Is Mormonism a Polytheistic religion?

[zaffiroborant]

Miriam,

Everyone certainly has their free will choice, and of course it was not a stretch at all to move from the Anglican church, which was clearly a human institution, back to the Catholic church.

I do find it surprising about all the clear Biblical meanings that are passed over, but then I have been able to see through conversations on this forum, how carefully the path is laid out for those meanings to be passed over–but it has been a learning experience for me to see that actually work.

I have noted how clearly the path is laid out for LDS meanings in the many teaching manuals of your church starting with those intended for people 18 months to 3 years old.

 

[NewSeeker]

I have noted how clearly the path is laid out for LDS meanings in the many teaching manuals of your church starting with those intended for people 18 months to 3 years old.

This is true. The “church is true” path laid out in the Sunbeams (age 3 children) teaching manuals is reinforced by parents when they take their children to the podium on Fast Sundays and whisper the child’s first testimony in her ear and the child then repeats publicly in a small child’s voice: “I’d like to bear my testimony…I know this church is true…I know Joseph Smith was a true prophet…I love my mommy and my daddy…in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.” At the end of the testimony, everyone goes “Awwww…” at the cuteness on display. For people brought up in the church, the “church is true” mantra is hammered home beginning in childhood in this fashion and is repeated at every opportunity growing up. A testimony that the “church is true” is attached to the end of every sacrament meeting talk, every sunday school lesson given, all every priesthood or relief society lesson given. The self-reassuring mantra is so commonly parroted and omnipresent growing up, that in suburban Utah testimony terminology like “I’d like to bear my testimony” or “in the name of Jesus Christ, amen” accidently slips out in non-church settings, like the time Dana H. let the latter slip at the end of her speech given for her jr. high student body presidential campaign. “Ooops!” [cue student laughter in the audience]. But it all starts when they’re very young in testimony meeting, with mom or dad whispering in their ear exactly what they are to begin asserting for the rest of their lives over and over and over and over again - “I’d like to bear my testimony, I know this church is true”.

NS

 

[ParkerD]

I have noted how clearly the path is laid out for LDS meanings in the many teaching manuals of your church starting with those intended for people 18 months to 3 years old.

Zaffiroborant,

I’ve gotten into many a conversation on these threads that aren’t covered in the same way in the teaching manuals, but are clear in the Bible nonetheless. That has made it worth the time spent, to explore verses that I hadn’t spent as much time thinking about before as when I was challenged to discuss their meaning.

But what is delightful to recognize is that everyone is getting what they want–what they truly desire, as though they had built their own religion from what satisfies them personally and is meaningful to them. So it all turns out for the best, since it means free will choice has been completely preserved, and that the deep-down motives of people are revealed by what they choose in the process.

As far as teaching children, Deuteronomy and Leviticus and Proverbs certainly teach that children should be taught the gospel, as did the Savior by example. Doing so makes complete sense to me. I love the Isaiah passage, “All thy children shall be taught of the Lord, and great shall be the peace of thy children.”

Peace and deep joy to you and all.

 

[Miriam1947]

Zaffiroborant,

I’ve gotten into many a conversation on these threads that aren’t covered in the same way in the teaching manuals, but are clear in the Bible nonetheless. That has made it worth the time spent, to explore verses that I hadn’t spent as much time thinking about before as when I was challenged to discuss their meaning.

But what is delightful to recognize is that everyone is getting what they want–what they truly desire, as though they had built their own religion from what satisfies them personally and is meaningful to them. So it all turns out for the best, since it means free will choice has been completely preserved, and that the deep-down motives of people are revealed by what they choose in the process.

As far as teaching children, Deuteronomy and Leviticus and Proverbs certainly teach that children should be taught the gospel, as did the Savior by example. Doing so makes complete sense to me. I love the Isaiah passage, “All thy children shall be taught of the Lord, and great shall be the peace of thy children.”

Peace and deep joy to you and all.

Thanks for letting us know what you really think. I became Catholic because it is true. That is why I am not a Mormon.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Zaffiroborant,

thinking about before as when I was challenged to discuss their meaning.

But what is delightful to recognize is that everyone is getting what they want–what they truly desire, as though they had built their own religion from what satisfies them personally and is meaningful to them. So it all turns out for the best, since it means free will choice has been completely preserved, and that the deep-down motives of people are revealed by what they choose in the process. end of quote

Not why I became Catholic. It was a lot more than that, deeper. My Religion was built not by me…by Jesus. I would call it alignment into truth. I was broadsided!

