How do the Mormons do it?

[ChristIsTheWay]

Well, you are quite right, and I will have to admit that I fall into this category. I could care less about reading an in-depth study of the Nephites and Laminites because I already believe it is nothing but a fairy tale and would rather spend the time concentrating other things. But archeology is not the only evidence we have to determine truth in these areas. Something should at least be considered plausible if one is going to decide to look into it further. But your point is well taken.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you. But I can think of another reason to look into this subject further, besides our individual assessment of its plausibility: other people encountering Mormon missionaries and apologetics might find a lot of this plausible. A poorly educated Catholic, for example, might be swayed by the scholarship of these Mormon scholars. If they seek rebuttals of these Mormon scholars, and find none, one can easily imagine that particular Catholic taking that as evidence there is no effective response. Of course, as individuals we can’t really do the assessment of all this scholarship by ourselves but I think it is important for the Christian community as a whole to undertake the task.

(Edited)

 

[SteveVH]

I don’t necessarily disagree with you. But I can think of another reason to look into this subject further, besides our individual assessment of its plausibility: other people encountering Mormon missionaries and apologetics might find a lot of this plausible. A poorly educated Catholic, for example, might be swayed by the scholarship of these Mormon scholars. If they seek rebuttals of these Mormon scholars, and find none, one can easily imagine that particular Catholic taking that as evidence there is no effective response. Of course, as individuals we can’t really do the assessment of all this scholarship by ourselves but I think it is important for the Christian community as a whole to undertake the task.

Again, your point is valid and I hope there are people who have the time to examine the evidence presented and give it an honest assessment. I prefer to deal with their theology and doctrines. It is on that basis that I have determined for myself that this is a false religion and for the life of me I cannot imagine ever having the energy or the motivation to assess their archeological claims. Not to mention that I am not an archeologist and would not consider myself qualified to make an argument anyway.

Let me put it this way. If one was to tell me that they believe Jesus Christ came from the moon and had received revelation that we were to use green cheese at communion, I would not be inclined to look much further into their faith. While this analogy is over the top in realtion to the LDS, I find their claims to be false based upon things that we do know and believe.

 

[Lefty0908]

I don’t know about anyone else here but I am not of this opinion. I do admit that when I first started looking at Mormon apologetics, I thought it was mostly damage control. I don’t think that way anymore. I don’t, in the end, believe that Mormon scholars are successful in establishing the (likely) historicity of the Book of Mormon but I have come to appreciate that many, like Sorenson, have made serious, scholarly efforts to do so.

And that’s the extent of the point I’m trying to make, so I thank-you. As I originally posted, I believe that cognitive dissonance is at least smoothed (if not resolved) when expressions of faith can be accompanied by rational arguments that buttress one’s faith. I grant that for a very many Mormons their reliance solely on their faith (testimony) completely serves the purpose of cognitive dissonance resolution. I respect that, but I’m not one of those Mormons. I need some reason to accompany my faith. By the same token, I have known a very many Catholics who resolve their own cognitive dissonance by also ignoring any knotty problems of theology and history and simply fall back on the tradition that their grandparents and parents were Catholic, and so shall they too remain - end of story. I have no problem with that. Not everyone wants to tackle history and doctrine, and I think that when we attack the simple faith of others we do so at our own peril. None of us are nearly as smart as we think. But that’s not to say that Catholicism is unable to provide substantive reasons to believe nor that deeply thoughtful people haven’t wrestled with and resolved for themselves the knotty problems that others may simply choose to ignore. And it therefore follows that if I think Catholicism is stupid, then the problem most likely is mine. I may not agree or choose to follow its precepts, but trashing it, mocking it, and denigrating its adherents are not options if I’m honest.

 

[broallenjoseph]

I am looking for an answer to this Mormon question. I have asked Mormon elders this question twice and they haven’t given an answer. They keep responding that they will get back to me.
Mormon friends have told me that they will be married in Heaven. At one point when I was watching documentary on Mormons, the commentator mentioned how Mormons will be married in Heaven.
How can they claim this? Scripture says, "Jesus said to them in reply, You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in Heaven.( Matt 22: 29).and “…some have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven”, (Matt 19:12).
Can anyone answer this for me. Thanks

 

[Lefty0908]

I am looking for an answer to this Mormon question. I have asked Mormon elders this question twice and they haven’t given an answer. They keep responding that they will get back to me.
Mormon friends have told me that they will be married in Heaven. At one point when I was watching documentary on Mormons, the commentator mentioned how Mormons will be married in Heaven.
How can they claim this? Scripture says, "Jesus said to them in reply, You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in Heaven.( Matt 22: 29).and “…some have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven”, (Matt 19:12).
Can anyone answer this for me. Thanks

Can ANYONE stay on the topic of this thread???

 

[broallenjoseph]

I did not mean to upset you. I was merely asking a question. I am new to this, so if my question offended you, please forgive me. Where else should I go to find the answer?

