I can't believe you all are not LDS(Mormon)!

[RebeccaJ]

Though I have not read that book, I assume it’s about the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

With all due respect, claiming that the LDS church was some how “responsible” for the massacre is like claiming the Catholic church is responsible for the massacre of indigenous Americans at the hands of the conquistadors.

Indeed, the massacre was perpetrated by Mormons, but of all the evidence I’ve seen, little has surmounted its burden of proving that the LDS church itself (as an institution) was responsible for it. It’s very likely that Brigham Young (the LDS First President at the time) knew little to nothing of the ordeal until it was too late for him to stop it.

From my understanding, the LDS Bishop who in many ways was “responsible” for the massacre (by inciting the riot of the faithful to begin with) was excommunicated promptly.

It is about the Lafferty brothers, written by John Krakauer…a very good book that explains the Mormon mind-frame quite well. The Lafferty’s themselves were breakaway LDS, part of a crazy polygamist affair, who murdered for God…blood atonement

 

[xixxvmcm85]

Zerinus, there is little more I can say on this issue. Please respect that I do not wish to further discuss my family with you. I respect the zeal with which you seek to defend your religion, but this is far outside your purview as it deals with events that you were not witness to, but I was. He told them “I do not want you guys to come here when I am not here.” Those are clear instructions. There is no need to press this point.

Just ignore him. You can’t win with him as any outcome he would twist to suit his position.

The LDS missionaries indeed kept visiting your family member (against the will of her husband) and so (in Zerinus’ mind) the husband must not have been stern enough.

Had the missionaries not come back to the house, I suspect Zerinus would use that as an example of how “Mormons are persecuted against”.

 

[xixxvmcm85]

It is about the Lafferty brothers, written by John Krakauer…a very good book that explains the Mormon mind-frame quite well. The Lafferty’s themselves were breakaway LDS, part of a crazy polygamist affair, who murdered for God…blood atonement

Ah! In that case, one could very well argue that “Mormonism” is in part responsible, since it was a traditional LDS doctrine (though since repudiated) that “drove” the brothers to murder.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[pismopal]

Though I have not read that book, I assume it’s about the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

With all due respect, claiming that the LDS church was some how “responsible” for the massacre is like claiming the Catholic church is responsible for the massacre of indigenous Americans at the hands of the conquistadors.

Indeed, the massacre was perpetrated by Mormons, but of all the evidence I’ve seen, little has surmounted its burden of proving that the LDS church itself (as an institution) was responsible for it. It’s very likely that Brigham Young (the LDS First President at the time) knew little to nothing of the ordeal until it was too late for him to stop it.

From my understanding, the LDS Bishop who in many ways was “responsible” for the massacre (by inciting the riot of the faithful to begin with) was excommunicated promptly.

With all due respect, borrowing your term, you did not read my post any farther than the title of the book, which is ," The Mormon Murders " but has absolutely nothing to do with the massacre in the 1800’s. The book is a true crime story of modern very recent times. ( As I think I thumbnailed sufficiently in my original post )

 

[pismopal]

It is about the Lafferty brothers, written by John Krakauer…a very good book that explains the Mormon mind-frame quite well. The Lafferty’s themselves were breakaway LDS, part of a crazy polygamist affair, who murdered for God…blood atonement

Nope…I read that one also but the book I am referring to is not " Under the Banner Of Heaven “. The book is " The Mormon Murders” and is about forgery and murder…also not fiction.

 

[mommyof4]

I can see I will not change your minds and you all pretty much hate me so I will leave. I am not a troll and I am LDS. It is fine if you don’t think so. I was just planting seeds. I’m sorry if I offended you.

Bye

Liz, no one hates you at all. But if you truly want to “plant seeds,” you need to refine your tactics. It does no one any good (is everyone listening? ) to go storming up to someone, either in person or on an internet forum, and start bashing their religion and saying things like “I can’t believe you guys do this or that, or whatever, boy do I feel sorry for you!” That immediately puts folks on the defensive, and no one will listen to you any more. And before you start trying to evangelize anyone, you need to find out what their beliefs are, and do some honest to good research. No, listening to or reading anti-Catholic literature is NOT going to tell you what we believe. I would suggest that you go to the CA library and start reading some of the articles there to get a better idea as to what we really believe.

For those who wish to become a Catholic apologist, I would suggest you begin with Patrick Madrid’s book, Search and Rescue.

 

[PaulDupre]

Call me crazy, but this whole thread seems kind of fishy in light of this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=259805

If you didn’t like being in the church, why did you make this thread?

This is quite common for Mormons who are beginning to see that Mormonism is a scam. They often have one final outburst of desperation just before the whole facade falls apart. It often takes the form of coming to a forum like this and saying something like the OP did. It is a desperate cry for help - help she has received, by the way.

Paul (a former Mormon)

 

[estesbob]

I can think of other, more psychologically like scenarios.

My impression early on was she was questioning her faith and was looking for people to validate her doubts. Sher didnt do it the way I would of BUT she claims to be starting RCIA so at this point we should take her at her word and give her all the support we can.

