Conversion to Mormonism?

[iepuras]

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.

Joseph F. Smith announced his dream of missionary work among the dead back in 1918 and it is now section 138 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

Official Declaration #2 where blacks were given the priesthood was more of a negative revelation. From what I have read, Pres. Kimball and the apostles basically decided to do it and told God that if He didn’t want them to do it, He needed to let them know.

The heavens seem to have been closed to LDS prophets for almost 100 years or so.

 

[TexanKnight]

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.

That is odd. How can anyone be spiritually fed when bread and water are offered instead of the Body and Blood of Christ? How can one be spiritually fed from a church who has no clue what its true teachings are?

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.

It is not always about feeling. If it were, then everyone at every church would be in the true church because they felt it so.

Do you have twelve apostles in the Catholic Church?

First, no…and neither does the LDS Church. You have FIFTEEN you CALL apostles. Not 12. Second, please show me exactly where Jesus said the Church must remain small and only have 12 apostles?

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

Show me where Jesus said one must have revelations. And while we are on revelations, do they count if the revelations say Adam is God? That you must build houses for js? that Cumorah is THE place of the final battle? that you MUST do polygamy? That blacks can;t hold the priesthood?

Has the Catholic Church produced scriptures?

You mean that quote the Bible and that speak of a place no one can find where people lived that left no evidence, in cities that never existed? And that the Scriptures had to be written with a guy looking into a hat using rocks he stole from someone?

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

I agree. We do not have MMM. We do not have ADAM/God theory. We do not have a god that was once a sinful man, we do not have a Jesus who was conceived by God having actual relations with Mary, we do not have polygamy, the doctrine which STILL exists, we do not have constantly changing doctrine…yes…the list is long

 

[truthseeker32]

EvanFaust, I want to speak to you in truth and love as someone who was raised LDS, seriously considered conversion to Roman Catholicism for years, and ultimately ended up an Orthodox Christian. I pray that I will not offend you in what I have to say.

I used to be Catholic, my entire family and relatives were all Catholics…but the Catholic environment did not answer many of my philosophical questions. My soul was not supportive of what I saw and what I felt.

First, I find this statement striking since Roman Catholicism has one of the richest, if not the richest, philosophical traditions among religious denominations. I wonder if the lack of answers you experienced was more a result of your personal Catholic upbringing since we all know how poor Catholic catechesis can be.

You introduce “feeling” here as well, which is central to the Mormon faith experience, but I would like to point out that feelings do not necessarily coincide with truth. Often times we do not like what is good and holy because we have conditioned ourselves to be not holy and not good in certain aspects. I make no judgments of you; I simply wish to offer you something to think about.

I knew there were many Christian Churches, but their theology, even though all based on the Bible, were conflicting. On top of that there was the question of authority from God in my mind. I sensed that the true Church of God would have manifestations from Heaven, angels, celestial beings, new revelations.

This is completely subjective. It sounds as though you decided beforehand what the true church should look like according to your own standards instead of being open to what the true church really looks like, regardless of whether it meets your personal beliefs and desires.

My own experience is a good example. Before and after I left the LDS church I was quite liberal in my perspectives. I was pro choice and pro gay marriage, but I had always loved seeking out what is true and having debates with others so I engaged in a series of conversations with people of various perspectives. Along the way I began to see that, even though I had believed and sensed that gay marriage and a woman’s right to choose were good things, I eventually became intellectually convinced that I was wrong, regardless of how badly I felt otherwise.

Well…this story can go on forever, but I will try to list some of the many reasons why I become a convert to the Mormon Church when I was 21 years old:

Beautiful Theology

Completely subjective. What is beautiful theology to you might be completely atrocious and erroneous to someone else. The only good reason to believe something is because it is capital-t True!

Appearance of many celestial beings to many Mormons

This is hearsay. It may or may not be true. Further, even if such beings have appeared to Mormons this doesn’t make Mormonism unique. Various faith traditions have similar accounts.

Visit of God the Father and His son Jesus Christ to a young prophet

Once again, this is something that may or may not have happened. Also, I am sure you are aware that Joseph Smith gave several versions of this encounter. What is fascinating is each version of his story seemed to coincide with what he believed at the time. For instance, during Smith’s Unitarian phase he spoke of only one being appearing to him.

Visitation of old Prophets and Apostles of the Bible

It concerns me that you base so much of your faith on things that may not have actually happened. Out of intellectual honesty you should probably believe all the other religious people who claim to have had visions of prophets and other heavenly beings.

