legitimate? I think on some level we all have some kind of sensation that we individually interpret to be the Holy Spirit, myself included (although I try to think that it is also confirmed by my own research). I’m not attempting to dismantle your testimony, I’m just curious, because ultimately, if we reduce our faiths to an experience, then conversion either way becomes impossible, don’t you think?

As far as the different versions of the first vision…I accept it because when you tell a story, many times you omit certain details. For example, I have written my personal experience several times and I have discovered as I was reading them, that I omitted certain details, and some other times I completed omit one very important aspect of it.

I suppose it would depend on the details. I mean though, whether you saw the Father and Jesus or just one of them would perhaps be too significant of a discrepancy, no? Is that a reasonable question? What do you think?

When you look at the story of the Paul’s conversion you will see some apparent contradictions. So, you cannot reject certain story just because there are several versions of it until it is refined and complete. For example, we know that the gospels were written many decades after it happened. Who knows how many people wrote the story of Christ and those that compiled it might have had several drafts in front of them before writing the final story that we have today.

– Acts 9:7 –
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

– Acts 22:9 –
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

–Acts 26:14 –
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me. . .

I would say this is a fair assessment. My only objection here is that the issue in Acts is more a translation one more than anything else. The original Greek word for “hearing” has been considered to mean both “hearing” and “understanding” which accounts for that discrepancy. Some newer versions clear that up. But I get what you’re stating.

Thank you.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?

LDS so called apostles do not meet the criteria set out in Acts for a member of the 12.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?

Can you give anything an LDS “apostle” has given as revelation since Joseph Smith. Smith at least talked like a prophet, he preached and lived a lot of stuff that no one else had, like marrying women with current living husbands. No where in Christian or Jewish history was that ever under any circumstance allowed. So where has an LDS prophet ever actually revealed anything.

 

[evanfaust]

This isn’t theology and it isn’t Christian.

I did not get into the theology. I said that Mormons have a beautiful theology. For example, the theology that the human intelligence (light and truth) co-existed with God, that we are offspring of God in spirit and that we all lived in heaven in spiritual form before being born in human flesh, that mortality is a way for us to grow and increase our happiness when resurrected, that we will be resurrected with different degrees of glories depending on how we behaved on the earth…this is an example of the beautiful theology I talked about.

The Bible does not contain all the revealed truth about God. It has the basic principles of the gospel, which can give us salvation. As you know the Bible tells us that Christ and the apostles knew things that were not passed on and of course Christ knew things that were not disseminated at that time either.

Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written John 21:25.

“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now” (John 16:12) and promised them, “The time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall show you plainly of the Father” (John 16:25)

 

[Old_Ephriam]

Can you give anything an LDS “apostle” has given as revelation since Joseph Smith. Smith at least talked like a prophet, he preached and lived a lot of stuff that no one else had, like marrying women with current living husbands. No where in Christian or Jewish history was that ever under any circumstance allowed. So where has an LDS prophet ever actually revealed anything.

There have been times where LDS apostles have given revelations. There is the revelation that the records of Christ’s visit to the lost tribes was soon coming that was announced by Elder Talmage in the October 1916 conference. There was also another prophecy about the descruction of Boston that was announced at the dedication of the Logan temple. So it does happen.

But I will grant you that it has really fallen off in the past 80 or so years.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca,

I was starving and very hungry spiritually for 21 years in the Catholic faith, and because I was hungry I used all my energy to find food for my soul …and when I found the LDS Church I feasted in the spirit of the Lord and had in abundance. I am well fed even till this day.

But if you feel happy and are spiritually fed in the Catholic faith, then you should stay there, but for you to say that Mormons are starving is not true. How can you feel what they feel? It is impossible. Millions of Mormons are happy and well fed spiritually fed. To say otherwise is not to use empathy.

Well it is all about feelings for you. It isn’t for me.

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?

The foundation of Christ’s Church are the twelve Apostles. So-called Mormon Apostles do not meet the criteria laid out in Acts. Your “Apostles” are pretenders.

Does the Pope receive revelation from God like Peter used to?

We believe Christ’s Church is led by the Holy Spirit, which is, revelation. Do we believe God MUST work in exactly the same way ALL THE TIME? No.

Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?

Ummm, where do you think the New Testament came from? O yeah, the Mormons that were around in the Early Church.

Do you continue to add to the cannon of scriptures?

