How do the Mormons do it?

[Miriam1947]

No.

My aspiration is to let Christ’s atonement work a miracle in my life, to cleanse me of my sins, and to subordinate my Will to His, to the point that I am One with His will, as described in John chapter 17. My ambition is to serve him in this life and the next. To honor the priesthood which he has given me, and through his word and his power, to bless the lives of my family, and of others.

It seems to me that Lucifer’s primary sin was not ambition, but rather Rebellion.

Yes he was quite the rebel but, he was also ambitious since he wanted to be like God. Why else would he have tempted Jesus and Adam and Eve?

When not directly encouraging people to worship him the devil has encouraged others to gradually come under his sway by following his example, by falling from grace through aspiring to be like God. This was the original lie he told Adam and Eve–that death would not come to them if they aspired to “be as gods” (Gen. 3:4-5). This was the lie that, once believed and acted upon, caused the fall of the human race.

 

[Stephen168]

Church History:

I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country, and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally with drawn from them as a people was made known to me:…

In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era.

We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the tower of babel. The second race came directly from he city of Jerusalem, about six hundred years before Christ. They are principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jardites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnants are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

 

[zaffiroborant]

If you want “scientific” evidence for the book of Mormon, well, look at the description of the geography when Lehi left Jerusalem. The account is much more accurate as to the Geography of Saudi Arabia than anything that would have been available to Joseph Smith. Not to mention that the specific directions from Jerusalem to what Lehi called “Bountiful,” not only map to a small fertile land on the edge of a horrible desert, but also contains evidence that someone named “Lehi” lived there thousands of years ago. That’s pretty solid stuff.

Something to backup your assertions?

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Stephen168:
Thank you Stephen. Yes, when JS wanted to speak of the Indians, he spoke of them as the “Aboriginal inhabitants.” The other reference you gave, JS quoting Moroni, spoke of the “former inhabitants,” which obviously cannot reference the Amerinds.

 

[zaffiroborant]

. The evidence available (DNA is all, so far as I am aware? As the rest relies on lack of evidence, which is a non-argument as it simply bolsters neither side’s position) only tells us that the BOM story is not the whole picture, which nobody has ever claimed it to be.

No lack of evidence does not * “only tells us that the BOM story is not the whole picture”*, lack of evidence shows an unsupported claim. Why should anyone accept an unsupported claim and make life changing decisions on the claim?

 

[mwok]

I like this def - **Evil **is the violation of, or intent to violate, some moral code

I think people may use contraception while sinning but contraception is not evil in and of itself.
.

Moral Code given by God: Be fruitful and multiply; leave your parents and cleave to your wife.

Contraception: Contra(Against) conception(being fruitful and multiplying as a result of “cleaving” to your spouse).

Sounds like a violation to me, therefore contraception is evil.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Hey Naf! I just figured out how to add someone to your “ignore” list.

Click on their name, e.g. Zaffiroborant, directly above. That causes a drop-down menu to appear.

From the drop-down menu, choose “View Public Profile.”

On the User Lists page for Zaffiroborant, click the User Lists menu. That causes a drop-down menu to appear.

From the drop-down menu, choose “Add Zaffiroborant to your Ignore List.”

It’s tricky, but if someone just won’t stop riding you, it might be worth it.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Moral Code given by God: Be fruitful and multiply; leave your parents and cleave to your wife.

Contraception: Contra(Against) conception(being fruitful and multiplying as a result of “cleaving” to your spouse).

Sounds like a violation to me, therefore contraception is evil.

Seems like abstinence between Husband and Wife would be a more clear violation of that moral code, mwok. Seems to me that cleaving through a prophylactic is more cleaving than no cleaving at all.

 

[mwok]

Seems like abstinence between Husband and Wife would be a more clear violation of that moral code, mwok. Seems to me that cleaving through a prophylactic is more cleaving than no cleaving at all.

God made an ovulation cycle for a reason, otherwise why aren’t women fertile all the time like men? As far as a prophylactic is concerned it is considered psuedocleaving, there is a physical,chemical, or mental barrier(depending on the method used) that prevents a complete union.

 

[mwok]

I’m sorry Cowboy, I forgot to ask. In what way is abstinence a clear violation of said moral code?

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

God made an ovulation cycle for a reason, otherwise why aren’t women fertile all the time like men?

To make it easier for us to develop female birth control pills?

As far as a prophylactic is concerned it is considered psuedocleaving, there is a physical,chemical, or mental barrier(depending on the method used) that prevents a complete union

Oh I agree; it’s entirely unsatisfying. But partial cleaving is closer compliance with the moral rule that you invoked, than total abstinence between husband and wife, or the on-again-off-again calendar of the rhythm method, which also has the intent of avoiding the multiply command.

