Stephen168
New member
So the Mormon Church does have professional clergy
- Status
Stephen168
New member
I was told by a Mormon that:
Christ would never do anything wrong
Drinking alcohol is wrong
Therefore the wine in the bible was not alcohol.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Not really. They are not paid. Catholic clergy, on the other hand are in it for the money, don’t ya know.
T
Telstar
Guest
I find it hilarious that anyone would admit that their own “seminary” classes are taught by people “who may or may not know what they’re talking about”. Is that the typical formula that LDS always use in teaching their kids the most important facts about their faith? That explains why you can ask 10 different Mormons what they believe about a certain LDS doctrine or belief, and get 10 different answers.
P
Pepband_Mom
Guest
Lefty
So what is it: The ancient, continual use of wine or a man made 19th century prohibition (falsely) attributed to God. Why would God do a 180? He says in OT he Changeth NOT so seems LDS beliefs are 180’s from doctrine/dogma laid down centuries ago.
Why would God suddenly flip-flop as per Joseph & Brigham?
So what is it: The ancient, continual use of wine or a man made 19th century prohibition (falsely) attributed to God. Why would God do a 180? He says in OT he Changeth NOT so seems LDS beliefs are 180’s from doctrine/dogma laid down centuries ago.
Why would God suddenly flip-flop as per Joseph & Brigham?
S
sallybutler
Guest
I am looking at my mother’s copy of the New Testament from the 1930’s. She was Catholic. It is written in English before 1962. It is a ‘Catholic’ translation. Included in the preface is portions of Pope Benedict XV (15 for those that were not taught Roman Numerals in 3rd grade) encyclical letter from 1920 – again, before 1962 – on the reading of Holy Scripture. It ended with this quote “Our one desire for all the Church’s children is that, being saturated with the Bible, they may arrive at the all-surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ.”
This does not sound like the Church was hiding the Bible. Of course, if you add the fact, unlike other churches, every Catholic hears more bible readings than others do on Sundays (and in whatever the local language is, not in Latin) I wonder how anyone can say that the Church was ‘hiding’ the Bible. Pretty hard to hide something if it is read to millions of people every day
L
Lefty0908
Guest
Please do point out the factual errors.
L
Lefty0908
Guest
You missed my point. English versions of the Bible were printed before 1962. Tyndale and Bilney gave their lives for that. But I do think that it wasn’t until Vatican II that the Church actually encouraged translations of the Bible into languages other than Latin.
L
Lefty0908
Guest
Ask God. You seem to have entirely grasped His mind.
L
Lefty0908
Guest
More of the double standard, as in all Catholics know everything their Church teaches and passes it on to others without error, while Mormons are so failingly human. I find THAT hilarious!I find it hilarious that anyone would admit that their own “seminary” classes are taught by people “who may or may not know what they’re talking about”. Is that the typical formula that LDS always use in teaching their kids the most important facts about their faith? That explains why you can ask 10 different Mormons what they believe about a certain LDS doctrine or belief, and get 10 different answers.
L
Lefty0908
Guest
I didn’t say it was. All of you are great at pounding on straw men you create from what you think I said. Sorry you missed what I was really trying to say.
L
Lefty0908
Guest
Just trying to make myself at home here with all of you who have such a thorough knowledge of what Mormons know.
S
sallybutler
Guest
Are you aware that English was not really a separate language until the late 1500’s? French and Latin were the common language shared among countries or the “English” of the day. English is actually a combination of many languages. For example, president comes from French. Welcome comes from the German influences. Italian and Spanish both come more from Latin than other languages.
Bede translated books of the bible. There were other translations prior to 1500. However, each copy of the bible took a long time to create. In order to afford one would be like trying to by a Lamborghini now. Not something that the common person could afford to commission. How many could you buy at that price? And if no one could buy it, why would you create one (remember, paper was expensive and there was no printing press)?
I realize it is more fun to believe that there was some great conspiracy. But the truth has more to do with economics. Demand and supply rules apply more than anything else.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
I have to step in…Tyndale put so many words and political contexts into Sacred Scripture… it is Tyndale’s work, not the Holy Spirit,
Lefty…study the objective hstory of the Bible, and not what you are learning int he LDS church…the KJV program is propaganda…and anti-Catholic at that…not absed on truth.
Lefty…study the objective hstory of the Bible, and not what you are learning int he LDS church…the KJV program is propaganda…and anti-Catholic at that…not absed on truth.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
There were Spanish, French, Italian versions of the bible in at least the mid 1500’s (some earlier) and as someone has pointed out a Polish version. The Douay-Rheims New Testament was publish in the late 1500’s with the OT published by 1610.