 

[SteveVH]

I am looking for an answer to this Mormon question. I have asked Mormon elders this question twice and they haven’t given an answer. They keep responding that they will get back to me.
Mormon friends have told me that they will be married in Heaven. At one point when I was watching documentary on Mormons, the commentator mentioned how Mormons will be married in Heaven.
How can they claim this? Scripture says, "Jesus said to them in reply, You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in Heaven.( Matt 22: 29).and “…some have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven”, (Matt 19:12).
Can anyone answer this for me. Thanks

If this topic is going to be discussed it really needs its own thread. I will tell you that this subject has been hashed and re-hashed on this forum more times than I can count and I actually feel sorry for the Mormons who would have to go there again. You are new to this forum and have not been involved in these discussions, but there is plenty of material on past threads.

Briefly, I believe they would tell you, concerning the verse you mentioned (Mt 22:29) (and that we all have mentioned), that Christ said they would not marry in heaven or be given in marriage in heaven, but the difference is that they are speaking of marriage on earth continuing in heaven. Take it for what it is worth.

As to your quote from Mt 19:12 I don’t remember how they get around that one, except that they believe the Bible was corrupted by the Catholic Church and pretty much anything that doesn’t comply with their doctrines in the Bible is due to this corruption. I certainly welcome any corrections in my perspective from any Mormon poster.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[ParkerD]

Really? I asked you to reconcile the following on another thread but never received a response back. These are “testimonies” received by your founding “prophet”.

“I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity” (Moroni 8:18).

“For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and in him there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing? And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, and in whom there is shadow of changing, then ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles.” (Mormon 9:9-10).

and at the same time this:

“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image, and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another” (King Follett Discourse).

Which one of these two contradictory positions do you accept and which one do you reject? It is impossible to believe both at the same time without throwing logic and reason out the window. Now tell me that “testimony” doesn’t trump “logic” in the Mormon world.

SteveVH,

They are only contradictory if one doesn’t understand Hebrews 6:20 through Hebrews 7:3. The words “for ever” and the words “having neither beginning of days, nor end of life” have to do with the priesthood held by the Son of God, which He received from His Father, and is without beginning and without end, or is in other words “everlasting”.

The passages in Mormon and Moroni have to do with miracles, but could just as well have to do with prophets and with the fact that God upholds His priesthood on the earth and that miracles are wrought by faith, through the power of the priesthood, and that prophets teach the people and receive the ministry of angels by the power of the priesthood, which priesthood is after the order of the Son of God. The power of the priesthood is unchangeable, everlasting, without beginning of days or end of life, and will endure through all eternity. Those who receive it and are faithful have entered into the covenant that is an everlasting covenant, a priesthood covenant.

 

[broallenjoseph]

Thank you for that response. As I say, I am new to this type of on line “groups”. It is not my intent to upset anyone, I was just searching. Thanks for the correction.

 

[CopticChristian]

And that’s the extent of the point I’m trying to make, so I thank-you. As I originally posted, I believe that cognitive dissonance is at least smoothed (if not resolved) when expressions of faith can be accompanied by rational arguments that buttress one’s faith. I grant that for a very many Mormons their reliance solely on their faith (testimony) completely serves the purpose of cognitive dissonance resolution. I respect that, but I’m not one of those Mormons. I need some reason to accompany my faith. By the same token, I have known a very many Catholics who resolve their own cognitive dissonance by also ignoring any knotty problems of theology and history and simply fall back on the tradition that their grandparents and parents were Catholic, and so shall they too remain - end of story. I have no problem with that. Not everyone wants to tackle history and doctrine, and I think that when we attack the simple faith of others we do so at our own peril. None of us are nearly as smart as we think. But that’s not to say that Catholicism is unable to provide substantive reasons to believe nor that deeply thoughtful people haven’t wrestled with and resolved for themselves the knotty problems that others may simply choose to ignore. And it therefore follows that if I think Catholicism is stupid, then the problem most likely is mine. I may not agree or choose to follow its precepts, but trashing it, mocking it, and denigrating its adherents are not options if I’m honest.

You have ignored every question that I have asked. You accused me of being insincere in another post. I asked direct questions. I don’t know if Mormonism is stupid, you are stupid, who is stupid or what is stupid as most of what you write avoids direct answers. Shall we hold our degrees up so that I can show you mine is bigger than yours? A direct answer to a direct question would be helpful. It appears either that you do not read what I write, cannot understand what I ask, have no ability to respond to what I ask, feel incapable of engaging in direct dialogue or perhaps something that I have not thought of. I anticipate you will continue to post abstract ethereal discussions which causes me to conclude as you say, “if I think Catholicism is stupid” then all I can conclude is that Mormonism is stupid insofar as you have provided me no evidence to the contrary.