Dear Parker
When those from the LDS faith walk into our church to learn about it one thing is apparent. If they come from a strong LDS family, once they find out about this they are told that by this choice they will loose their family.

1. Her children and her husband will leave her if she continues on. After her Baptism they remained with her even after she chose Jesus over them. They attend Mass with her at Easter and Christmas.
2. Her dad told her she will loose her family (Bishops daughter Grace Idaho) When she was baptized her father gave her a beautiful Rosary.
3. Her dad (LDS Bishop) Can’t you just go along with it for our families sake? Five years after her baptism they just don’t speak about religion. But the family is together.

I could go on. I could even ask them for their stories and post them.

While standing in a line in a grocery store in Northern Utah a grandmother said this to her grandchild who was maybe three years old.

‘Why does grandma love you so much?”
“Because you know the church is true”

I was ok with it, but the hurt I felt was in my reflection of Jesus. You just put your hands up, smile at them and move on. You love them.

I was in a mans office from nine pm until 12am while this man tries to convert me to the LDS faith. He showed me an old Mormon video on why their church is true. It portrayed Christians as witches. When it was over he said

“Rich, now can see that our church is true?”

When I told him no he got angry and told me to leave. I went to embrace him but he would have no part of that. As I began to turn to leave he said
“You really think a lot of that fellow Jesus”

My reaction “All praise and glory to Him”

When two LDS Missionaries came into my home I spoke about the Most Holy Trinity. I went over many scriptures with them. At one point the older Missionary laughed when I spoke about God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The other went into the this out loud “I believe the church is true……

This was after I told the older Missionary (Lovingly) he was laughing at God.

When its right the peace of Christ will allow you to see others as God sees them. It is all about them. Only Christ can fill us and them with light. I know my Church is true because I have been given a gift that no human can take away………My Lord and my God Jesus Christ. Only in Him is life found. The Treasure he Himself spoke of. For me the land purchased, the field is the Holy Mass.
www.utahmission.com

 

[Jay53]

But what is delightful to recognize is that everyone is getting what they want–what they truly desire, as though they had built their own religion from what satisfies them personally and is meaningful to them. So it all turns out for the best, since it means free will choice has been completely preserved, and that the deep-down motives of people are revealed by what they choose in the process.

Wow!! Rather revealing!!!

 

[zaffiroborant]

Zaffiroborant,

I’ve gotten into many a conversation on these threads that aren’t covered in the same way in the teaching manuals, but are clear in the Bible nonetheless. That has made it worth the time spent, to explore verses that I hadn’t spent as much time thinking about before as when I was challenged to discuss their meaning.

.

Well of course they are “clear” the ground work for meaning has been laid down since toddlerhood. You can see this with the JW’s also, once the presuppositions are in place it’s natural to read everything in light of them.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Thanks for letting us know what you really think. I became Catholic because it is true. That is why I am not a Mormon.

Wow!! Rather revealing!!!

I’m not sure why there is surprise over this, he has said this repeatedly If you keep an eye out you will find him slipping in something like* “everyone is getting what they want–what they truly desire”* almost regularly. Granted he usually doesn’t include the “built their own religion” part but even if left off the implication is there. Watch for it, make it a game

 

[Crdl2Grv]

I do find it surprising about all the clear Biblical meanings that are passed over, but then I have been able to see through conversations on this forum, how carefully the path is laid out for those meanings to be passed over–but it has been a learning experience for me to see that actually work.

Come on, dude. You’re better than that.

 

[zaffiroborant]

]Come on, dude. You’re better than that.

Really?

RebeccaJ,

So I emphasize free will choice repeatedly in this forum, and note that Jesus deliberately acted in ways to keep free will choice available with no sense of “gotta believe this religion and this set of beliefs, because the ECF say such and such” about verses they had no idea what they meant, and you say I have not experienced freedom. Yeah, right.

I suggest that not only do you have no idea what you’re talking about, but that it comes from your frame of reference that you don’t. I certainly am not offended by this kind of thinking, at all.

Jesus really did show by His actions that He was teaching people on the level they were prepared to receive. Thus He helped those “know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” who were prepared to receive the truths He had “hidden in a field.”

It simply goes over some heads. They would rather think He prepared a plan that forced everyone into compliance, using a verse that completely departed from all He had taught by saying “Peter is the rock.”