No, and neither does the Mormon church. Catholics believe the Apostolic faith is The Faith, handed on once, for all. We are not sola scriptura. Jesus is God’s Word fully and perfectly revealed. I’ll ask you what I ask all Mormons, 'What did Jesus leave out?"

And of course there are many other things that you do not have. The list is very long.

Only in your imagination.

 

[iepuras]

Fabius,

My atheist friend told me that he did not believe in God and never joined any Church, but if he ever decided to join any Church he would consider the Mormon Church. He said he liked the way people in the LDS Church treated him with respect despite his ideas and unbelief. He also mentioned some aspects of the theology, which were interesting.
That made me very curious and interested coming from an Atheist.

I think Mormonism has a lot more in common with atheism than meets the eye. The LDS concept of God (a human being inside time and space) and the atheist’s belief that God does not exist both rely on metaphysical materialism. Mormonism and atheism simply are not possible in classical aristotlean/thomist metaphysics. The god of Mormonism is simply a highly evolved human being.

The Catholic Church never inspired me. Rituals, repetitions of prayers, many images, Christ was not being the center, praying to the saints. The word saint in the Catholic Church has a different meaning from what you see in the scriptures, history of the Catholic Church, celibate and other doctrines…I never felt the spirit of God there.

Have you been to the LDS temple? The masonic rituals performed in the LDS temple are highly repititious. It is exactly the same each time! Many of the older temples have masonic images carved on the outside and paintings of the earth on the inside. Other than Jehovah being a character in the endowment video who simply relays information between Elohim and Michael, Peter, James and John, how is Jesus Christ the focus of the temple rituals?

If your ward talks about Jesus every Sunday and focuses on His words in the Bible rather than recent conference talks, then that is quite rare. In my 35 years in the LDS church, we rarely discussed Jesus Christ. In fact, most Sundays, the only time I heard the name of Jesus was in prayers that were prayed to Heavenly Father in the name of Jesus. In my last ward’s Primary, they focus on Joseph Smith’s birthday rather than Christmas each December. I also know of wards who heard about missionary work rather than Jesus Christ this past Easter.

As far as the different versions of the first vision…I accept it because when you tell a story, many times you omit certain details. For example, I have written my personal experience several times and I have discovered as I was reading them, that I omitted certain details, and some other times I completed omit one very important aspect of it.

Are you aware that the multiple versions of the First Vision vary from Joseph seeing God the Father and Jesus Christ to seeing only Jesus to seeing only angels? Those are pretty big differences. That is not forgetting minor details.

When you look at the story of the Paul’s conversion you will see some apparent contradictions. So, you cannot reject certain story just because there are several versions of it until it is refined and complete. For example, we know that the gospels were written many decades after it happened. Who knows how many people wrote the story of Christ and those that compiled it might have had several drafts in front of them before writing the final story that we have today.

– Acts 9:7 –
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

– Acts 22:9 –
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

–Acts 26:14 –
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me. . .

Well, isn’t this apparent contradicition also problematic for the LDS church? Don’t Mormons accept the Bible? They do except if anything is “wrong” or “inconvenient” in the Bible, it is tossed aside as an “incorrect translation” or something was added to or removed from the Bible by conspiring men. Very convenient that parts of the Bible can be tossed aside if they are not convenient for LDS teachings.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Fabius,

My atheist friend told me that he did not believe in God and never joined any Church, but if he ever decided to join any Church he would consider the Mormon Church. He said he liked the way people in the LDS Church treated him with respect despite his ideas and unbelief. He also mentioned some aspects of the theology, which were interesting.
That made me very curious and interested coming from an Atheist.

I was raised LDS (BIC), by the time I was 21 I was an atheist. Why? Because I found the Mormon claims and teachings to be absolutely unbelievable. But, this was in the 1970’s, before African Americans could be ordained and I was the last generation to be taught that Lamanites were cursed with dark skin. Do you think I believed it? No. Neither do Mormons today. The difference is, I remember when the LDS Church taught its racist doctrine as revelation from God. Do you accept LDS revelation because it makes you feel good? I reject it because it makes me feel creepy, AND, logically/scientifically, God cursing people has nothing to do with skin color. Was I taught falsely? Did your church make a mistake? If so has it apologized for that mistake? It hasn’t. It maintains God desired a group of people to not be near to Him, as Mormons believe, just your church doesn’t know why. Well…where’s the revelation on that? Your God reveals women should be careful to not wear more than one earring in each year, but is silent on overt and institutional racism. Who is this fickle God you worship anyway?