Powerful personal revelation confirming Mormonism to be the only true church

I have had powerful personal revelation that Mormonism is certainly not the true church. How do you respond in light of this?

Mormon doctrines corroborated by the Bible, early fathers, etc

Only if misquoted, read out of context, or mistranslated.

Prophets and Apostles as part of the Church

This is a circular argument. You believe the true church must have apostles and prophets because your church says the true church must have apostles and prophets because your church says the true church must have apostles and prophets because your church says the true church must have apostles and prophets because your church says the true church must have… well, I think you get the point.

Continuous revelations from God

That is conveniently timed, such as lifting polygamy so Utah can become a state, or lifting the priesthood ban so BYU can be part of the NCAA and get with the times. It isn’t much of a revelation if it happens after everyone else has already figured out it is the right thing to do.

Well…the list is long…but I think you get the idea.

What I get from all your reasons is that they are completely subjective and anyone of any faith tradition can refute your truth claims simply by claiming that their subjective experience has led them in a different direction. Unfortunately, “It might not be true for you but it is true for me” is completely baseless and relativistic. I hope you can provide some reasons more rooted in objectivity that we can actually discuss.

God bless

 

[SpeSalvi]

For being a lifelong Catholic before converting to Mormonism, it seems you know very little of the Catholic Faith, Evanfaust.

I seem to run into Catholics on a daily basis that have been poorly catechized or were only really culturally Catholic, and their view of Catholicism is incredibly skewed because of it. Oftentimes, if I didn’t know better I would think the Catholicism I know and the Catholicism they knew were completely different churches.

I would encourage you to really look into what the Catholic Faith teaches (and has taught since the days of Christ) before you start claiming that Mormonism is superior.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I sensed that the true Church of God would have manifestations from Heaven, angels, celestial beings, new revelations.

Were you not aware, during your time as a Catholic, that Catholic history is replete with Heavenly visions and visitations, of Jesus Christ, Mary, angels, etc? Indeed, there aremany more examples of this in Catholicism than in Mormonism.

 

[LivingWaters7]

The list I provided is just a few things that popped up in my mind. I could probably come up with hundreds or even thousands of reasons whey I am Mormon…but I can tell you that the spiritual happiness that I experienced and still do cannot be described with words…all the good and inspiration to be good and the love I acquired towards my fellowman came in developing my faith around Mormon Theology…can a bad tree bear good fruits?

Many people in many religions say the same thing, and ask that same question. So I guess there are no bad trees then, right?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Edwin Hatch asserts that “it is among the Gnostics that there appears for the first time an attempt to realize the change of the elements to the material body and blood of Christ.”

Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church, p. 308.

Perhaps you are able to provide substantiation to Hatch’s claim, which I’ve only ever seen stated by Hatch (and LDS apologists quoting this same sentence). Indeed, it makes no sense, within the context of Gnostic theology on matter, for them to believe there is a change in the bread and wine. Please provide evidence that this is the case, since I have yet to see anything in support of this claim.

 

[LivingWaters7]

The Catholic Church never inspired me. Rituals,

Ritual clearly finds precedent in ancient Jewish temple and synagogue worship. Indeed, Catholic liturgy finds its roots in ancient Jewish worship. There are many books and articles written about that.

repetitions of prayers,

Repetition of prayer is different from “vain” repetition.

many images,

Images clearly find ancient precedent in ancient Jewish temples. Further, LDS meetinghouses and temples have images.

Christ was not being the center,

Actually, Christ is at the very center of everything about Catholicism.

praying to the saints.

Catholics believe that the Heavenly saints are very much a part of the lives of the earthly saints, as we see in the Bible. Therefore, we can ask them to pray for us, just like we would ask earthly saints to pray for us.

The word saint in the Catholic Church has a different meaning from what you see in the scriptures,

Actually, the Catholic understanding is Biblical. You just don’t know what it actually is. Catholicism teaches that the Church is a “Communion of Saints”. All members of the Church, on Earth, in Purgatory, and in Heaven, are “Saints”, members of that communion, which is the Church. Some of these Heavenly saints are canonized, showing them to be examples of living Christ-like lives. This is basic Catholic teaching that you seem not to be aware of.

history of the Catholic Church, celibate and other doctrines…I never felt the spirit of God there.

What about the history? Celibacy is Biblical, and finds ancient Jewish precedent.