 

[SacredHeartFan]

I have been a Mormon all my life and to this day I can’t believe you all are other religions! If you read the Book of Mormon you would truly see it is true. I don’t know why you all choose to read anti materials and listen to EXMormons.

I feel bad for those who have lost the true gospel but there is always time to come back. I have been reading posts for about 6 months and have decided to join. I have always been interested in the whole Idea people are Catholic because they seemed a bit messed up. I mean you bow down to a Pope. So very sad.

I have read the book of mormon and I know many mormons. I believe absolutly nothing is true about the book of mormon.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

I have been a Mormon all my life and to this day I can’t believe you all are other religions! If you read the Book of Mormon you would truly see it is true.

A Muslim will tell you the same… If you just read the Koran, you will see it is true.

Where is the historical evidence of the civilizations mentioned in the book Joseph Smith wrote?

“The first myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists…If one is to study Book of Mormon archaeology, then one must have a corpus of data with which to deal. We do not. The Book of Mormon is really there so one can have Book of Mormon studies, and archaeology is really there so one can study archaeology, but the two are not wed. At least they are not wed in reality since no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem then that a concentration on geography should be the first order of business, but we have already seen that twenty years of such an approach has left us empty-handed.” (Dee F. Green, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1969, pp. 77-78)

“The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archeologists see no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book.” (“Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon,” Smithsonian Institution, Spring 1986)

“With all of these great efforts, it cannot be established factually that anyone, from Joseph Smith to the present day, has put his finger on a single point of terrain that was a Book-of-Mormon geographical place. And the hemisphere has been pretty well checked out by competent people. Thousands of sites have been excavated.” (Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Written Symposium on Book-of-Mormon Geography: Response of Thomas S. Ferguson to the Norman & Sorenson Papers, p. 4, 1975)

“The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has even shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere.” (Michael Coe, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1973, pp. 42, 46)

Even the small little “Widow’s mite” coin mentioned in the New Testament has been unearthed…

IF the calamatous battles mentioned in Joseph Smith’s novel really occured in the New World, where are the broken swords, battle axes, bones, etc?

 

[tundramom]

Nope…I read that one also but the book I am referring to is not " Under the Banner Of Heaven “. The book is " The Mormon Murders” and is about forgery and murder…also not fiction.

That’s the story of the Salamander Letter and Mark Hoffman’s other forgeries.

I am friends with the daughter of the coin store owner who befriended Hoffman and helped him in his early years.

The murders were bombings in cardboard boxes delivered to the victims. Hoffman is now in prison serving a life sentence I believe.

in Christ
Steph

 

[po18guy]

I have been a Mormon all my life and to this day I can’t believe you all are other religions! If you read the Book of Mormon you would truly see it is true. I don’t know why you all choose to read anti materials and listen to EXMormons.

I feel bad for those who have lost the true gospel but there is always time to come back. I have been reading posts for about 6 months and have decided to join. I have always been interested in the whole Idea people are Catholic because they seemed a bit messed up. I mean you bow down to a Pope. So very sad.

Deep, deep in your heart, you know that if the BOM is not true, the only other faith that can be is the Catholic. Now, repeat this at every meeting until it is ingrained!

 

[why_me]

I have read the book of mormon and I know many mormons. I believe absolutly nothing is true about the book of mormon.

What is interesting about the book of mormon is that it is filled with relgious insight. It is not designed at all to lead people away from god but rather to bring people closer to god. Now if a person takes the book as a book with religious instruction and not as the ‘Mormon bible’ but as a book written by someone who was religious one can find some real gems in that book. We need to remember that whoever wrote that book, they sought to bring people closer to god and make the USA a better place than what it was in the beginning of the 19th century.

 

[why_me]

I imagine it’s only a matter of time before there are enough Mormons in communion with Rome to qualify for our own rite.

I can never see this happening at least not officially. Any mormon who advocates such a philosphy will be reprimanded if they begin to lead people away from the official lds church. It would be close to apostacy if not down right apostacy and excommunication or disfellowshipment would follow but I think that you know that already.

Its best to enjoy both faiths if they work for you and remain a closet mormon rite catholic. No harm done.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Well, I never said I would lead the charge. I’m just happy doing my own thing.

However, I’m more than happy to correct any misconceptions about the other in each respective camp. I showed my local LDS Institute director the Nicaean Creed, and he said he agreed with it. (He had never actually read it before.)

It may be that an LDS institute director agreed with the Nicene Creed, but the Mormons have completely different understanding of key terms contained with in the creed ~ words like “God” “Jesus Christ” and “the Holy Spirit” which renders any sort of Mormon “agreement” with it utterly meaningless.

Mormonism is a non-Christian, polytheistic religion that has copied familiar words and phrases from Christianity to seduce members and prospective members into the belief that they are Christian and thus make the religion more palatable. Delve deeper and you find that Mormonism is not Christian at all, despite their claims and despite the words “Jesus Christ” in the formal name of their church.