Anyone who conjectures that that kind of plan would be establishing “freedom” has no idea what they’re talking about as to the use of the word.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

Fair enough…

 

[Miriam1947]

Parker here is an article which explains why we Catholics believe that our Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth and why it has been true for almost 2,000 years.

catholic.com/thisrock/2010/1005fea4.asp

When I was in the Bible doctrine class at Bob Jones University, one of the verses we had to memorize was Matthew 16:18: “I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.”

A Catholic student might memorize this verse to prove his beliefs about the papacy. We learned it in order to deny Catholic beliefs about the papacy. It was explained that the rock in this verse was not Peter, but his profession of faith that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. Christ’s pun on the name “Peter-petros” was not a pun at all because petros meant little stone, so Jesus could not have intended the rock to be Peter because he was speaking of a foundation stone. Only many years later did I begin to reassess the teaching I had received about this famous and important verse.

The Fundamentalists claimed that Catholics built the entire edifice of papal authority on this one verse taken out of context—a misuse of Scripture. An important doctrine, they said, should not be developed on one proof-text alone. In fact they are right, and as I began to study the Catholic faith more openly, I came to understand that the Catholic Church does not rely on this one verse alone to support papal claims but considers the whole verse in context. In addition, instead of one proof-text, there are three important biblical images that come together to support the Catholic Church’s claims to papal authority.

The three images are rock, steward, and shepherd. These three images are found not just in one verse, but are rooted in the Old Testament and affirmed in the New. Like a strong, three-strand, braided rope, these three images of rock, steward, and shepherd provide a powerful interlocking and interdependent support for the authority Christ intended to leave with his Church on earth.

Read the whole thing.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker here is an article which explains why we Catholics believe that our Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth and why it has been true for almost 2,000 years…
The three images are rock, steward, and shepherd. These three images are found not just in one verse, but are rooted in the Old Testament and affirmed in the New. Like a strong, three-strand, braided rope, these three images of rock, steward, and shepherd provide a powerful interlocking and interdependent support for the authority Christ intended to leave with his Church on earth.

Read the whole thing.

Miriam,

I’d never read that article before, so it was interesting to see those three ideas presented together, each of which is a clear reference to Christ as the Rock, as He who alone bears the key of the house of David upon His shoulder (see Isaiah 9:6) and shall “open, and none shall shut”, and “shall shut, and none shall open”. (see Revelation 1:18 and 3:7), and as the Good Shepherd, who doesn’t need an intermediary because He has the Holy Ghost as One sent to testify of Him and testify to knowledge of truth, including the knowledge that He lives and strengthens believers in Him.

Those are very primary symbols of Jesus Christ, with deep meaning that never goes away or gets old which the apostles were no doubt well aware of, which explains why Peter never, ever thought of himself as “the rock”. He knew Christ was and is “the Rock”, always. We can be, and are, the sheep of the Good Shepherd. His sheep know His voice–it is a voice of perfect peace.

 

[rock17]

Miriam,

I’d never read that article before, so it was interesting to see those three ideas presented together, each of which is a clear reference to Christ as the Rock, as He who alone bears the key of the house of David upon His shoulder (see Isaiah 9:6) and shall “open, and none shall shut”, and “shall shut, and none shall open”. (see Revelation 1:18 and 3:7), and as the Good Shepherd, who doesn’t need an intermediary because He has the Holy Ghost as One sent to testify of Him and testify to knowledge of truth, including the knowledge that He lives and strengthens believers in Him.

Those are very primary symbols of Jesus Christ, with deep meaning that never goes away or gets old which the apostles were no doubt well aware of, which explains why Peter never, ever thought of himself as “the rock”. He knew Christ was and is “the Rock”, always. We can be, and are, the sheep of the Good Shepherd. His sheep know His voice–it is a voice of perfect peace.

So if Jesus was the perfect peace then why was there a need for the restoration of the Gospel? And I think you would agree to the importance of a organized religous society. And for the to be organazation there needs to be leadership and Jesus clearly gives that the leadership role to peter, and why would Jesus who is doing God’s will set up a society that is destined to fail? Its seems illogical to claim that something that was created by someone who knows all things would not know that peter would not have a successor. And why would Christ go through all the trouble of dying and so forth for it to be lost in one generation? the argument for peter not being the rock and there being an apostasy is illogical.

 

[ParkerD]

So if Jesus was the perfect peace then why was there a need for the restoration of the Gospel?

Hi, Rock17,

John saw that restoration in vision, and saw that the church was taken into the wilderness from among the people.