I’m sorry, but it seems as if you don’t really know what the Catholic Church actually teaches, and are instead relying on the old stereotypes and caricatures. Perhaps it would be helpful if you familiarize yourself with Catholic teaching if you desire to present yourself as a convincing witness of someone who purportedly left Catholicism for something better.

 

[evanfaust]

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.

One of the traditional Christian views is about the nature and definition of God, which is something that I reject. The definition of God accepted by Catholics/Protestants is very confusing, illogical and does not have common sense. The Mormon theology makes more sense and matches better what the bible tells us about it. That is another reason why I believe in the first vision.

Man was created in the image and similitude of God…Steven when being stoned saw God the father and his son at his right hand. Christ said that if you see him you see the father. He even said further that he and his father are like two men.

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? .

The word “once” as used in Jude 1:3 should be translated as “before” or “previously” to be more accurate. As proof of this, note that the same Greek word was used in verse 5 and was also translated in the KJV as “once.” The context used in verse 5 makes it clear that to interpret the use in verse two as “one time” is not correct. The KJV translates the Greek as “ye once knew this” (i.e. He knew it in the past but may have forgotten it). The New International Version confirms this by translating this same Greek word (once–verse 5) as “already,” meaning formerly.

Other scriptures confirm that many general apostasies have taken place, and that the gospel had been formerly delivered to ancient Israel following these apostasies… (Deuteronomy 9:7,25; 29:25; 30:15- 19; Judges 3:7; 1 Kings 11:2; 14:22; 2 Kings 17:7; 21:2; Psalms 106:36; Isaiah 2:8; 39; 24:5; 29:13-14; 59:2; Jerimiah 2:17; 7:11; 35:15; Ezekiel 2:3; 11:12; 22:26; Hosiah. 4:6, 17; Amos 8:11; Micah 3:11; Matthew 13:15; 15:9).
Paul taught the Galatians that “God… preached before the gospel unto Abraham”

(Galatians 3:8) and in Hebrews 4:2 he declared that, “unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them [Israel in the days of Moses… 1 Corinthians 10:4, Hebrews 3:16-17]: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it” (Hebrews 4:2). If the gospel was preached to Abraham in 2000 BC, to the people of Israel during the Exodus in 1350 BC, and then to Israel of Christ’s day, it was delivered more than one time. (See also Isaiah 40:9; 52:7; 61:1; Moses 5:58-59; 6:51-68; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 59-61; Seaich, Mormonism, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Nag Hammadi Texts, pp. 54-55).

fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/biblical-evidences-of-an-apostasy

In Rev 13:7 we see confirmation that the devil would fight the saints of the Church of Christ and defeat them. The Bible uses the word saints to refer to the members of Church. It says…”And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”

You asked why Mormon Apostles do not receive revelations…Answer: Yes, they do receive revelations; they are inspired men of God. One such revelation is the extension of the priesthood to all worthy men received in 1978. They prayed in the temple for many days and many nights and finally the revelation came and they spoke in one voice. They also receive revelations on how to assist the members, and admonish them about possible pitfalls just like Paul and Peter in their epistles to the Saints in various parts of the Church.

Why is there a need to continue to expand the canon of scripture? When there are Apostles and Prophets then there is revelation and continuous communication with God. Nowhere in the bible says that the cannon are closed. The Church is alive when there is revelation and communication with God. For example, the Book of Mormon is another testament of Christ, which is also scripture. God still has many things to reveal to man.

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

Yes, God can see the future and the prophecies are evidence of that. The prophets and apostles saw that the early Church of Christ was going to fall into apostasy. He saw the apostasy and consequently there was a need for a restoration. Both are abundantly prophesied in the Bible.

 

[evanfaust]

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

No…he never did. He is still Atheist.

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?

This is up to each person. I am sure many people are sincere in their beliefs and that is why they follow or accept a certain faith. Each one of us has a certain amount of light of truth that we acquired in heaven before we were born. Some of us acquired more or less depending on how we lived there and it also decreases or increases depending on how we live here. Many of us are deceived…this life on earth is a spiritual battle…a battle that started in heaven and continue here. No matter which faith we belong to …or even no faith at all, if we are decent and live a good life showing respect and love to people we will receive a great reward and possibly even expand our reward in the hereafter.

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?