I’m sorry Cowboy, I forgot to ask. In what way is abstinence a clear violation of said moral code?

If a husband and wife abstain, they aren’t cleaving at all, right? Not multiplying either.

Spencer W. Kimball said that the law of chastity requires total abstinence before marriage and full fidelity afterward. He also said that while we allow birth control, we love to have kids. I think the numbers reflect that. President Kimball also said that the one form of birth control that the church categorically rejects within marriage is abstinence, because that disrupts the natural relationship between husband and wife.

I’d better stop responding on this line. It’s not something I feel strongly about, and didn’t come here to preach, and I’ve got few enough friends here as it is. I apologize if anything I said sounded preachy or disrespectful; I was merely giving my own religious point of view on the matter. Not telling you what you should believe.

 

[mwok]

To make it easier for us to develop female birth control pills?

Oh I agree; it’s entirely unsatisfying. But partial cleaving is closer compliance with the moral rule that you invoked, than total abstinence between husband and wife, or the on-again-off-again calendar of the rhythm method, which also has the intent of avoiding the multiply command.

If a husband and wife abstain, they aren’t cleaving at all, right? Not multiplying either.

Spencer W. Kimball said that the law of chastity requires total abstinence before marriage and full fidelity afterward. He also said that while we allow birth control, we love to have kids. I think the numbers reflect that. President Kimball also said that the one form of birth control that the church categorically rejects within marriage is abstinence, because that disrupts the natural relationship between husband and wife.

I’d better stop responding on this line. It’s not something I feel strongly about, and didn’t come here to preach, and I’ve got few enough friends here as it is. I apologize if anything I said sounded preachy or disrespectful; I was merely giving my own religious point of view on the matter. Not telling you what you should believe.

1. Or maybe so that a husband and wife could abstain only during times of fertility if they wish to hold off on having children. Such practices like Natural Family Planning(NFP) or the Billings Method prove that methods that require both spouses participation rather than depending on one to be contracepting, even if the other is reminding one to take a pill.
2. Its not a total abstinence, just during times of fertility.
3. Yes, at the time of abstinence they are not “cleaving”. There is the emotional cleaving to consider as well. Also, much to many men’s dismay God did not give us the fortitude to have sex all day, every day.
4. No disrespect taken here, the Catholic Church tells me what to believe. And last time I checked my profile you are still listed as a friend.

 

[Naf623]

This is the problem, 1) study the early Church, there is no sign of Mormonism 2) study the early Church and it is the same Church as the Catholic church.

I see no sign of Catholicism in the early church, myself.

Baptism by immersion is a larger subject. You can start another thread. Just because you say, “I DO THIS IN THIS WAY”, doesn’t make it something that was lost or restored.

And just because you say I DO IT THIS WAY" doesn’t mean that its correct, or original.
Jesus was baptised by full immersion as our example, as were all the early Christians.

Either you believe Jesus Christ guides and guards what is His, or you don’t. It is really as simple as that. I see no reason to not trust God.

I do believe He guides and guards what is His. I have received a personal witness, both in private and in public ‘communion’ with others, that His church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was about THE SOUrCE of the aboriginal people of the Americas. As you have explained the Mormon Church has changed the the story to A source. Nephites, Jaredites, Mulekits, Lamanites were all jewish; NOT Asian. ALL scientific evidence proves the aboriginal people of the Americas came from Asia NOT the middle east. Science has thought this before DNA evidence. DNA is just the cherry on top.

Science can think whatever it likes; without knowing everything (as God does), nobody can ever make any scientifically categorical statement; and anybody who tries, is a fool. Science produces theories, some of which it accepts as facts; while at the same time realising that future evidence may require a re-think.
You believe in ‘The Trinity’, something which I believe the Biblical evidence does not support; yet because you believe God has told you He is so, you believe it.
You believe in events that happened before the flood (I presume?), despite there being no archaeological evidence to support them.
Ask an Atheist, and they will claim that either science disproves the existence of God, or otherwise they will claim that there is simply no evidence for His existence. Yet both you and I accept the evidence in the Bible; the evidence that despite much persecutions, Christianity still exists; and the evidence (that we see, even if others contest it) of everything that is around us.

The thing about God’s Commandments is that God is not bound by them, we are. If He chooses to take back the life He created then who are we to question? All creation belongs to Him. As for Abraham, what because he was Father Abraham he was exempt from disobeying God? What about King David? Is he exempt for murdering Bethsheba’s husband ,Uriah, because he is the great-great-great-great-great grandfather of Our Lord?

