LDS: Is this video accurate for your theology?

[Cowboy_Pete]

Yet this famous image from Mormon Church’s 1972 Family Home Evening manual explains with a pretty clear diagram, just what the leadership of the Mormon Church wanted parents to explain to their children:

http://www.mrm.org/files/images/mom-plus-dad-equals-you.png

Um… Soren? You realize that the FHE manual isn’t a sex ed manual, right?
Do you disagree that Jesus is the son of our Heavenly Father, and Mary?
If you get “sex” out of that picture, that says more about you than it says about us.

 

[truthsave]

Here are few ex mormons that have been mormons for a while that answered about this video, my wife has been a mormon too since birth before changine a coupple of years ago.
I keep not understanding why if you talk as a mormon with mormon then you can see this movie and talk about things with another disposotion, but when a mormon talks with a Catholic or Protestant or whoever then immediately everything getzs more complicated.

When I talk to an atheist I don’t have any problem expressing my faith and he expressing his view, I have buddist friends and we can talk freely.
With mormon you cannot even try to say you have a completely different view of Jesus and the Father and the Holy Ghost then me and most of other Christians, so different that it could be leggitimate to call him the mormon Jesus, they feel offended.
I don’t understand. IF they feel, since they must feel, they are right, why don’t they assume the fact that really they have a different way of seing Jesus and the Father that is the right way and our the wrong?
I accept as an Orthodox if an (average) Catholic tells me I am in the wrong since for him I can only be wrong, and I accept his way of looking at me, if he would think I am right why he woudn’t change and become an Orthodox?
So why Mormons don’t accept to have a different Jesus then the rest of Christians, and a different God? They could just say they have the right Christ, our vision of Jesus and the Father has been always more or less wrong.

This is an exteremely difficult thing to handle with them. I know since my wife’s family are all mormons.

I would like to know why if any of you could help me understand it I will be grateful.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

To me, what Jesus said, and did for us, is more important than his DNA or the precise mechanics of how he was made flesh.

Talking about LDS differences as if we worshipped a “different Jesus” seems to me like those who obsess over whether Jesus was white or black or had a big nose.

Trifles.

He is God made flesh. He died for us that we might live again; His sacrifice gave us the Atonement and the Resurrection.

In that light, what else matters?

truthsave, if you and I had live two thousand years ago, the Romans would have thrown both of us to the lions. There would be no talk of differences because I thought that the Father had a body. The name “Christian” was coined at Antioch as a death sentence for persons like you and I. I believe that the Holy Spirit is grieved when persons like you and I mock each others’ love for the Savior.

And there is only One.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Certainly I believe and can see that Mormons seek to follow Jesus Chrsit. In that, we’re all on the same journey.

The differences that Mormonism have are not small, and do not align to Christian belief. That is why Mormonism is not viewed as a Christian religion.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Certainly I believe and can see that Mormons seek to follow Jesus Chrsit. In that, we’re all on the same journey.

The differences that Mormonism have are not small, and do not align to Christian belief. That is why Mormonism is not viewed as a Christian religion.

The differences between our faiths is indeed profound. You believe in One God in Three Persons, while we believe in Three Persons in One God. I hope we can still be friends.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

P.S.: On a slightly unrelated note, I heard that “Mormon” is a slightly derogatory term, and you guys prefer to be called “Latter Day Saints.” Out of sheer curiosity, why does “Mormon” have a stigma attached to it?

“Mormon” is a name made by our enemies, but “Christian” was also coined by outsiders and enemies of the church. We do embrace the word “Mormon” but LDS is the name that God gave us. The only stigma associated with the word “mormon” today is that monsters like Warren Jeffs claim to be mormon. You cannot begin to imagine the disgust that we feel for men like Jeffs – abusers and brainwashers. The word we have for what he does is “PRIESTCRAFT.” I don’t know an uglier word in the English language.

Incidentally, the video that you show is made by an ex-mormon named Ed Decker who, according to his son who lives in Orem, Utah, was excommunicated for spousal abuse. Ed Decker has also co-written a book with Ron Carlson called Fast facts on false teachings, which deals with what he believes to be various false systems of worship, including Catholicism.

I apologize that I cannot go through the video point by point for you, but I feel physically ill whenever I hear the phrase “the mormon Jesus.” I feel sorry that anyone that calls themselves Christian would blaspheme Christ just in order to hurt my feelings.

