Is Mormonism a Polytheistic religion?

[KathleenGee]

Well, right now I have to take my two dingo dogs out down to the creek and around for a run.

I spoke with my pastor today about my intention to write to Cardinal Leveda about Mormons using a few sentences of saints to use to prove we all become gods some day if we accept the baptism when we are dead. I doubt it.

He got a big smile…

Our church artist was up on the scaffold working on the new icon…and I told her they are now putting up the Mormon temple in Rome…she was in shock.

I would like to see the Mormons save our economy…

 

[catholic-rcia]

Catholic-RCIA,

I think you must be kidding, right?

If it’s not in accordance with the Bible (KJV best to use in English), then I assure you I not only won’t agree with it, but I will know it is evidence of the apostasy that was prophesied by Christ and by John.

But as I’ve noted before, the allowance for that to happen was planned by God in His wisdom, to allow for free will choice–even the kinds of choices one sees as people read a text and find exactly the wrong meaning as has been seen in recent comments in this thread about Emma Smith, who was being advised to be faithful in her marriage and not commit adultery or she would be “destroyed” which word has the same meaning as in Acts 3:23–meaning be held accountable for not repenting through the atonement of Christ, and be held accountable for their own sins and thus suffer “second death” by losing the Spirit of the Lord if not repenting and forgiving as Christ taught.

But thanks for thinking of me in your comment, Rich.

No, not kidding at all. What you read is from Christ’s Church. This is authentic revelation.
Did you study the footnotes?
This is real Parker. Study the footnotes.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Catholic-RCIA,

I think you must be kidding, right?

If it’s not in accordance with the Bible (KJV best to use in English), then I assure you I not only won’t agree with it, but I will know it is evidence of the apostasy that was prophesied by Christ and by John.

But as I’ve noted before, the allowance for that to happen was planned by God in His wisdom, to allow for free will choice–even the kinds of choices one sees as people read a text and find exactly the wrong meaning as has been seen in recent comments in this thread about** Emma Smith, who was being advised to be faithful in her marriage and not commit adultery or she would be “destroyed**” which word has the same meaning as in Acts 3:23–meaning be held accountable for not repenting through the atonement of Christ, and be held accountable for their own sins and thus suffer “second death” by losing the Spirit of the Lord if not repenting and forgiving as Christ taught.

But thanks for thinking of me in your comment, Rich.

Of course because everyone knows what a little tart Emma was, if anyone needed God to tell them specifically not to commit adultery it was Emma Smith

 

[acarlson]

I believe very few Catholics realy understand the theology of the Trinity

As my bible study leader once said, I believe that if any person speaks about the Trinity for more than 15 seconds, they’re committing heresy! (Of course that’s an exaggeration)

Why does the Trinity have to make sense? Why can’t God’s three-in-one nature be incomprehensible to us? Can’t we just take his word on it? I think the RCC does a fantastic job of explaining the Trinity so that the average layman has the best, FLAWED, HUMAN understanding of God. . but without appearing to understand God as God understands himself.

After reading through these few pages, I have to cast my vote that Mormonism IS a polytheistic religion. Catholics believe there is ONE GOD in three persons who are each made of the same “divine stuff” as each other person. In a crude summary, Mormons believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinct and entirely separate from one another, which makes them each a god. More than one god = polytheism.

:twocents:

 

[Jim_Dandy]

That’s scarey? You do realize that Joseph Smith prophesied that the Mormons are also destined to save America, right?
The White Horse Prophecy

Not only are they supposed to be the new church, but they’re also destined to rule America (if not the whole world). They tend to look at the Constitution as right up there on par with Holy Scripture.

Maybe we should start a new thread, just for this topic.

Good idea! Years ago there was an article in a magazine that detailed Mormon assets, and it blew my mind. They owned so much of our financial infrastructure. I’d like to know if anyone has up-to-date information.

I didn’t know about the White Horse Prophecy. THANKS!

 

[PaulDupre]

One thing that I have never seen any of them explain, is how their Jesus even qualified to reach the ‘celestial kingdom’, since he was just one of their older ‘brothers’ who never got married, which is supposed to be an automatic demerit for any Mormon that wants to be a god. I’d be very interested in hearing their explanation for that one.

The founding “prophets and apostles” of Mormonism taught that Jesus was married. In fact they taught that he was a polygamist and had children. That teaching is “not emphasized” these days, but many Mormons still believe it, including several on this forum.

Here is a post about it. The whole thread is quite interesting.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[Jim_Dandy]

But as I’ve noted before, the allowance for that to happen was planned by God in His wisdom, to allow for free will choice–even the kinds of choices one sees as people read a text and find exactly the wrong meaning as has been seen in recent comments in this thread about Emma Smith, who was being advised to be faithful in her marriage and not commit adultery or she would be “destroyed” which word has the same meaning as in Acts 3:23–meaning be held accountable for not repenting through the atonement of Christ, and be held accountable for their own sins and thus suffer “second death” by losing the Spirit of the Lord if not repenting and forgiving as Christ taught.