The Catholic Church never inspired me. Rituals, repetitions of prayers, many images, Christ was not being the center, praying to the saints. The word saint in the Catholic Church has a different meaning from what you see in the scriptures, history of the Catholic Church, celibate and other doctrines…I never felt the spirit of God there.

Everything, and I mean everything, in the Catholic Church is centered on Christ. That you didn’t learn this, and realize it, but instead are relying on typical anti-Catholic Mormon responses, says to be you have been deceived, and are still walking around like you haven’t.

The Truth is found in Jesus Christ, not Joseph Smith.

 

[iepuras]

I know that Mormons could be considered to have some weird ideological ideas from a cradle Catholic perspective, but reading this thread I wonder if we aren’t more alike than we think.

We agree on the central authority of the Church, which sets us apart from mainstream Protestant denominations. I wonder if maybe that’s not why so many people are saying that it was either the Mormon church or the Catholic church.

My own grandmother, born and raised and forever hard-core Catholic, once said that if she weren’t Catholic, she would be Mormon. I agree with that. She said it was about having a family-oriented religion, but for me, I think it more has to do with the fact that in order for a church to survive, it needs a central authority - otherwise you get splits and branches and factions left and right and up and down.
I spent a few months as a Sola Scriptura Protestant and I’m not afraid to say, it almost ruined my life. I’ve never been more confused about my life because there were about a dozen or more different churches all telling me that THEIR interpretation of the Bible is correct, don’t listen to the other fifty-freaking-thousand churches that are trying to tell you about a DIFFERENT story. I was a brand-new Christian living in an atheist household in an atheist portion of America with nothing but the internet to hold me afloat…and trying to figure out the Bible under those circumstances was literally impossible. I figured out, eventually, that there needs to be a center of the church that has to authority to tell you what the heck is going on.

There’s two prominent churches, as far as I can tell, with that sort of central authority: the Morman church and the Catholic church. Once you realize that Sola Scriptura is completely flawed, you’ve only got two places to turn.
If it were not for how I felt about Jesus, I could have just as easily turned to Mormonism as Catholicism. I really just needed a church that could help keep the chaos to a minimum, which Mormonism does, from what I see, just as well as Catholicism.

They may seem similar on the surface, but Catholicism and Mormonism are miles apart. Mormonism assumes a materialist metaphysics and their god dwells inside time and space. He co-exists eternally with all matter and the intelligences of all human beings. He is a highly evolved human being. The God Christians worship is outside time and space and created everything out of nothing.

There are plenty of other false prophets besides Joseph Smith who have claimed to have God’s authority to restore His true church. What makes the LDS church’s claims more valid than the claims of the Baha’i, Jehovah’s Witnesses or La Luz del Mundo?

 

[iepuras]

I did not get into the theology. I said that Mormons have a beautiful theology. For example, the theology that** the human intelligence (light and truth) co-existed with God, that we are offspring of God in spirit **and that we all lived in heaven in spiritual form before being born in human flesh, that mortality is a way for us to grow and increase our happiness when resurrected, that we will be resurrected with different degrees of glories depending on how we behaved on the earth…this is an example of the beautiful theology I talked about.

How can we be the spirit offspring of Elohim if we co-existed with him as intelligences?

I understand why you believe the LDS plan of salvation is beautiful. I did too. In fact, it was the last thing I had to let go of when I realized that Joseph Smith was a false prophet. It all sounds good on the surface.

However, as a woman, I dreaded the celestial kingdom deep down inside. I was single for a very long time in the LDS church. I suffered immensely during my 20’s because I was looking forward to being assigned as a plural wife and having to share a husband in the celestial kingdom. I was filled with dread and sadness. It didn’t get that much better when I finally married at the ripe old age of 30. I dreaded having to share my husband in the celestial kingdom. I also dreaded being given to another man if my husband wasn’t “faithful”. My husband was never a “good priesthood holder”. He hated going to church, hated the temple even more and never really believed it all. Even though I was married and had my temple sealing, I also knew that there was a good likelihood of being separated from my husband for eternity anyway and having to share a husband. How is that beautiful? It’s down right sickening.