This is the response John Tvedtness, a Catholic converted to Mormonism and a Scholar at the Mormon Church to a debate he was having:

Joseph Smith NEVER said that “he saw one being.” That is the standard interpolation used by critics such as yourself. He said that he saw “the Lord,” but didn’t say that he saw “no one but the Lord.” If I say that I saw my brother yesterday, does that exclude the idea that I may also have seen his wife? If I went to my brother’s house and his wife answered the door, but I spent the rest of my time speaking with him, would I be wrong to not mention her appearance at the door? Remember, in Joseph’s vision, the Father merely introduced the Son, and the rest of the conversation was between Christ and Joseph.

Why is it that you fault Joseph Smith for the variants in his first vision story but do not fault the apostle Paul for the more numerous variants in his first vision story?

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.

There are more variants than just the hearing part.

 

[TexanKnight]

One of the traditional Christian views is about the nature and definition of God, which is something that I reject. The definition of God accepted by Catholics/Protestants is very confusing, illogical and does not have common sense. The Mormon theology makes more sense and matches better what the bible tells us about it. That is another reason why I believe in the first vision.

lol…so, which LDS version do you want? That Adam is our God? Or that God was once a sinful man who had a god who was a sinful man who had a god who was once a sinful man ad infinitum? The LDS God is MUCH more confusing…especially since your different prophets have taught differing ideas of God

Man was created in the image and similitude of God…Steven when being stoned saw God the father and his son at his right hand. Christ said that if you see him you see the father. He even said further that he and his father are like two men.

And? You make the mistake of many heresies…you try to make God into something small you can understand

Other scriptures confirm that many general apostasies have taken place, and that the gospel had been formerly delivered to ancient Israel following these apostasies… (Deuteronomy 9:7,25; 29:25; 30:15- 19; Judges 3:7; 1 Kings 11:2; 14:22; 2 Kings 17:7; 21:2; Psalms 106:36; Isaiah 2:8; 39; 24:5; 29:13-14; 59:2; Jerimiah 2:17; 7:11; 35:15; Ezekiel 2:3; 11:12; 22:26; Hosiah. 4:6, 17; Amos 8:11; Micah 3:11; Matthew 13:15; 15:9).
Paul taught the Galatians that “God… preached before the gospel unto Abraham”

Nowhere does it say a TOTAL apostasy. Nowhere. Please do not invent scriptures.

You asked why Mormon Apostles do not receive revelations…Answer: Yes, they do receive revelations; they are inspired men of God.

Yes…like Adam/God. Like Men walk on the moon dressed like Quakers, like blacks cannot hold the priesthood until it is financially bad for them not to hold it…and on and an…

.

 

[TexanKnight]

Why is it that you fault Joseph Smith for the variants in his first vision story but do not fault the apostle Paul for the more numerous variants in his first vision story?

ah…first, js had at least NINE variations. Not the couple of Paul. And the variations we have of the js vision came FROM JS himself! The variations of Paul you try unsuccessfully to use came from Luke. Finally, the Paul effort you make was written in a different language thousands of years ago in a different country and translated. While the js lies were written in English in THIS country. So, I do not blame you for trying to compare…it is the fallback position of all Mormons when trying to defend the incredibly different versions of the js vision…

it just does not work.

 

[LivingWaters7]

One of the traditional Christian views is about the nature and definition of God, which is something that I reject. The definition of God accepted by Catholics/Protestants is very confusing, illogical and does not have common sense. The Mormon theology makes more sense and matches better what the bible tells us about it. That is another reason why I believe in the first vision.

Actually, the definition of God accepted by Catholics/Protestants is not confusing, illogical, nor does it lack common sense. The problem arises in caricatures of that doctrine, which are pretty common amongst LDS and other non-Trinitarian critics of the Trinity doctrine. Many LDS leaders and writers/apologists have actually criticized the heretical teaching of Modalism, and not the Trinity doctrine, which is always amusing.

The fact is that the Trinity doctrine matches more clearly the teachings of the Bible than the LDS teachings on God. The Trinity doctrine, in its simplest form, is that there is only one God, and there are three distinct Persons who are fully God. LDS believe many things about the Divine that are not Biblical, such as:

-the belief that the Son and Holy Ghost are literal spirit offspring of Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother
-the belief that the Father progressed to/achieved Godhood, and was therefore not always God
-the Father is married to a Heavenly Mother