Has anyone kept track of the words in Mormonism that Mormons tell us don’t mean what they say? Here’s another. Destroyed doesn’t mean destroyed.

 

[PaulDupre]

Has anyone kept track of the words in Mormonism that Mormons tell us don’t mean what they say? Here’s another. Destroyed doesn’t mean destroyed.

Modern Mormon apologetics is focused on plausible deniability. They are trying to distance themselves from much of what their prophets and apostles have taught in the past. One way to create plausible deniability is to redefine and therefore confuse the meanings of certain words. That gives the Mormons a certain amount of wiggle room to say “that statement from that LDS prophet may not mean what it says because such-and-such a word actually means such-and-so to us…”.

Paul (formerly LDS, now LDS)

 

[zaffiroborant]

Has anyone kept track of the words in Mormonism that Mormons tell us don’t mean what they say? Here’s another. Destroyed doesn’t mean destroyed.

I keep thinking I have to do that.

 

[KathleenGee]

Mormon apostles come to an end…just like their great apostasy …but our Apostles, witnesses of Jesus Christ, chose successors for every generation…

Mormons believe in revelation revealing itself all the time…but it is a changing revelation.

Mormons would do themselves alot of good to study St. Thomas Aquinas’ ‘The Summa’…just the first book on God…and study his teaching on the Eucharist from which his statement was used in CC460…that Mormons twist into the opposite.

We don’t want the forbidden fruit given Eve.

Mormons need to have full teachings of our faith…not the few sentences here and there with no content and not representing our faith…that is sleazy. So many Mormons target their opposition and obsession with the Catholic Church.

This man told me today at church, the Mormons at heart want to be Catholics…they want the Catholic Church…may be they can only handle a little at a time…but it is not good to be in division or always have these goals you have to meet or all these recommendations…

So my pastor came up with this idea…he said you Mormons should just join the Catholic Church and get it over with…Here you and the many followers will not hear anymore false or distorted teachings, here you can go to RCIA, go at your own speed…here in the Catholic Church, you can say whatever it is you don’t understand, or ask questions, or even say in RCIA or to us what you don’t like. You do not have to become baptized or stay in RCIA.

It is up to you to decide whether to become a baptized Catholic. But here, you will not have to hear any more things about the Catholic Church, or be concerned about this new relationship, or about all these Mormon ideas that keep changing and changing…

In regards to the Mormons saving the Constitution in his prophecy, you will also find American citizens who are Catholic who are just as patriotic and loyal to the Constitution as the Mormons.

So my pastor’s response to Mormons…Come into the Catholic Church…just get it over with!!! Mormon people, come into the Catholic Church…you will find out many good things that will give you life…and a new beginning…

 

[ParkerD]

Has anyone kept track of the words in Mormonism that Mormons tell us don’t mean what they say? Here’s another. Destroyed doesn’t mean destroyed.

So if I am understanding the meaning drawn from Acts 3:23 by Catholics, Catholics think that Peter was saying that God was going to “destroy” everyone who didn’t believe in Christ? Does that mean eliminate, as in completely destroy?

 

[Telstar]

Good idea! Years ago there was an article in a magazine that detailed Mormon assets, and it blew my mind. They owned so much of our financial infrastructure. I’d like to know if anyone has up-to-date information.

I didn’t know about the White Horse Prophecy. THANKS!

They hide all of their property very well, from what I’ve heard. Another instance of “Lying for the lord”? Maybe. I do know that there are many affluent members of the church that have their fingers in a lot of the biggest businesses, banks and corporations in the US. A real ‘tinfoil hat’ conspiracy theorist could have a field day coming up with some interesting scenarios for that situation, especially in light of that prophecy. I first learned about it a couple of years ago. That subject alone could go on for a very long time, I’m sure. Of course, all LDS deny that they believe it now, or ever have believed it. They insist, “It’s not taught as LDS doctrine.”, even though almost every Mormon leader has waxed poetic over it since it was first uttered by Joseph Smith.

Mormon theology (?) is definitely based on men already being gods ‘in transition’. It’s a humanistically focused religion that fails to see or acknowledge the infinite power of God, Himself. It even reduces the Angels to being ‘spirit children waiting to be born’. They only see ‘gods’ in limited, humanistic terms that are based on this earth and it’s physical properties. There are potentially billions of billions of different gods that could eventually exist, just from this earth alone. If that’s not polytheistic, then I don’t know what is.

I wonder if any Mormon mathematician has ever sat down and tried to extrapolate an approximation of how many gods there would eventually be, and how soon they would run out of existing “matter” to create new worlds?

