LDS & Catholic Comparison

[dianaiad]

Since the definition of “Christian” is still under debate, I will re-post the following:

I am not insulted, if another religious group, says that I am not a “Christian.” They have the religious freedom to hold this belief. Such a belief does not have a negative impact on my faith or my identity as a Christian.

Anna

I am not insulted…except when the person telling me I am not a Christian intends for it to BE an insult. Mostly–they do. You see, to those who restrict Christianity to a specific set of beliefs that they agree with, “Christian” means “correct,” or “right” or “good…” and anybody who claims to be Christian but doesn’t have the qualifications is…‘none of the above.’ It IS an insult.

Especially since, as history has proven over and over again, the first step taken when any group wants to persecute another is to declare it ‘other.’ It is no insult to declare that Jews are not Christian. They don’t want to BE counted as Christian. The same thing goes for saying that Hindus are not Christian, or Budhists are not Christian, or Muslims are not Christian. They do not want to be seen as such.

However, when you unilaterally decide that a group that believes that it IS Christian is not, that is an insult. It’s an excommunication, of sorts. It is saying to that group; you are not us. You do not deserve the respect we give to fellow Chrisitans. You don’t deserve to be listened to; you are less than second class citizens; we will accept you only if you agree with us that you are second class.

Your attitude is exemplified in your statement that I have the right to declare other Christians not to be that. Anna…you KNOW that NO Mormon would ever tell a Catholic (or any other person who claims to be Christian) that he or she was not. You are quite free to say that you would not be insulted if we did, because you know that your statement will never be tested.

That is especially ironic, since if we used the same definition of “Christian” that you do, that is “A Christian is someone who has the same beliefs I do about Jesus Christ,” or “someone who has the correct beliefs about Jesus Christ,” then I’m the Christian and you–aren’t.

But that’s not the definition of “Christian.” The definition is: a person whose religious beliefs are centered around the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

You fit that description. So do the Catholics. So do Mormons. So does pretty much everybody who claims to BE Christian.

 

[dianaiad]

The LDS Church does put Christ at the center;

And it is THAT which makes us Christian. That, and that alone.

 

[RebeccaJ]

But Mormons are the Latter Day Saints.

Ok, jokes aside. I want to understand what you are trying to say here. Protestants of the 16th century are heretics because they knew Catholic doctrine, so they are accountable for their shedding of the doctrine. Protestants of the 21st century are not accountable to Catholic doctrine because they don’t know any better?

The doctrine is that if a person has sin and does not seek reconciliation with God, their soul is in mortal danger. The Reformers, as in the people themselves, not the movement, were baptized and catechized Catholics. They were Catholics, all of them. Their actions were, from a Catholic perspective, sinful. They died in a state of sin.

The individual today is not committing a sin by merely being born into circumstances where they do not know Catholic teachings.

Of course this is a broad brush. The times, then and now, are made up of individuals. God will be the judge of all.

 

[dianaiad]

The short answer is yes, it would be possible for Mormons to one day proceed to Heaven from Purgatory.

The nitty gritty answer is that, probably, many Mormons will not be going to heaven. I forget the exact doctrine, but it basically states that if you have been shown the fullness of truth and choose to reject it, you choose to reject God and Christ and are destined for Hell. Meaning if a Mormon has been given the option of accepting the fullness of truth trough the Catholic Church and has openly and purposefully rejected it without coercion or conspiracy from another source, that Mormon, unless he or she repents, confesses, and converts from Mormonism before they die, will surely go to Hell.

That sounds almost exactly like the position we hold regarding our beliefs.

Given that some Mormons have reported extreme family and community pressure to remain in the LDS faith even after they have thought to leave it, I think the question of a Mormon’s salvation in the eyes of the Catholic Church is quite a tough pickle to chew and figure out.

And ditto…families are pretty much the same where-ever.

 

[thecourt]

dianaiad my church and the FLDS are not together. The FLDS I do not know what they believe in other than doctrine of plural marriage. The men in their cult should be arrested because they do what do in freedom to do it and yet these girls, who are forced to get married have no choice.

Again we are not associated with the FLDS.

 

[dianaiad]

So on a regular basis you must testify to your belief in Joseph Smith?

Wow. If THAT’S not a “have you stopped beating your wife?” sort of question, I don’t know what is.

Where did you get THAT from the post?

 

[dianaiad]

LDS Members that deny the above mentioned belief that we will one day have worlds of our own where our own spiritual offspring will reside in mortality in an experience like the one we are in right now, have either never heard it, been taught it, or fail to understand it. If they are actually ashamed of it…sad…but to each their own.

The problem is in the way it is put. Invariably it is stated rather like this: “You mormons believe that you are going to have lots of wives, keep them eternally pregnant, and each have your own world to be god of.”

Well, we don’t believe that…and denying that we believe THAT is not denying our belief that we MAY someday become like God and have all that He does, and that we are His children, literally.