 

[sallybutler]

“Mormon” is a name made by our enemies, but “Christian” was also coined by outsiders and enemies of the church. We do embrace the word “Mormon” but LDS is the name that God gave us. …

Incidentally, the video that you show is made by an ex-mormon named Ed Decker who, according to his son who lives in Orem, Utah, was excommunicated for spousal abuse. E/QUOTE]

Shouldn’t you call Mr Decker an ex LDS, not an ex mormon?

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

I call myself a jackmormon. Mormon’s not a bad word. And exmormon rolls off the tongue better than ex-LDS.

If any mormon on this site ever whines at you for calling them a mormon, please point it out to me, and I’ll tease them mercilessly.

I have no objection to anyone calling me a mormon. What offends me is Ed Decker’s phrase “the mormon Jesus” but that would not be less offensive if someone said “the LDS Jesus.”

 

[pablope]

“Mormon” is a name made by our enemies, but “Christian” was also coined by outsiders and enemies of the church. . The word we have for what he does is “PRIESTCRAFT.” I don’t know an uglier word in the English language.

.

Actually, the word “Christian” was first used by the Church at Antioch. This is actually recounted in Acts 15, I believe.

“Roman” was added to the CC only sometime in the 1500s by anglicans, and as a derogatory label…but has stuck, I guess to distinguish the Latin Rite of the CC.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Actually, the word “Christian” was first used by the Church at Antioch. This is actually recounted in Acts 15, I believe.

“Roman” was added to the CC only sometime in the 1500s by anglicans, and as a derogatory label…but has stuck, I guess to distinguish the Latin Rite of the CC.

Ah; I had no idea that it was derogatory. I’ve heard lots of Catholics self-identify as “Roman” – especially in Spanish. * “Catolico, Apostolico, Romano.”
*

Acts says the word “Christian” was first used in Antioch, but isn’t specific about who used it, so you may be right … does your tradition say that this was by the Christians?

 

[truthsave]

To me, what Jesus said, and did for us, is more important than his DNA or the precise mechanics of how he was made flesh.

Talking about LDS differences as if we worshipped a “different Jesus” seems to me like those who obsess over whether Jesus was white or black or had a big nose.

Trifles.

He is God made flesh. He died for us that we might live again; His sacrifice gave us the Atonement and the Resurrection.

In that light, what else matters?

truthsave, if you and I had live two thousand years ago, the Romans would have thrown both of us to the lions. There would be no talk of differences because I thought that the Father had a body. The name “Christian” was coined at Antioch as a death sentence for persons like you and I. I believe that the Holy Spirit is grieved when persons like you and I mock each others’ love for the Savior.

And there is only One.

I can perfectly understand what you are saying but you have to understand if this was so clear, if this was the real base of mormon doctrine they would have not changed anything.
They would have stayed with the basic doctrine of the other Christians. Jesus the son of God is God Himself and the mistery of the Trinity. But since it has been changed by “revelation” it means the truth of the concept is important. If not why changing it? At least important to separate, distinguish mormon doctrine by all the other churches that “were abbominations to the eyes of the Lord” So their message was abbominable since they changed the truth of the message.

OK let’s put it simple: I am Italian so I will use an italian known artist: Leonardo da Vinci that I guess more or less everybody here should know.

If I say Leonardo da Vinci was a great painter since he painted monna lisa, the last supper and so on and wa a great inventor and was born in italy.
Another say he admires Leonardo da Vinci because he was a great artist but he had his artistry tought by Merlin the magician, he was not really born in Italy since there was a traduction mistake in his birth date and place, yes he painted the Monna Lisa but he was helped by a friend of his in making this ouvre, of course we are talking about the same person. Or not?
If I say I am a friend of yours since you went in that school and since you said that or this and because you have a beard and you like racing cars, I am stil friend of yours if 50% of these things are true? It is like saying I am friend of yours for what I think you are.

It is what Jesus did and all the context that was around him and His inalterated message that make Him Jesus. If not He would have just said: I am Jesus, your savior. If you believe in me ok, if not what can I do? He would have then desappeared. No pentacost, no traditions and so on. You can think I am whatever you prefer thinking.

Let’s put it more simple since I reasonable appretiate food I will tell you this:
I like pasta bolognese. Another one says he love that kind of pasta too, but in his recepie to be able to like it he has to change 80% of ingredients. We can still say we like the same pasta?