 

[Telstar]

No, not kidding at all. What you read is from Christ’s Church. This is authentic revelation.
Did you study the footnotes?
This is real Parker. Study the footnotes.

I doubt he even read it at all. He’s not interested in any of it. Most likely, it wouldn’t have any affect on him at all, even if he did. Dyed in the wool Mormons are determined to become gods by following everything Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught them… to the letter. They can’t let themselves even consider that anyone else could possibly be telling the truth. Their god might find out that they’re ‘apostates’ and take away all of their hopes of ‘omnipotent’ power just for questioning their FFs. It’s sad because they have no idea what they’re missing.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

So if I am understanding the meaning drawn from Acts 3:23 by Catholics, Catholics think that Peter was saying that God was going to “destroy” everyone who didn’t believe in Christ? Does that mean eliminate, as in completely destroy?

Acts 3:22-23 is a quotation from Deuteronomy 18:18-19 and is applied to Jesus: “A prophet like me will the Lord, your God, raise up for you from among your own kinsmen; to him you shall listen in all that he may say to you. Everyone who does not listen to that prophet [Jesus] will be cut off from the people.” So what the KJV translates as ‘destroyed,’ the NAB translates as ‘cut off from the people.’

No such translation question exists in D&C 132:54. J. Smith wrote destroyed in English and destroyed is what he meant. And it wasn’t Emma’s committing adultery that was Smith’s concern – it was her tolerance of his serial adultery that he was using a threat from God to secure.

Jim Dandy

 

[ParkerD]

I doubt he even read it at all. He’s not interested in any of it… It’s sad because they have no idea what they’re missing.

This is for Catholic-RCIA to reiterate:

I read it (speed-read), and if you would like I will quote the many lines that are profoundly opposite to the words and teachings of the Bible. As I had stated earlier and reiterate, the apostasy from Biblical teachings is immediately evident in the words of that catechism, over and over again. But to each their own.

 

[ParkerD]

Acts 3:22-23 is a quotation from Deuteronomy 18:18-19 and is applied to Jesus: “A prophet like me will the Lord, your God, raise up for you from among your own kinsmen; to him you shall listen in all that he may say to you. Everyone who does not listen to that prophet [Jesus] will be cut off from the people.” So what the KJV translates as ‘destroyed,’ the NAB translates as ‘cut off from the people.’

No such translation question exists in D&C 132:54. J. Smith wrote destroyed in English and destroyed is what he meant. And it wasn’t Emma’s committing adultery…

To the general reader:

Here is D&C 132:54–

54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

The words “cleave unto” are familiar to Latter-day Saints because of other scriptures.

Genesis 2:24
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Doctrine and Covenants 42:22
22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else.

“Cleave unto” has the same meaning as those words in Genesis 2:24, and means to be faithful in marriage and draw strength from one another in marriage and become “one”.

“Destroy” is also a word found in the Bible (KJV), and thus is an allusion. An allusion means that the word has more meaning when the alluded scripture is taken into account. (A student of literature understands what is meant by “allusion”, as this is a very common literary term describing a very common literary and teaching device–one which the Savior used repeatedly during His ministry by quoting verses or teachings which we find in the Old Testament.) The alluded scripture in this case is Acts 3:23 (KJV), which does not include the same words as Deuteronomy 18:19.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

To the general reader:

Here is D&C 132:54–

54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

The words “cleave unto” are familiar to Latter-day Saints because of other scriptures.

Genesis 2:24
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Doctrine and Covenants 42:22
22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else.

“Cleave unto” has the same meaning as those words in Genesis 2:24, and means to be faithful in marriage and draw strength from one another in marriage and become “one”.

“Destroy” is also a word found in the Bible (KJV), and thus is an allusion. An allusion means that the word has more meaning when the alluded scripture is taken into account. (A student of literature understands what is meant by “allusion”, as this is a very common literary term describing a very common literary and teaching device–one which the Savior used repeatedly during His ministry by quoting verses or teachings which we find in the Old Testament.) The alluded scripture in this case is Acts 3:23 (KJV), which does not include the same words as Deuteronomy 18:19.

The quote in Acts 3:22 begins with the words (from the KJV), “Moses truly said unto the fathers. . .” It is from Deuteronomy 18:18-19 and continues in 3:23.

The “alluded scripture” is your attempt to whitewash what Smith was clearly doing – using God to threaten Emma. Smith did not claim he was ‘alluding to Acts 3:23.’ You did!

D&C 132:54 in context shows that the “commandment” being urged upon poor hapless Emma is that she accept Joseph’s multiple wives.

From the D&C intro to Section 132: “Revelation given through Joseph Smith, the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenent, including the eternity of marriage covernent, as also the plurality of wives . . .” It concludes: " . . . the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known to the prophet since 1831." (That’s when Joseph’s philandering began with a girl named Fanny Alger who lived in his home and was kicked out by Emma when she discovered the affair.)