To me, that doesn’t mean a planet. Planets, though long lived in terms of our mortal existances, are not precisely eternal. So…then what? We get a planet, we administer and populated it, and then it blows up or cools down or gets swallowed by its star–THEN what?

God the Father isn’t limited to a planet, or even several of them. If we are to be like Him, then we won’t be, either.

 

[dianaiad]

All of it ignores the yard stick of God, the Bible.

None of it does, Derek.

er…you aren’t the Derek who posted on alt.religion.mormon for so long, are you?

 

[Anna_Scott]

I am not insulted…except when the person telling me I am not a Christian intends for it to BE an insult. Mostly–they do. You see, to those who restrict Christianity to a specific set of beliefs that they agree with, “Christian” means “correct,” or “right” or “good…” and anybody who claims to be Christian but doesn’t have the qualifications is…‘none of the above.’ It IS an insult.

Especially since, as history has proven over and over again, the first step taken when any group wants to persecute another is to declare it ‘other.’ It is no insult to declare that Jews are not Christian. They don’t want to BE counted as Christian. The same thing goes for saying that Hindus are not Christian, or Budhists are not Christian, or Muslims are not Christian. They do not want to be seen as such.

However, when you unilaterally decide that a group that believes that it IS Christian is not, that is an insult. It’s an excommunication, of sorts. It is saying to that group; you are not us. You do not deserve the respect we give to fellow Chrisitans. You don’t deserve to be listened to; you are less than second class citizens; we will accept you only if you agree with us that you are second class.

Your attitude is exemplified in your statement that I have the right to declare other Christians not to be that. Anna…you KNOW that NO Mormon would ever tell a Catholic (or any other person who claims to be Christian) that he or she was not. You are quite free to say that you would not be insulted if we did, because you know that your statement will never be tested.

That is especially ironic, since if we used the same definition of “Christian” that you do, that is “A Christian is someone who has the same beliefs I do about Jesus Christ,” or “someone who has the correct beliefs about Jesus Christ,” then I’m the Christian and you–aren’t.

But that’s not the definition of “Christian.” The definition is: a person whose religious beliefs are centered around the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

You fit that description. So do the Catholics. So do Mormons. So does pretty much everybody who claims to BE Christian.

dianaiad:

None of us can expect another religion to change the definition of “Christian,” in order to prevent someone from being insulted, or to prevent someone from feeling left out.

You do not have the right to impose your definition of Christianity upon me; just as I do not have the right to impose my definition of Christianity upon you.

However, I can disagree with your definition of Christianity; and I have the freedom to believe that any group is or is not Christian, according to my beliefs and understanding of Christianity.

This is freedom of religion. I do not have to change my beliefs to make someone feel better about their religion.

Anna

 

[twopekinguys]

dianaiad my church and the FLDS are not together. The FLDS I do not know what they believe in other than doctrine of plural marriage. The men in their cult should be arrested because they do what do in freedom to do it and yet these girls, who are forced to get married have no choice.

Again we are not associated with the FLDS.

I think you’re confused. Again.

If you are referring to Diania’s comment about leaving Missouri, that has nothing to do with the FLDS, or the RLDS (now the Church of Christ I believe)

It is part of your mormon history that Joseph and the Mormons in Missouri were ordered out. That’s when they headed for Nauvoo. If my memory serves me correctly.

 

[Kdesiel]

I think you’re confused. Again.

If you are referring to Diania’s comment about leaving Missouri, that has nothing to do with the FLDS, or the RLDS (now the Church of Christ I believe)

It is part of your mormon history that Joseph and the Mormons in Missouri were ordered out. That’s when they headed for Nauvoo. If my memory serves me correctly.

Maybe Court is now FLDS?
I mean its been about 45mns since his last post, more than enough time for Court to convert to another religion.
Who Knows?

 

[mrparker]

You are much like the Catholics in this regard, since you are not prepared to give a defense of the “Hope” that should be in you; you must provide a link to tell another what salvation or how to get to heaven. If it is so complicated that you cannot explain it in a couple of short paragraphs; then this presents further problems. All the writers of the NT were able to do such in very short passages; shouldn’t all Christians be able to do the same?

So no, that does not help, but at least you attempt to address the question, which is far more than COURT.

Or for lack of time. As i already spend too much time on here haha

 

[twopekinguys]

Maybe Court is now FLDS?
I mean its been about 45mns since his last post, more than enough time for Court to convert to another religion.
Who Knows?

Truth is stranger than fiction.

 

[thecourt]

twopekinguys I am well aware of why our enemies murdered Joseph Smith and why we left Nauvoo.

It needs to be said that there is a different between the FLDS and the Community of Christ, both of who split from my church – the Community of Christ does not practice plural marriage.

 

[dianaiad]

Xavierlives:

Actually, I am saying that we have the religious freedom to believe or state that another religion is not Christian, according to our understanding of Christianity.

Subsequently, the religion we believe is not Christian, has the religious freedom to claim that they are Christian. It is really an argument that goes nowhere—like most arguments with LDS Members.