Abraham lied; the Biblical record states this. His reasons were the preservation of himself and his family. However, your statement was that what God says is wrong, is always wrong; so surely this means that Abraham cannot be revered as the holy man he is considered?

The central claim of the Mormon church

“Central”, really? As far as I’m aware, our core doctrine relates to following Jesus Christ and encouraging all to Come Unto Him.
The Church has published its threefold mission:
Proclaim the Gospel
Perfect the Saints
Redeem the Dead
Joseph Smith, when asked about our basic beliefs, or core doctrine produced The Articles of Faith by divine revelation.
Other publications the church has produced include The Living Christ (even the name speaks for itself really), and The Family: A Proclamation to the World; again, speaks for itself.
Then there’s the fact that even the name of the church itself is The Church of Jesus Christ.
“Central”?; the evidence doesn’t stack up.
Miriam1947;8440341:

that men and women can become the deities of their own worlds, the same as God the Father now is with billions worshipping them–represents the ambition of Lucifer, who said in his heart, “I will ascend above the heights of the the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Is. 14:14)

Actually, as more recently pointed out by President Gordon B Hinckley, we do not really understand the meaning of this statement. We do not know which characteristic(s) of deity we are able to attain. More on this as other of your statements come into play also.
Miriam1947;8440341:

The devil has craved worship and equality with God ever since he fell.

Lucifer was cast out because he desired status alongside God the Father. Since that time he has done everything in his power in attempt to thwart the works of God.

 

[Naf623]

When not directly encouraging people to worship him the devil has encouraged others to gradually come under his sway by following his example, by falling from grace through aspiring to be like God. This was the original lie he told Adam and Eve–that death would not come to them if they aspired to “be as gods” (Gen. 3:4-5). This was the lie that, once believed and acted upon, caused the fall of the human race.

Lets actually look at the full quotations and Biblical account here, shall we?
The tree that Adam & Eve were commanded not to eat from was The Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil (Gen. 2:16&17). We also understand that when initially created, Adam & Eve did not understand the concept of Good & Evil (Gen. 2:25).
Lucifer, when tempting Eve (and lets use the Ifull quotation this time, shall we?) claimed:
“4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

Lucifer was practising what he does best; deception by using part truths. He tells us (or leads us to believe) something that we know to be true, lulling us into false security that therefore other things he says will also be true; then he accompanies it by the lie he wants us to believe. He told Adam and Eve that they would not necessarily die (which, actually, is not entirely untrue considering the city of Enoch was taken directly to heaven without tasting death), and accompanied that by the truth; that eating of the tree would cause them to be as God; in that God understands Good & Evil. The language is clear that Lucifer did not state they would be as God is in all His Power, Glory & Splendour.
Therefore, continuing from above, we are all already ‘as God is’, in that we know Good & Evil as He does. We are also able to assimilate knowledge, understanding and wisdom; all traits of deity. We understand that we can attain eternal life with Him in heaven; and therefore will be ‘as He is’ in that we will also live forever.
Tell me, which of these statements of Biblical fact do you find heretical?

Yes he was quite the rebel but, he was also ambitious since he wanted to be like God. Why else would he have tempted Jesus and Adam and Eve?

Because he does not understand the mind or purpose of God any more than we do; and so he believes that by doing these things he may cause the entire plan which God has for us to be ruined and come to naught in the end. Clearly this is not, never has been, and never will be the case. But so blinded is he by hos own greed and misery, he does not see.

No lack of evidence does not * “only tells us that the BOM story is not the whole picture”*, lack of evidence shows an unsupported claim. Why should anyone accept an unsupported claim and make life changing decisions on the claim?

I therefore challenge you to provide evidence, sufficient to convince a well-informed atheist, of the existence of God and the truth of the religion that one should follow.
As you cannot (otherwise there would be only one church, and no atheists), you cannot make assertions against the BOM for similar lack of scientific proof.
the witness I have received from God is more than sufficient for me (and millions of others worldwide, most with a higher than average level of education) to accept the Book of Mormon as true, that it is the word of God, and the teachings held within its pages are the truth. Since The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the only church (to speak of) which accepts and uses the book, it follows that it must also be the only true church since a church which rejects any portion of God’s word can never be true. however, I do not need this logical deduction either, as I have a personal witness of the truth of the church and its teachings also, and that Joseph Smith was truly a prophet of God. What a wonderful gift, to be able to ask God (as the Bible dictates) about His word, and receive a response through The Holy Spirit. However logical and sensible something sounds, and appears to be correct; I am prepared to accept nothing without this witness from the Holy Spirit of its truth. After all, as Christ Himself told the Apostles; it is The Holy Spirit of Truth, and as such testifies to us of all truth.