The Savior gave a parable saying that there would be husbandmen who would not only plot to “kill him” meaning kill the promised son, but that they would plot to “seize on his inheritance”. (Matthew 21:21) That parable was a prophecy, including verse 42 which talks about the “stone which the builders rejected” which is what is being done every time Peter is made to be “the rock” instead of Christ in any verse about “the rock”. Also including verse 43 which says the kingdom of God would be “taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”

People don’t usually have what I would call “perfect peace” unless they hear the voice of the Good Shepherd directly, and that is exactly what He promised they would have in their lives although He was going to ascend into heaven and be in heaven. He was still the Rock, and still the Good Shepherd, and still the bearer of the key of David with the government upon His shoulder and the opening and shutting of the gates of hell or of heaven (whichever is applicable for each soul) upon His shoulder.

The reason sheep and lambs can lie down feeling safe is that they do hear the Good Shepherd’s voice directly, and thus feel safe and calm, peaceful, settled in a good pasture.

And I think you would agree to the importance of a organized religous society. And for the to be organazation there needs to be leadership and Jesus clearly gives that the leadership role to peter, and why would Jesus who is doing God’s will set up a society that is destined to fail?

To allow free will choice among those who were offered the chance to listen and hear His voice and be gathered to Him, Who still lives and still calls as the Good Shepherd. If they feel compelled, then that is not free will choice. Tradition as the precursor to free will choice is not offering free will choice–it is an underlying compulsion.

Also, to allow that the fulfillment of the parables in Matthew 13:44-46 would show that the kingdom of heaven would be hidden, not obvious. The treasure would be hidden, not obvious.

Its seems illogical to claim that something that was created by someone who knows all things would not know that peter would not have a successor. And why would Christ go through all the trouble of dying and so forth for it to be lost in one generation?

Jesus said His kingdom is “not of this world”. His “dying and so forth” was for all the world–all the world for all time, past, then-present, and then-future. That was His message, and that is still His message today. His purposes were far more encompassing than the time Peter was alive, and that is shown very particularly in the vision John had as recorded in the book of Revelation.

the argument for peter not being the rock and there being an apostasy is illogical.

Which statement is what I had noted is an extension of logic that makes “tradition” a ruler and free will choice less-than-possible for those who insist on that logic as the basis of their decision about the “stone which the builders rejected”–the Rock upon which they should voluntarily and with perfect peace, build their foundation.

 

[Miriam1947]

Miriam,

I’d never read that article before, so it was interesting to see those three ideas presented together, each of which is a clear reference to Christ as the Rock, as He who alone bears the key of the house of David upon His shoulder (see Isaiah 9:6) and shall “open, and none shall shut”, and “shall shut, and none shall open”. (see Revelation 1:18 and 3:7), and as the Good Shepherd, who doesn’t need an intermediary because He has the Holy Ghost as One sent to testify of Him and testify to knowledge of truth, including the knowledge that He lives and strengthens believers in Him.

Those are very primary symbols of Jesus Christ, with deep meaning that never goes away or gets old which the apostles were no doubt well aware of, which explains why Peter never, ever thought of himself as “the rock”. He knew Christ was and is “the Rock”, always. We can be, and are, the sheep of the Good Shepherd. His sheep know His voice–it is a voice of perfect peace.

from the article:

So the king holds the keys of the kingdom, but he delegates his power to the steward, and the keys of the kingdom are the symbol of this delegated authority. The keys not only opened all the doors, but they provided access to the store houses and financial resources of the king. In addition, the keys of the kingdom were worn on a sash that was a ceremonial badge of office. The passage from Isaiah and the customs all reveal that the role of the royal steward was an office given by the king, and that it was a successive office—the keys being handed to the next steward as a sign of the continuing delegated authority of the king himself (See “A Successive Ministry,” above).

 

[rock17]

Hi, Rock17,

John saw that restoration in vision, and saw that the church was taken into the wilderness from among the people.
So there was a Church who was the leader worldly leader of that church? And i am wondering when the early church was fighting heresies what side would the lds church take if they had to say who was the most true? would they side with Adoptionism, Apollonarism, Aquarii, Arianism, Docetism, Donatism, Ebiontism, Eutychaiansim, Gnosticism, Iconclasm, Macedonianism, Manicheanism, Marcionism, Modalism, Monarchiansim, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Montanism, Nestorianism, Novatianism, Origenism, Patipassianism, Pelagiansim, Pneumatomachiansism, Sabellianism, Semi-Arianism, Semi-Pelagianism or Subordinationsim? or what was the Catholic Church or would they be non-believers because these were the choices when it came to Christianity.
The Savior gave a parable saying that there would be husbandmen who would not only plot to “kill him” meaning kill the promised son, but that they would plot to “seize on his inheritance”. (Matthew 21:21) That parable was a prophecy, including verse 42 which talks about the “stone which the builders rejected” which is what is being done every time Peter is made to be “the rock” instead of Christ in any verse about “the rock”. Also including verse 43 which says the kingdom of God would be “taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”