We need a new thread - the moderator will correct us for being off topic.

Jim Dandy

 

[ParkerD]

To the general reader:

Allusions within the Bible ought to be studied and understood, in order to not be mislead by someone who would threaten or misguide with a verse for which they haven’t figured out that there was an allusion being made.

For example, the word “rock” is nearly always (unless the language is talking about a material substance such as the rocks used by David to kill Goliath) an allusion to Christ, the Rock, the Stone of Israel. Peter is not the “rock” in this sense of allusions in the Bible. Peter knew this, and taught that Christ is the Rock.

The words “destroy” or “destruction” usually are an allusion to coming under the influence of the “destroyer”, who is the fallen angel, Satan–so it is an allusion to losing the influence of the Holy Spirit (the second death) and thus falling prey to Satan’s grasp. Sometimes that grasp is referred to as “everlasting chains”.

One should not feel “threatened” if someone tells them “they are going to be destroyed” if they follow a certain path. In a Biblical sense, it means they should check the influence they are following and change their behavior by seeking to follow the living Christ, the Good Shepherd, and seek the influence of the Holy Spirit in their life in order to keep repenting, keep growing, become sanctified by the Spirit, and prepare to meet God when the time comes.

 

[KathleenGee]

Parker,

Are you implying the Rock of Peter…meaning the Catholic Church headquarters in particular, is going to be destroyed?

Today is the feast day of the Transfiguration of Our Lord. This is the event beginning Christ’s new dimension of ministry…and the apostles present witnessing Christ’s light and glory, as well as strengthened in preparation for Christ’s Passion. We pray today in the Liturgy of the Hours to receive Christ’s light so we can see light, and we pray for all men to walk in Christ’s light, as well as for God’s blessing on the Jewish people who of old were called to be His chosen nation.

In Romans 8:16-17, ‘The Spirit himself gives witness with our spirit that we are children of God. But if we are children, we are heirs as well: heirs of God, heirs with Christ, if only we suffer with Him so as to be glorified with Him…’ We are instruments of Christ, not separate, not gods of our own will.

In contrast to honors and riches of this world…the very things Satan tempted Christ with…and the assumption that Satan also wished to be as a god, demanding the Lord bow down and worship him…

St. Anastasius of Sinai in his words, affirmed that God is and always will be…'Let us run with confidence and joy to enter into the cloud like Moses and Elijah, or like Jame and John. Let us be caught up like Peter to behold the divine vision and to be transfigured by that glorious transfiguration. Let us retire from the world, stand aloof from the earth, rise above the body, detach ourselves from creatures and turn to the Creator, to whom Peter in ecstasy exclaimed: ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here.’

We Catholics and Christians in general come in time to know that the greatest possession we can have is Jesus Christ, the Pearl of Great Price and to begin to dwell in His kingdom already here on earth.

It doesn’t matter if physical buildings go down by the hands of terrorists or earthquakes or comets. What stands is Jesus Christ, the rock of Peter, the successors to the apostles and their disciples, and the faithful with the living Eucharist within us.

St. Anastasius continues, 'It is indeed good to be here, as you have said, Peter. It is good to be with Jesus and to remain here for ever. What greater happiness or higher honor could we have than to be with God, to be made like him and to live in his light?

'Therefore, since each of us possesses God in his heart and is being transformed into his divine image, we also should cry out with joy: ‘It is good for us to be here–here where all things shine with divine radiance, where there is joy and gladness and exultation; where there is nothing in our hearts, but peace, serenity and stillness; where God is seen. For here, in our hearts, Christ takes up his abode altogether with the Father, saying as he enters: “Today salvation has come to this house”. With Christ, our hearts receive all the wealth of his eternal blessings, and there where they are stored up for us in him, we see reflected as in a mirror both the firstfruits and the whole of the world to come’

St. Anastasius lived in the 600’s, living 1230 years before Joseph Smith…and we are still reflecting and recording in our hearts these same teachings.

The Resurrected Lord draws all of creation up to Himself…When we are in Christ, nothing is lost, not our faith, not our Church.

 

[catholic-rcia]

I doubt he even read it at all. He’s not interested in any of it. Most likely, it wouldn’t have any affect on him at all, even if he did. Dyed in the wool Mormons are determined to become gods by following everything Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught them… to the letter. They can’t let themselves even consider that anyone else could possibly be telling the truth. Their god might find out that they’re ‘apostates’ and take away all of their hopes of ‘omnipotent’ power just for questioning their FFs. It’s sad because they have no idea what they’re missing.

Parker says he denies all of what is written about the fall of mankind. In that he is denying Chritsianity to the fullest

Here it is again, what he is denying
scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm#392