Other scriptures confirm that many general apostasies have taken place, and that the gospel had been formerly delivered to ancient Israel following these apostasies… (Deuteronomy 9:7,25; 29:25; 30:15- 19; Judges 3:7; 1 Kings 11:2; 14:22; 2 Kings 17:7; 21:2; Psalms 106:36; Isaiah 2:8; 39; 24:5; 29:13-14; 59:2; Jerimiah 2:17; 7:11; 35:15; Ezekiel 2:3; 11:12; 22:26; Hosiah. 4:6, 17; Amos 8:11; Micah 3:11; Matthew 13:15; 15:9).
Paul taught the Galatians that “God… preached before the gospel unto Abraham”

(Galatians 3:8) and in Hebrews 4:2 he declared that, “unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them [Israel in the days of Moses… 1 Corinthians 10:4, Hebrews 3:16-17]: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it” (Hebrews 4:2). If the gospel was preached to Abraham in 2000 BC, to the people of Israel during the Exodus in 1350 BC, and then to Israel of Christ’s day, it was delivered more than one time. (See also Isaiah 40:9; 52:7; 61:1; Moses 5:58-59; 6:51-68; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 59-61; Seaich, Mormonism, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Nag Hammadi Texts, pp. 54-55).

fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/biblical-evidences-of-an-apostasy

In Rev 13:7 we see confirmation that the devil would fight the saints of the Church of Christ and defeat them. The Bible uses the word saints to refer to the members of Church. It says…”And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”

Yes, the Bible does demonstrate that there have been many apostasies, and even that with the establishment of the Church (the Kingdom of God), there would be apostasies from the Church. Nowhere at all does the Bible support an apostasy of the Church of Jesus Christ. Instead, we see that the Church, the Kingdom of God, is guided by the Spirit, has Jesus Christ at its Head, is the Body of Christ, etc, and was prophesied in the Old Testament to never be destroyed. The Bible supports the perpetuity of the Church, and nowhere speaks of it being taken off the earth after its establishment.

You asked why Mormon Apostles do not receive revelations…Answer: Yes, they do receive revelations; they are inspired men of God. One such revelation is the extension of the priesthood to all worthy men received in 1978. They prayed in the temple for many days and many nights and finally the revelation came and they spoke in one voice. They also receive revelations on how to assist the members, and admonish them about possible pitfalls just like Paul and Peter in their epistles to the Saints in various parts of the Church.

The issue of race and the priesthood is actually one example of why Mormonism most certainly is not the true Church. When Jesus Christ came, He said to take the Gospel to all nations. In the LDS church, the Gospel includes the teaching that priesthood ordination is necessary for eternal life, exaltation, for men, as well as the temple ordinances for both men and women. During the time of the priesthood/temple restriction, blacks did not have access to the full blessings of the Gospel (if we go along with this), nor did the LDS Church even send missionaries to Africa, which went in direct conflict with Christ’s command. It makes absolutely no sense, within the context of the progression of salvation history (going from the Jews to all of the world with the advent of Christ), for God to restrict blessings from His children that He apparently deemed necessary for eternal life.

Sad that this is the latest example of a canonized revelation in the LDS church (and even then, we don’t have the actual revelation, just a declaration that said revelation was received…odd).

 

[LivingWaters7]

Why is there a need to continue to expand the canon of scripture? When there are Apostles and Prophets then there is revelation and continuous communication with God. Nowhere in the bible says that the cannon are closed. The Church is alive when there is revelation and communication with God. For example, the Book of Mormon is another testament of Christ, which is also scripture. God still has many things to reveal to man.

While Catholics don’t believe in adding to the “canon” of scripture per se, there are many documents that are regarded as inspired or on par with scripture in Catholicism, such as the various documents that come from Councils of the Church, which are regarded as inspired by the Holy Spirit. Catholicism teaches that “public revelation”, all that is necessary to be known for eternal life, is complete. God will not reveal a new teaching tomorrow and say, “whoops, starting today, you actually need to be bathed in the blood of a goat to receive salvation”. That is what is meant by the closing of public revelation. With that, Catholicism teaches that Heaven has always been open. God still speaks to His children, individually, and through the Church. Catholic history has hundreds of examples of Heavenly visions and visitations from Jesus Christ, Mary, angels, other Heavenly saints, etc. A “restoration” simply was not needed, since communication with God was never lost.

Yes, God can see the future and the prophecies are evidence of that. The prophets and apostles saw that the early Church of Christ was going to fall into apostasy. He saw the apostasy and consequently there was a need for a restoration. Both are abundantly prophesied in the Bible.

The ancient prophets and apostles saw that people would fall away from the Church. They nowhere claimed that the Church itself would fail.

 

[Marie5890]

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.