Are you talking about the parable of the tennats because that is the closet thing i could find we must be using different Bibles. He is talking about his own death and He in my translation the word stone is used not rock so there is a differnece there and Jesus ofcourse is the cornerstone, no argument there. People don’t usually have what I would call “perfect peace” unless they hear the voice of the Good Shepherd directly, and that is exactly what He promised they would have in their lives although He was going to ascend into heaven and be in heaven. He was still the Rock, and still the Good Shepherd, and still the bearer of the key of David with the government upon His shoulder and the opening and shutting of the gates of hell or of heaven (whichever is applicable for each soul) upon His shoulder.

I would say there is no perfect peace until we reach heaven because we are always striving for that perfect peace in God, When Jesus went up to heaven he had to leave a worldy leadership, just as you believe in the president and quorum and so forth.
The reason sheep and lambs can lie down feeling safe is that they do hear the Good Shepherd’s voice directly, and thus feel safe and calm, peaceful, settled in a good pasture.

Yes he leads us through the valley of death and I fear no evil i don’t see how this makes him the worldy leader of the church and not just the heavenly leader and inspiration for men to do better, how does this make him a worldy leader after he left this world.
To allow free will choice among those who were offered the chance to listen and hear His voice and be gathered to Him, Who still lives and still calls as the Good Shepherd. If they feel compelled, then that is not free will choice. Tradition as the precursor to free will choice is not offering free will choice–it is an underlying compulsion.

Are you saying that tradition and logic and what the great Christian minds who spent lifetimes pondering and disscussing should have no effect on our thinking at all, just start anew with each person? than why have the Bible the Bible is a form of Tradition? We learn to teach, if we don’t teach the tradition than we are failing the next generation.
Also, to allow that the fulfillment of the parables in Matthew 13:44-46 would show that the kingdom of heaven would be hidden, not obvious. The treasure would be hidden, not obvious.
No it says the kingdom of heaven is like a treasure someone finds in a field and the person who finds it must sell all he has to buy the field so he can own the treasure, i am not saying that heaven is easy to get to but i think you took it out of context it means you must give up everything it is just talking about what must be done not that it is hard to find.

Jesus said His kingdom is “not of this world”. His “dying and so forth” was for all the world–all the world for all time, past, then-present, and then-future. That was His message, and that is still His message today. His purposes were far more encompassing than the time Peter was alive, and that is shown very particularly in the vision John had as recorded in the book of Revelation.

Yes the kingdom is eternal but we were only alowed into the kingdom with the death of Jesus right? And for entrance into heaven we need a priesthood to conduct baptism right? so without a priesthood there would be no baptism meaning no heaven so the gates of heaven would than be closed to man once more until the vision of Joseph Smith and the priesthood restoration right? Which statement is what I had noted is an extension of logic that makes “tradition” a ruler and free will choice less-than-possible for those who insist on that logic as the basis of their decision about the “stone which the builders rejected”–the Rock upon which they should voluntarily and with perfect peace, build their foundation.

maby i am confused are you discrediting logic?Sorry i messed up on the quoting thing my answers are in blue

 

[Miriam1947]

Parker, in order to believe what you believe I would have to give up the Eucharist. Why would I give up the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus the Christ?

The Eucharist is very difficult for non-believers. Let’s get real here. Jesus is saying “This is my body given up for you.” Hello, can we talk? Way hard saying and in fact many of his followers left because this is such a hard saying. It really comes down to: Is Christ who He says He is? Or is He nuts? There are your choices. You pick. I already have.

Your idea of the Christ is so different from every other Christian belief that if makes no sense to me.

Even the Protestants (and I was one for 61 years) believe in the Christ. The Trinity. Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

You work very hard to promote your beliefs. And I respect you for it. That does not mean that you are right and that I am wrong. Only Jesus Christ is the one God and I am so very grateful to Him that He gave me the grace to understand and believe.