At the end we could say: yes but at the end we like pasta nevertheless. This is the important thing.
Yes maybe. But when we go deeper we realize that I like pasta that is made from eggs, farine and so on, the other friend of mine like pasta made without eggs and farine, but from soya and so on. We can still say both of us like pasta?
The only thing that we can say that both of us have the same need of food.

Why using then the term pasta, bolognese and so on? we can say we like different things. Me I like italian pasta the other like chinese pasta.

And if the Romans were vegeterians would have send both of us to the lions just because our two extremely different pasta contained meet in their recepie. For them was the same thing.
At the end we can go with another Lady that is not our wife because she is a woman nevertheless.

So therminology, context, tradition, faith in tradition is essential.
St. Irene was a direct disciple of St. Jean. St. Jean was preatty close to Jesus.
None of the mormon doctrine was tought to him by St. Jean. What St.irene said was absolutely in sintony with what Christians believes.
I know maybe you can say the time was not ready and so on. But with this attitude we can say whatever comes in our brain.

Mormon prefer believing in another thing. They are free, but I still don’t understand the need of their freedom.

 

[truthsave]

Re calling “mormon Jeus”.
I understand you feel disgusted by using this therm. But please put, if you can, yourself in my place. God was a human like me, the Vierge Mary was just a pius lady, the Lord has a body of bones and flesh and live in a planet, mormons can become gods. What do you think I have inside when ppeople that want to be called Christians say these things?
I promise: inside I have at least the same sorrow that you have when you hear the therm
“mormon Jesus”.
For your respect I would not use this therm any more. For the respect of the other Christians you shoudn’t say to them your thing either. They are more offensive then the therm “mormon Jesus”.
I know nevertheless you don’t do and say these doctrine to offend, but you can understand that is perceived by me or by others inside our hearts as deeply offensive.
I know you can exuse yourself in saying that for you is the truth since you know it is the truth since you have a testimony of it.
Me too I know it. But my knowing and your is absolutely incompatible and have nothing in common.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

The term “the mormon Jesus” was coined by Ed Decker. Surely you can find a better theologian.

It’s like trying to start a discussion by insulting someone’s mother. Not a useful tactic.

 

[truthsave]

The term “the mormon Jesus” was coined by Ed Decker. Surely you can find a better theologian.

It’s like trying to start a discussion by insulting someone’s mother. Not a useful tactic.

I said I would not use this therm any more, and I meant it. I hope you respect my, and some others views too. For me mormon doctrine is felt inside my heart much, much more as an insult then if somebody would insult my mother. Of course I forgive, or better I try to forgive them, but when I hear their doctrine I feel deeply offended nevertheless.
I am sure you don’t use with this intent, but you must accept that when I say that for me mormons are not Christians you understand too that is not because I want to offend anybody.

I don’t use neither want to use any tactic since for me what is written is written and tradition cannot be reinvented, they are there without tactics. If someone want to accept them ok if someone doesn’t it is not my fault. They do whatever.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

*Vierge *… vous parlez francais? Je parle un peut de francais parce que je suis tombe dans une marmite de comix d’Asterix quand j’etais petit.

You are mistaken if you think that we believe that the Virgin Mary was just some “pious lady.”

We do not pray to her, but we do reverence her. And we’ve never ridiculed your reverence for her.

For me mormon doctrine is felt inside my heart much, much more as an insult then if somebody would insult my mother.

?? That’s astonishing for me to hear. Which doctrines?

I suspect that you’ve seen movies like the Godmakers which say some truth, lots of lies, and are designed to make people angry, to engender hatred.

Don’t get me wrong, there are profound differences between our churches. But I don’t think that you would react as strongly about what we actually believe, as you feel about what you’ve been told that we believe.

 

[truthsave]

*Vierge *… vous parlez francais? Je parle un peut de francais parce que je suis tombe dans une marmite de comix d’Asterix quand j’etais petit. .

Sorry about it, yes I am Italian, I live in part of Switzerland where French is the spoken language.

You are mistaken if you think that we believe that the Virgin Mary was just some “pious lady.”
We do not pray to her, but we do reverence her. And we’ve never ridiculed your reverence for her.