As to the bolded part, you clearly were not catechized well if you didnt realize that Christ IS the center of it all. The Mass, the Tabernacle, etc etc etc.

The word “saint” comes from the Latin word “santus” which means nothing other than holy. Mormons probably arent aware of how they corrupted it’s meaning.

 

[Marie5890]

I used to be Catholic, my entire family and relatives were all Catholics…but the Catholic environment did not answer many of my philosophical questions. My soul was not supportive of what I saw and what I felt.

.

Evan I went back to your original post in this thread as others have pointed out, you really do not know Catholic teaching based on your post.

Im guessing you and your family was Catholic by tradition and not by actual practice? More of a “in name only” Catholic?

I would suggest if you really want to have an intellectual discussion of Catholicism and Mormonism, you would find it helpful to take time to seriously educate and explore Catholic teaching.

I highly recommend Fr Robert Barron’s “Catholicism” series. It’s a great and extensive DVD series that cover the basics, but it’s solid in it’s explanation of what it means to be Catholic.

 

[twopekinguys]

Truth be told, I don’t think Evan is as thrilled with mormonism as he would like us to believe.

I get the impression he is searching for more, and is testing the waters of Catholicism.

There is a reason why Catholics tell others…“Welcome Home”.

Personally, I came from a a family where religion wasn’t a part of our lives. Even with my Grandfather being a Presbyterian minister.

When I came into full communion with the Church, I knew I was truly home.

I really think that is what Evan is looking for, whether he wants to admit it or not.

 

[evanfaust]

Evan I went back to your original post in this thread as others have pointed out, you really do not know Catholic teaching based on your post.

Im guessing you and your family was Catholic by tradition and not by actual practice? More of a “in name only” Catholic?

I would suggest if you really want to have an intellectual discussion of Catholicism and Mormonism, you would find it helpful to take time to seriously educate and explore Catholic teaching.

I highly recommend Fr Robert Barron’s “Catholicism” series. It’s a great and extensive DVD series that cover the basics, but it’s solid in it’s explanation of what it means to be Catholic.

Marie,

I am from Brazil and lived half of my life there…that is the largest Catholic country in the world. It is very permeated in the Brazilian culture…you breathe Catholicism everywhere in the country…no way to avoid it. LOL. Most of my friends and families were all Catholics…but I do agree that most Catholics in Brazil are inactive and ignorant in their own faith. That means, they do not attend church regularly and they do not know much about the doctrines of the Catholic Church. They actually know a lot about the traditions and prayers, etc, but in terms of essence and history they know very little…actually I ended teaching many Catholics what the Catholic Church believed. Many of them acted surprised. Here in the US Catholics seem to be more educated.

I served a mission for the LDS church in Brazil and I loved to discuss theology with the fathers in every city I went…by the way, one of my companions in my mission attended Catholic Seminar and became a Mormon missionary 3 months after his conversion.

Well…I do not have any desire to take lessons on Catholicism…why would I ? I am extremely happy in the Mormon Church. I am very confident in what I believe and have no intentions of changing my beliefs. I do believe I know more than enough about the Catholic Church to reject its doctrines and positions and I feel very comfortable with that decision. If for whatever reason, someday, I decide not to follow the Mormon Church anymore…I would not join any other church. I would just keep the commandments and would be a good Christian.

As you know I have been bombarded with questions here and it stands to reason that I also have a life and don’t have time to respond them all. So, I will have to choose some questions and answer them as time allows. Don’t take my silence as ignorance…that is the wrong conclusion.

I just think it is fun to be here and see all these questions and emotions flying high. I guess I was a little bored and decided to come and make life a little more exciting…hehe

 

[brittrossiter]

The word “saint” comes from the Latin word “santus” which means nothing other than holy. …

This is my understanding as well. I do know that, in Greek, the word *Hagio *(meaning literally, “holy”) is still used to this day in reference a saint.

Jason

 

[zaffiroborant]

You asked why Mormon Apostles do not receive revelations…Answer: Yes, they do receive revelations; they are inspired men of God. One such revelation is the extension of the priesthood to all worthy men received in 1978. They prayed in the temple for many days and many nights and finally the revelation came and they spoke in one voice. They also receive revelations on how to assist the members, and admonish them about possible pitfalls just like Paul and Peter in their epistles to the Saints in various parts of the Church.

Please provide substantiation that this is a revelation, I’ve seen nothing from any LDS leader declaring it a revelation.