C
Crdl2Grv
Guest
Not only that, but the Douay-Rheims was “updated” (some would say re-translated) in 1750, and became pretty much the standard Catholic Bible in English until the 1900’s. It was translated at a Catholic university (founded by a Catholic king authorized and confirmed by two different Popes) by monks and scholars who had moved from England (Oxford, mostly) in the wake the accession of Elizabeth I and the re-institution of Protestantism. It was certainly not the work of “rogue” monks and scholars secretly translating in their basements against the orders of their local bishops.
Furthermore, as (name removed by moderator) already pointed out (and despite your best attempts to ignore it):
The reason, friend, that “they may be familiar with that one” is that the “Wujek Bible” was used in the liturgy of the CC in Poland beginning in… what the late 1500’s? How’s that for “encouraging” its translation and use?
Please, please ask us for more references. Honestly, we’d all love nothing more than to show you just how ridiculous it is to claim that the Catholic Church didn’t “encourage” or “authorize” non-Latin translations of the Bible until 1962. And by all means, keep lacing your stunning historical ignorance with snarky phrases like “So you’ve got that going for you!” That kind of stuff makes you look really, really smart.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
Yes sirree I can’t even begin to describe how impressed I am with his smartness.
1
1voice
Guest
I have found that “The everything-is-wrong-with-you-and-nothing-is-wrong-with-us paradigm” that you describe pretty much comes with the territory here … as people of the RC persuasion are very territorial and highly opinionated as a group (God love em)
Social inertia and social pressure is very strong among all religions.
Anywaysss …
I have been following the topics related to the Mormon Church here off and on for about a year … I have observed a pattern that repeats itself over and over … people that are honestly curious just get a real sense of confusion when they start asking specific questions about facts and beliefs associated with the Mormon Religion. When I started digging into the history and the writings and the claims that were made … I felt the same way… The deeper I looked … the more the facts conflicted with the claims … and when I asked about it the responses just made no sense.
I’m no genius … I’m a college graduate that runs my own business … fairly successfully in spite of the current financial crunch in the economy. I can figure thing out. I looked at the the LDS religion because my daughter dated a Mormon and Mit Romney is a contender … and stuff like that … but you know … Joseph Smith just contradicts the Bible right and left … and wrote his own commentary when he needed to support his claims… and there are absolutely no other primary source documents or history to support his claims … other than what he himself wrote.
DNA evidence … proves that the Nephites never existed … Archeologists have shown that there is no evidence and no geography that could support the civilizations described in the writings of Joseph Smith … Why defend such an indefensible position?
I understand that there is a sense that the people that believe in the LDS Religion do so because of the social aspects of the faith … and dont really want to focus on the other aspects… because its not like they have much to do with the daily life of a Mormon… but I have a personal stake in this (no pun) because I lived among Mormons in Idaho and my daughter dated a young man. Please dont take this as a personal affront … It is just honestly what I am seeing here. It really is confusing.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
So you don’t “know” what all these supposed people (pepbandmom was referring to an actual acquaintance of her daughter’s) “know” about their church???
K
KathleenGee
Guest
What Tyndale and Smith and those who worked with him writing the Mormon books is a very good example why the Church early on was mandated to discern which books were inspired and those that were not …and it was not the work of a few and – unchallenged individuals.
It is said not to change one word of Scripture…there is a dispute in the Lutheran camp about the issue that Martin Luther changed one proposition in Sacred Scripture and took out books that went against his concept of faith alone.
But to add new books with stories and figures and meanings and practices allowed outside Christiantiy, taking verses of the Gospels themselves and denying their meaing…here I am referring to people getting sealed and having spirit children in the next life…you are entering into mythology turned into belief.
Catholics here know very well as other explanations by Mormons are presented are covering up the truth about Mormonism and its history of beliefs.
There is much deflection, ignoring and knowlingly using the same words to make us think they are the same, when they know the words mean differently…and yes, that is being devious.
You can only go so far having different meanings…but when they come to new story and differing behaviors and condemnation of Christian doctrines as corrupt…this aspect is suspect…
It is said not to change one word of Scripture…there is a dispute in the Lutheran camp about the issue that Martin Luther changed one proposition in Sacred Scripture and took out books that went against his concept of faith alone.
But to add new books with stories and figures and meanings and practices allowed outside Christiantiy, taking verses of the Gospels themselves and denying their meaing…here I am referring to people getting sealed and having spirit children in the next life…you are entering into mythology turned into belief.
Catholics here know very well as other explanations by Mormons are presented are covering up the truth about Mormonism and its history of beliefs.
There is much deflection, ignoring and knowlingly using the same words to make us think they are the same, when they know the words mean differently…and yes, that is being devious.
You can only go so far having different meanings…but when they come to new story and differing behaviors and condemnation of Christian doctrines as corrupt…this aspect is suspect…
- Status