The reverence mormon have for her is pure respect since mother of Jesus. But mormon relantion with our Mary is not in cause since they just don’t have any relantion at all.
Regarding the reverence for her: there is not even one Himn for Her, but there are at least 6himn for Joseph Smith if I am not wrong: Joseph Smith first, Praise to the man, We thank the oh God for the prophet, Come listen to a prophet voice, Come sing to the Lord,Now we’ll sing with one accord.
In all of these Joseph Smith is part either central part or part. So at least I can say there is more reverence for Smith then for the Holy Mary.
But there is not a problem for me there

.
?? That’s astonishing for me to hear. Which doctrines?.

Our Lord was a man like me and you and he is still progressing. People becoming god not in the way can be understood in the bible to be with God, but really gods. THE PLANE OF SALVATION is a distortion of the first sin (original sin for Catholic.) It was good man disobeyed the Lord and listen to the devil for the plane the salvation to be possible. The devil followed the Lord plane.
In the temple Adam is the Arcange Michael, I don’t go over the cerimony and the symbols in the garmeth that a friend that study esoterism explained to me in detail.
And expecially that every time a mormon has the possibility to choose if they have to believe to Jesus or Joseph Smith they believe in Joseph Smith because Jesus speak in Joseph Smith, they consciously prefer to believe in him against any kind of evidence, historical, cultural, tradition. How: two tools: wrong translation, or was not the right time for this to be said. In this way I can start a religion tomorrow.
The worse: human wellness is in analogy with soul wellness.

Of course in this I write only about tought doctrine, I live apart the absurde blasphemy the second mormon prophet was capable of saying. Yes they are not doctrine but his attitude and saying say a lot about what being a mormon can lead you to think and then he was a prophet for you.

I suspect that you’ve seen movies like the Godmakers which say some truth, lots of lies, and are designed to make people angry, to engender hatred.

Unfortunately I don’t need to see movies like that. I see much worse movies live when my wife’s family comes visiting.

Don’t get me wrong, there are profound differences between our churches. But I don’t think that you would react as strongly about what we actually believe, as you feel about what you’ve been told that we believe.

I can act strongly because I know mormonism.
When a mormon talk about Lord and says he’s talking about my Lord the difference is: I know what he thinks what he is tought and that he is there for the confusion of the simple.
If I cannot react strongly with somebody appropriating the Holy names I have my faith in and seeing them doing whatever they want with them, glorifying in himns a faulse prophets whose fantasies went against every Father of Christianity, every Saint of Christianity Ortodox or Catholic, and for an unknown reason prefering him to them,
sorry I react strongly. I don’t insult them, even though I feel deeply insulted by the freedom they take in doing what they are doing.
The price to pay for freedom is this and of course I am willing to pay it for freedom.
I tell here again: would not be a problem for me if mormons wouldn’t like to be considered christians.

 

[alwayswondering]

**Brigham Young said that, **“The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood–was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers.” (Journal of Discourses, volume 8, p. 115)

**BY also taught: **“When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost… Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, pp. 50, 51)

**Ezra Taft Benson: **“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father.” (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg.7; cf. Come unto Christ, p. 4)

**Orson Pratt: **"[God] had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son , …it may be that … He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits (bear his children) in eternity." ('The Seer, p. 158)

**Gospel Principle (1985) teaches: **“Thus, God the Father became the literal father of Jesus Christ. Jesus was born of a mortal mother and an immortal father.” (p.57)

The grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was, because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him.

Jedediah M. Grant - Journal of Discourses, Vol 1. ppl 345-346

It is said that many Apostles taught that Jesus was married and had children, but no “official” documentation has been found. My LDS ex-wife believed he was married and had children, she referenced some Bible verse that she took out of context and I don’t remember which one it was.

…no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are—I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation—the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim—“Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!” But it is true.

Brigham Young October 9, 1859 - Journal of Discourses Vol 7 Page 289

“I have more to boast of than any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such work as I”.

Joseph Smith - History of the Church, Vol.6, pp. 408-09.

I wouldn’t go as far as saying that some of these are “theories.” Many of these points where taught by Church Authorities. Now where they speaking as man or Prophet or Apostle, has yet to be addressed. Some LDS still believe in these and other like plural marriage, while others don’t know or care. My ex-wife told me that she still believes in Plural Marriage (why men can remarry in the temple and women can’t.) She even said that her grand parents moved to Mexico to pratice polygamy when it was outlawed here, because they believe it was taught by the Prophets and the Government shouldn’t be able to take that away.