Your religion is not Christian and you know that. You do not believe in Christ as God. You cannot pray to Him. It is only to the Heavenly Father that you are allowed to pray to and that is because you separate out the Trinity into three separate gods. Not one person but three totally separate persons. The Father (one) the Son (two) and the Holy Spirit (three)

And let’s discuss communion. Bread and water? That is not even close to what Jesus instituted at the wedding at Cana. And in John? It is Passover and it is unleavened bread and wine. Read John 6. Learn it. Believe it.

I am so lucky. I pray to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One God, three persons.

I am so sorry that you are missing out on the fullness of the faith.

That is not your fault, obviously.

But, there will come a time when you must make a decision.

I will pray for you.

 

[ParkerD]

maby i am confused are you discrediting logic?Sorry i messed up on the quoting thing my answers are in blue

When logic is used as the sole basis for religious beliefs, then prayer would take a “back seat” and real communication, two-way, with God would take a “back seat” to logic. Heartfelt, unrehearsed, non-memorized prayer should definitely not take a back seat to logic. And if tradition sets up a monopoly position, then it defies logic that God who values free will choice tremendously would set up a monopoly position without there being more than one real, logical choice for each person to be able to make.

So there was a Church who was the leader worldly leader of that church? And I am wondering when the early church was fighting heresies what side would the lds church take if they had to say who was the most true? would they side with Adoptionism, Apollonarism, Aquarii, Arianism, Docetism, Donatism, Ebiontism, Eutychaiansim, Gnosticism, Iconclasm, Macedonianism, Manicheanism, Marcionism, Modalism, Monarchiansim, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Montanism, Nestorianism, Novatianism, Origenism, Patipassianism, Pelagiansim, Pneumatomachiansism, Sabellianism, Semi-Arianism, Semi-Pelagianism or Subordinationsim? or what was the Catholic Church or would they be non-believers because these were the choices when it came to Christianity.

Rock17,

At the time John had the vision he had, then he was the lead living apostle so that would mean he was the “worldly” leader of the church Jesus had organized. Peter had already been killed by that point in time.

Probably the Anabaptists, just guessing.

The Catholic church appears to have adapted itself to be more pleasing to Pharisees converts, it appears to me.

I would say there is no perfect peace until we reach heaven because we are always striving for that perfect peace in God,

Isaiah wrote, “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee.” (Isaiah 26:3)

My experience is that there really is “perfect peace” in this life, through prayer, repentance, forgiveness, and knowing the voice of the Good Shepherd and the voice of the Comforter.

Are you saying that tradition and logic and what the great Christian minds who spent lifetimes pondering and disscussing should have no effect on our thinking at all, just start anew with each person? than why have the Bible the Bible is a form of Tradition? We learn to teach, if we don’t teach the tradition than we are failing the next generation.

The effects of tradition are not always good, and often are not good.

The best source of wisdom about the Bible is to read the Bible and pray about its meaning, with heartfelt prayer using one’s own words. I think a Catholic does better to use the Douay Rheims translation than a more “modern” one.

how does this make him a worldy leader after he left this world.

He taught that He would still be with us. He is still with us, as a living, guiding Good Shepherd–but one must listen for His voice, His call, His guidance that He Himself gives person-to-person. That is the difference between the Shepherd and a “steward”.

A wish of peace to you, Rock17. (By the way, “stone” and “rock” would be understood to be the same thing.)

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,…

You work very hard to promote your beliefs. And I respect you for it. That does not mean that you are right and that I am wrong. Only Jesus Christ is the one God and I am so very grateful to Him that He gave me the grace to understand and believe.

Your religion is not Christian and you know that…

Miriam,

It would make little sense for us to discuss John 6, which I am very familiar with, as I have discussed those verses before with others and it is a wall.

Jesus Christ is the One Savior, the One King of Israel, the One Rock of salvation, the one Good Shepherd, the one Messiah, the Holy One of Israel, the Son of God. He is also Jehovah, which point of understanding was obviously not accepted by the Jewish leaders and is still not understood by those who half-heartedly teach that Jesus is Jehovah as well as being the Son of God and the Son of David, yet is said to be not separate and distinct from His Father.

My religion is Christian based on what the Bible teaches a Christian is, but is certainly not accepting of the Nicene creed.

But your statement about “Christian” says far more about the person making the statement than about the person they know nothing about other than that Latter-day Saints believe in the Son of God as the true and literal Son of God, and believe in following Him daily. (I realize it’s something you have been taught to say–but you could read the Bible about the subject and make your own independent decision instead of following what you have been taught to say–though I realize that is a pretty sizable “could”.)

A wish of peace and joy to you, Miriam.