 

[Naf623]

1. No disrespect taken here, the Catholic Church tells me what to believe. And last time I checked my profile you are still listed as a friend.

Interesting, as only God tells me what to believe, by the power of His Holy Spirit.
Others may teach, but without the Spirit, this teaching is worth nothing.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

I
The Church has published its threefold mission:
Proclaim the Gospel
Perfect the Saints
Redeem the Dead

In February 2010, the church added a fourth mission, “to care for the poor and needy.”

The Church used to consider this part of the Second Mission, to Perfect the Saints, but as the worldwide economic crisis deepened, the Church saw fit to separate it out to give it additional emphasis.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

And last time I checked my profile you are still listed as a friend.

That’s right, which is precisely why I don’t want to lose you.

1. Or maybe so that a husband and wife could abstain only during times of fertility if they wish to hold off on having children. Such practices like Natural Family Planning(NFP) or the Billings Method prove that methods that require both spouses participation rather than depending on one to be contracepting, even if the other is reminding one to take a pill.

Ah, now that’s the best, most Christian argument that I’ve ever heard to favor NFP over artificial contraception. That it’s bilateral, rather than inherently unilateral.

Note that Onan’s method (withdrawal) is clearly “natural,” so I’m not sure I buy the natural vs. artificial valuing … but I am persuaded by your argument that a joint method is inherently superior to a method where one partner can defraud the other, just as Onan sought to defraud Tamar. Well argued!

1. Its not a total abstinence, just during times of fertility.

True.

 

[mwok]

Interesting, as only God tells me what to believe, by the power of His Holy Spirit.
Others may teach, but without the Spirit, this teaching is worth nothing.

Did you read my post #414?

Peter, led by the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the successor of Peter and is led by the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ and speaks on behalf of His Bride. So, to make a loooong statement short, the Catholic Church which was founded by Christ and is led by the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the successors of Peter tells me what to believe.

 

[Naf623]

Did you read my post #414?

Peter, led by the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the successor of Peter and is led by the Holy Spirit. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ and speaks on behalf of His Bride. So, to make a loooong statement short, the Catholic Church which was founded by Christ and is led by the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the successors of Peter tells me what to believe.

But we should all be led by the Holy Spirit, otherwise there is no way to be sure of the truth and validity of what we are being taught.
Consider, if Satan wanted to lead us astray (and let’s face it, he does) what better way than to convince people that they have no need to seek out the Lord’s direct guidance?
The scriptures encourage us to ‘trust in the Lord with all thine heart’; not to trust in the Lord’s church… I believe just as you do that my leaders are called of God and are therefore also led by the Holy Spirit, however this does not mean I blindly follow their lead. If anyone else told you to just believe them and do what they said, their apparent qualifications and status would not mean you’d just do it, would you? I certainly always ask policemen for ID, and validate any workmen visiting my workplace before allowing them entry, however convinced I am that they are genuine.

 

[mwok]

But we should all be led by the Holy Spirit, otherwise there is no way to be sure of the truth and validity of what we are being taught.
Consider, if Satan wanted to lead us astray (and let’s face it, he does) what better way than to convince people that they have no need to seek out the Lord’s direct guidance?
The scriptures encourage us to ‘trust in the Lord with all thine heart’; not to trust in the Lord’s church… I believe just as you do that my leaders are called of God and are therefore also led by the Holy Spirit, however this does not mean I blindly follow their lead. If anyone else told you to just believe them and do what they said, their apparent qualifications and status would not mean you’d just do it, would you? I certainly always ask policemen for ID, and validate any workmen visiting my workplace before allowing them entry, however convinced I am that they are genuine.

We are all led by the Holy Spirit, when we allow him. However, only one person is authorized to bind on earth what is in heaven and vise versa. Otherwise, why not just go on your own path towards Christ without claiming any name to your beliefs? In fact, why not take it to the extreme? Why read the Bible if you are led directly by the Holy Spirit? If what you are saying is true then the Gospels were just for the authors themselves as the Holy Spirit inspired them to write under inspiration. If what you are saying is true then I would not need to validate anyone’s authority as God knows me more than they would and sent His Spirit to guide me to Him? But, as it is Christ died for His Bride the Church and if I want to be considered a child of His cleaving to His Church then I must obey Her teachings and without fear because I know that Christ will never leave His Bride even if Her children apostasize.