The Catholic Church is the Church actually founded by Jesus Christ, and has stood the test of time and endured the frailties of men and survived, because Jesus said it would. Since the real “true church” ~ the Catholic Church ~ is still around after nearly 2000 years, nothing has ever needed to be “restored”. The Mormon story about the “Great Apostasy” and the “Restoration of the Gospel” is a fairy tale invented to justify the establishment of their heretical sect.

 

[majick275]

What is interesting about the book of mormon is that it is filled with relgious insight. It is not designed at all to lead people away from god but rather to bring people closer to god. Now if a person takes the book as a book with religious instruction and not as the ‘Mormon bible’ but as a book written by someone who was religious one can find some real gems in that book. We need to remember that whoever wrote that book, they sought to bring people closer to god and make the USA a better place than what it was in the beginning of the 19th century.

except for all the heresies in it that lead to damnation.

 

[MelanieAnne]

How can you be sure that everyone reciting the creed during Mass doesn’t have their own definitions for key terms? Would this not make any sort of Christian unity at all meaningless?

If you ask me, the Nicene Creed is pretty self explanatory. After he read it, the Institute director apologized for comments he had made earlier, and said that it changed his opinion of the Catholic Church.

In today’s religious climate, looking Christian doesn’t necessarily make a religion more palatable. Mormons call themselves Christian because to do otherwise would be lying.

It doesn’t get much deeper than the Doctrine and Covenants, which reads:
“Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen.”

- D&C 20:28​

That sounds an awful lot like the Trinity to me.

It may sound the same to you, but it isn’t so. Jesus and “Heavenly Father”, as you well know I’m sure, according to Mormon theology are 2 separate persons each with their own body of flesh and bone. The Holy Spirit is yet another person. And there are numerous other differences distinguishing the Mormon Godhead and the Mormon theology that proceeds from their understanding of the Godhead, from Christianity, so many that the inescapable conclusion is that Mormonism is a non-Christian, polytheistic faith. That’s not a criticism, it’s just a fact.

I’ve heard Mormons discuss the “trinity” too, but they do not mean the same thing as we do when we use that term. Just saying the words, and have the words sound the same, does not mean the beliefs are the same, not when the definition of the words is completely different.

In Christianity, God is not a separate person with a body of flesh and bone, as in Mormon theology. And God is eternal, not an exalted human. In Christianity, Jesus IS God, not some sort of subordinate creation of “Heavenly Father”. Essentially the Mormon Heavenly Father is a different God from Christianity and the Mormon Jesus is a different Jesus. Mormon’s are not Christian in the sense of any other Christian faith. They may have the words, but their understanding of the meaning of those words are so different that the result is that their faith is not a Christian faith, but some other thing.

Mormon’s are NOT Christian in the same sense that Catholics are Christian or Lutherans are Christian. Mormons may SAY they are Christian, and perhaps they find that comforting in some way, but they are not Christian in the same way that a Catholic is Christian or in the same way as various other Christian sects. The Mormon Godhead is a different God, Jesus and Holy Spirit from Christianity.

 

[MelanieAnne]

This diagram of the Trinity applies equally to Mormonism and Catholicism.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.png

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in being, but if you don’t think that they are separate persons, then you don’t know as much as you think you do about Catholicism.

That’s really funny. But then I don’t get my Catechism from Wikipedia.

I understand the Catholic Trinity. If you believe that it is the same as the Mormon one, then you’re the one with the problem understanding either the Mormon Godhead, the Catholic Godhead, or both.

Doesn’t change the fact that Mormons are non-Christian polytheists.

 

[pismopal]

That’s the story of the Salamander Letter and Mark Hoffman’s other forgeries.

I am friends with the daughter of the coin store owner who befriended Hoffman and helped him in his early years.

The murders were bombings in cardboard boxes delivered to the victims. Hoffman is now in prison serving a life sentence I believe.

in Christ
Steph

Bingo. Interesting connection you had with Hoffman Steph. Thanks

 

[MelanieAnne]

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm#brief
266 “Now this is the Catholic faith: We worship one God in the Trinity and the Trinity in unity, without either confusing the persons or dividing the substance; for the person of the Father is one, the Son’s is another, the Holy Spirit’s another; but the Godhead of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is one, their glory equal, their majesty coeternal” (Athanasian Creed: DS 75; ND 16).

- Catechism of the Catholic Church​

This fits right in with Mormonism.

Yeah, except that the Catholic God is not an exalted man. And except the fact that Mormons believe that Jesus and God are 2 separate physical beings with bodies of flesh and bone and Christians do not believe that Jesus and God are 2 separate physical beings, etc. etc. etc.

You’re illustrating my point. Mormons may SAY the same words, but the Mormon definition of the words is so different that they may as well be speaking a different language. This is why Mormons are non-Christian polytheists.

Apparently you do not understand one or both theologies sufficiently to distinguish the vast differences between the two. Words mean something. Mormons have changed the definitions of the words because they have fundamentally altered the theology. In so doing, they have set themselves apart from Christianity.

Mormons are not Christian and no amount wordplay is going to change that. To be Christian, Mormon theology would have to change, and it would have to start with the nature of God. To do that, for example, you would have to determine that the whole Joseph Smith First Vision story was a fraud and it goes downhill from there.