I suggest you start with something simple. Tell me your understanding of cognitive dissonance and “knotty problem”. With a degree from Cinicinatti you could do that.

 

[ParkerD]

I am looking for an answer to this Mormon question. I have asked Mormon elders this question twice and they haven’t given an answer. They keep responding that they will get back to me.
Mormon friends have told me that they will be married in Heaven. At one point when I was watching documentary on Mormons, the commentator mentioned how Mormons will be married in Heaven.
How can they claim this? Scripture says, "Jesus said to them in reply, You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God. At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in Heaven.( Matt 22: 29).and “…some have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven”, (Matt 19:12).
Can anyone answer this for me. Thanks

Broallenjoseph,

The Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection, and were rejecting Christ in the instance you noted, so although they will indeed be resurrected they indeed won’t have an eternal marriage nor will there be an opportunity for them to marry in heaven.

Those who renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven would mean they accepted what the apostles were saying, that the kind of marriage Adam and Eve had, with no thought of divorce, was a “hard saying” and they would rather not be placed in that position so they opted out and remained single.

 

[broallenjoseph]

Thank you

 

[CopticChristian]

Broallenjoseph,

The Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection, and were rejecting Christ in the instance you noted, so although they will indeed be resurrected they indeed won’t have an eternal marriage nor will there be an opportunity for them to marry in heaven.

Those who renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven would mean they accepted what the apostles were saying, that the kind of marriage Adam and Eve had, with no thought of divorce, was a “hard saying” and they would rather not be placed in that position so they opted out and remained single.

This sounds Christieneze. I found an answer at a LDS website on Celestial marriage.

ldschurchtemples.com/mormon/marriage/

I don’t believe it but here it is. No mention of the saducees.

 

[broallenjoseph]

This sounds Christieneze. I found an answer at a LDS website on Celestial marriage.

ldschurchtemples.com/mormon/marriage/

I don’t believe it but here it is. No mention of the saducees.

I just read what you suggested. At first I would see a similarity of Christ welcoming his bride, which is the Catholic Church into Eternal life as a possible Celestial Marriage. But I am not seeing, and I will admit to being slow to understand, how this is meaning two married on earth, will be married in Heaven. I need Scripture to back it up.What I mean is Scripture to back up what the above article from the Mormon church, is saying.
Even in their quote in regards to Peter having the keys to bind and loose, I do not see where the act of sealing a marriage can be taken out of that quote.

 

[CopticChristian]

I just read what you suggested. At first I would see a similarity of Christ welcoming his bride, which is the Catholic Church into Eternal life as a possible Celestial Marriage. But I am not seeing, and I will admit to being slow to understand, how this is meaning two married on earth, will be married in Heaven. I need Scripture to back it up.What I mean is Scripture to back up what the above article from the Mormon church, is saying.

Why do you need scripture? Mormonism is primarily based on D & C of Joseph Smith.

No one seems to want to talk about it but Mormons have the King James Bible, The Book of Mormon, The Pearl of Great Price and Doctrines and Covenants of Joseph Smith, as I understand it on equal plane.

Mormonism is not based on the Bible alone. If you are asking for Scripture then I am not sure you understand Mormonism. No one here seems to want to discuss anything except codes of honor at school, cognative dissonance, knotty problems, Nobel prizes, archeology and other nonsense.

 

[broallenjoseph]

This has been interesting. I would like to stay for awhile, but I need to fix dinner.
God bless you all and thanks. Will try to get on tomorrow, or later tonight.

 

[campeador]

Can ANYONE stay on the topic of this thread???

I take that to mean you’ve completely given up on Mr. Hamblin.

 

[CopticChristian]

Can ANYONE stay on the topic of this thread???

Not exactly dripping with sincerity. It is how do Mormons do it and you have not provided any evidence as to how that is done.

 

[mark_a]

This is neigborly and in my opinion avoids the elephant in the room.

True.

I normally don’t mention the elephant in the room if its their room. But if they bring the elephant into my room, that’s a different story.

 

[Miriam1947]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind are Catholic beliefs regarding the Eucharist. Specifically that the priest, by saying the words of the consecration, can transform bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If you were to take two hosts - one consecrated and one not - and subject them to any kind of examination you could come up with, no one would be able to tell the difference. Of course, the Catholic response would be that, while the accidents of bread and wine remain, the consecrated host has actually been transformed into Jesus. From my perspective, this conflicts with reason. At the very least, it is no more unreasonable than Mormon beliefs.

Jesus used a lot of material objects to describe Himself–He said, “I am the Light.” “I am the Door.” “I am the Shepherd.”

But He never said, “That light is Me.” “That door is Me.” “That shepherd is Me.”

However, He did say, “That Bread is Me. That Wine is Me.”

(Thank you Cat)

Of course hosts will look the same and have the same characteristics. It’s called a mystery.

You either believe Christ or you think he is a liar.

Your choice.