Thank you for the corrections. I wasn’t a part of the church very long…if you could even call me a “member” because I wasn’t baptized. I was just always told these were all theories…my apologies. Thank you.

 

[truthsave]

…no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are—I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation—the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim—“Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!” But it is true.
Brigham Young October 9, 1859 - Journal of Discourses Vol 7 Page 289

These is terrible but my sources say it is not tought, Bringham Joung was a prophet of which if they consider officially what he said was inspired would be very inconvenient for mormons. But they consider him as a prophet nevertheless. And Bringham Young last sentence reported "We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true"
A prophet that make this remark, and say it is true, but it is not officially tought…
so we can say even though it was true was true for him because there was no a council of approbation. So why you need a prophet if what he says has to be approved? Just don’t give him this title then.

What it is thought though is that without being married in a mormon temple you are not going to be with the Father but in one of the other less exalted kindom that for me is also extremely insulting not just because St. Francis or St. Seraphim are in a lesser state of grace then the good mormon family, that is already incredible to think of, but that the very last condition of access to the presence of the Lord is not by Jesus Christ or grace or faith, but for your temple marriage.
It means you can be a Saint (our Christian Saint) and having a faith in Jesus to which you have dedicated all your life and sorrow and perseverate till the end but you are not married in a mormon temple you are out.
It is the temple marriage that open you the door of the celestial kingdom.
Why the apostoles (the first real one ) few left their wives (of course for their special mission) why John, Jesus favourite never got married (he should be thought in secret from his Master about this) and why in the apocalipse 14 it is written about uncorrupted men that had no met any woman (of course for a mormon must be a bad translation as everything going against their doctrine).
They say it is a question of faith. Yes of course. Against all this it must be really a question of faith. But against all this evidence is like jumping out from a mountain and waiting angels to save you. It would be really like tempting the Lord. (remember Christ temptation)

What I would like to say, but please my friend americans is not against you, is this:
When I was little I was thought at school the concept for american of the so called self-made man. I think this concept is and was so strong that Joseph Smith made it broader in a religion of self made gods.

 

[truthsave]

…and then of course I don’t want to neither repeit, nor quote, not to read again what alwayswondering reported (Originally Posted by paulp1002 ).
They can be no tought by the LDS, but as I asked my wife (ex LDS) some of these affirmation she is very familiar with. So somebody inside their organisation must spread it.

There are something written over there that makes me cry, other things extremely sad.
And insulted. Giving me like a depression state.

Of course I will pray for the mormons as I already prayed for Joseph Smith to be forgiven by our Lord.

It is sad they cannot even understand how somebody like me can feel deeply insulted by their doctrine.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Ah; I had no idea that it was derogatory. I’ve heard lots of Catholics self-identify as “Roman” – especially in Spanish. * “Catolico, Apostolico, Romano.”
*

Acts says the word “Christian” was first used in Antioch, but isn’t specific about who used it, so you may be right … does your tradition say that this was by the Christians?

I don’t know that it was specifically meant to be derogatory (they already had a derogatory word for Catholics- “Papists”), so much as that many Anglicans liked to still consider themselves Catholics too (presumably better Catholics at that), so they needed a word to distinguish our kind of Catholics from their kind. That of course didn’t fit our (older) understanding of Catholic identity, but the term “Roman Catholic” still stuck, outside and to a lesser degree even inside the Catholic Church. Today it’s often reduced further to “Roman church” (“church” not capitalized I suppose to imply it’s a false church) and “Romanists” by anti-Catholics, which is derogatory even though you can find a handful of old documents in which the term “Roman Church” was used in the Catholic Church itself.

Today the situation is also complicated by the fact that some Catholics, both East and West, use the term “Roman Catholic” as a synonym for “Latin Rite Catholic” (or “Western Catholic”, but that term is in decline since Latin Rite Catholicism has spread to non-Western cultures like those of Asia), and so you will find Eastern Catholics who will insist that they are “not Roman Catholic”, which can be highly confusing since to many if not most people “Roman Catholic” means a Christian who is in communion with the bishop of Rome, the Pope, and so the person seems to be distancing themselves from their own Church. Because of all this confusion I avoid the term “Roman Catholic” entirely and generally encourage others to do so as well.

Regarding the name “Christian”, I’m not aware of any tradition about exactly who originally called us that.

It was a relief when I found out that most members of the LDS weren’t offended by the term “Mormon”, since it’s just a much more natural sounding word to use.