Dianaiad complained about participating in joint charity projects with Catholics and still being relegated to a “back of the bus” status. I told her that participating in joint charity projects with Catholics, or any other Christians, should not be done with the expectation that they will acquiesce to her beliefs.

No, it shouldn’t…and it isn’t. However, noting that they do accept our aid while considering us ‘not one of the group’ isn’t complaining. It is simply stating fact. If it is an uncomfortable fact, think about which one of us is being made uncomfortable by it. I’m not suggesting that we cease working with Catholic charities, y’know.

IOW, Catholics do not have to change their opinion of Mormon doctrine and beliefs, just because Mormons participate in a joint charity project. I would expect that to be the same for any religion.

You are quite right. They do not have to. Of course, we don’t have to pretend that their opinion of us is correct, or flattering, or anything that it isn’t, either. Honesty is always better than dishonesty, don’t you think?

the fact is simple. Catholics do not believe our baptisms are valid. They shouldn’t; we don’t think THEIRS are, after all. But their reason for doing so is because “Mormons aren’t Christian” that is, they have defined ‘Christian’ as 'someone who believes what we do." It is a judgment that THEY have made against us. They work with other non-Christian groups, but in those cases, calling them ‘not Christian’ is a validation of the opinion those groups have of themselves, not a declaration of exclusion by the Catholics. There is quite a difference, there.

And that is wrong.

If I worked on a charity project with Catholics, I would not expect them to change their views of Protestantism.

Anna

Nor do I expect them to change their views of Mormonism. However, their views are their views, and if it makes them, and you, uncomfortable by pointing out that they DO this, then you might ask yourself why it does make you uncomfortable.

It doesn’t make us uncomfortable enough to stop working with them, you notice.

 

[DerekD]

dianaiad my church and the FLDS are not together. The FLDS I do not know what they believe in other than doctrine of plural marriage. The men in their cult should be arrested because they do what do in freedom to do it and yet these girls, who are forced to get married have no choice.

Again we are not associated with the FLDS.

The main reason it is not practiced is because of the taboo and illegalness of the practise within the US.

There is evidence that Joseph started to think about making plural marriage a moral practice within his church as early as 1831, one year after the church was founded. He knew, however, how shocking such a practice would be not only to many Mormons, but to the gentiles also. He intended to postpone the announcement of the new practice until people were more ready to accept it. Meanwhile, he let a few trusted colleagues know that plural marriage had been sanctioned by God in a special revelation to Joseph. God, said Joseph, was no more opposed to polygamy in 1831 than He had been in the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who all had large harems.

Meanwhile, although Joseph had not announced God’s sanction of plural marriage to the entire church, Joseph himself was practising it. He proposed what he called “celestial” marriage to a number of women, some of whom were already legally married to other men. Joseph considered celestial marriages to be on a higher plane than earthly marriages, lasting forever, and taking precedence over mundane marriages.

Only polygamy - the custom of one man taking multiple wives was sanctioned. Women were not allowed to have more than one husband. Joseph taught that a woman’s possibility of entering heaven depended largely on the worthiness of her husband, rather than on her own worthiness.
Source: lds-mormon.com/jsmith.shtml

Do you deny the vision that Joseph Smith had from “god” that pologymy was okay or do you just pick and chose as you go? What other doctrines do you also reject and why? If this was a true prophet from god, why has his Missouri prophecies failed? No prophet from god is ever wrong. Sounds like the FDLS is more in line with the founder; at least on this point.

 

[twopekinguys]

twopekinguys I am well aware of why our enemies murdered Joseph Smith and why we left Nauvoo.

It needs to be said that there is a different between the FLDS and the Community of Christ, both of who split from my church – the Community of Christ does not practice plural marriage.

I give up

You brought up the FLDS for some unknown reason, and quite frankly, I would be scared to know what that reason is.

I explain to you that you must have misinterpreted Diania’s post, and somehow you got the reasons why JS was murdered?

Do you understand how to follow a conversation on here?:takeoff::whackadoo:

 

[thecourt]

DerekD the website you stated on your post — lds-mormon.com is not affiliated with the church so if the member who created the site wants to stand behind what is says, if that member’s choice. The site is not a official site of the church.

 

[DerekD]

None of it does, Derek.

er…you aren’t the Derek who posted on alt.religion.mormon for so long, are you?

Never heard of the site, so not the same Derek. What’s with the err? There is not much Biblical basis for this entire thread, but it is certainly interesting to so many similarities between the Latter Day Saints and the Catholics. Especially on the works righteouness avenue, do you all have “priests” as well?

 

[twopekinguys]

Hi Rebecca, that is a really good question. The Protestant Bible is the one that does not contain the apocrypha, a known book to have error, even by the Catholic Church admission.

Please provide a reference for this. Unsubstantiated claims carry no weight.

By the way, you realize that the Apocrypha is more than one book right?

DerekD,

Have you ever come up with a reference for this?