LDS Question - Why do all Mormons give that same Testimonial statement?

[ParkerD]

Formulaic is a good way to describe it, Rebecca.

Personally, when I was investigating, I found the repetition of the formula at the end of most every talk to be rather … well, I can’t even find a word to describe it… group think?

In any case, my reaction to it was not a positive one. It kinda gave me the creeps, for lack of a better description.

…Particularly when the little kids would get up and do it, just imitating mommy or daddy.

Sablouwho,
I agree that some children “get up and imitate mommy and daddy”–which may seem trite and meaningless, but one occasionally hears a sincerity that is akin to “the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David;” …“And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” (Matthew 20:15, 16) Those few, when that happens, stand out.

Our ward testimony meetings have not had children stand up for several months now, but used to have some who stood up perhaps a year ago, but when an eighteen-year-old young man stands up and tells of his feelings, then I have appreciated his sincerity.

My own experience has been to not feel inclined to “bear testimony” until I understood the Holy Spirit in my life, and that was in college so in high school I stayed silent during “testimony meetings”, and felt just fine doing that.

 

[Jay53]

I was reading another thread, and enjoyed reading the letter wherein the “Holy See” declares a certain message to a Conference on Women. It was a very important message, with good counsel.

I have often wished Islam had the concept of a living “Pope” so that they would follow someone on earth who has peace and love in their heart rather than following whoever gains a following among a particular group, thus potentially endangering the world around them even though other Islamic may not share that isolated group’s ideas or behavior. So I can say honestly without a moment’s hesitation that I am grateful for the idea of a “Pope” with love and peace in his heart, and that Catholics obviously believe the Pope has a special authority and a special message–at least that is what it appears in the media, whether Catholics say it in so many words from their “heart”. (What kind of self-deception does it take to say there is not a person on earth who is “worthy of recognition”–the media describes thousands and tens of thousands who gather when the Pope visits a place.)

This was not at all what I said and you know it. Please stop twisting my words in the same way you twist scripture.

 

[JMJ4]

I was reading another thread, and enjoyed reading the letter wherein the “Holy See” declares a certain message to a Conference on Women. It was a very important message, with good counsel.

I have often wished Islam had the concept of a living “Pope” so that they would follow someone on earth who has peace and love in their heart rather than following whoever gains a following among a particular group, thus potentially endangering the world around them even though other Islamic may not share that isolated group’s ideas or behavior. So I can say honestly without a moment’s hesitation that I am grateful for the idea of a “Pope” with love and peace in his heart, and that Catholics obviously believe the Pope has a special authority and a special message–at least that is what it appears in the media, whether Catholics say it in so many words from their “heart”. (What kind of self-deception does it take to say there is not a person on earth who is “worthy of recognition”–the media describes thousands and tens of thousands who gather when the Pope visits a place.)

ParkerD- What did you mean by that?

 

[ParkerD]

This was not at all what I said and you know it. Please stop twisting my words in the same way you twist scripture.

Jay53,
I guess it would help if you say what you mean. You can re-explain, since I evidently didn’t understand you. If you think the Pope is given “recognition”, then I suppose you would want to acknowledge that if you are trying to assert that the LDS give “recognition” to a “living prophet.” One on my “side of the line” is trying to understand how one on your “side of the line” “differentiates” between “recognition” of the Pope or “recognition” of the prophet. I see no substantive difference.

 

[Xavierlives]

Hopefully, just twice–once to try and clarify and once again to try and clarify again. There is no point in people having ill-conceived and completely erroneous misconceptions about such a simple thing. In our world today, we can actually become informed–so silly to be misinformed, especially by those who deliberately bring their “slant” to deliberately misinform by making comparisons that are untrue. One ought to bring honesty to the world, or if one is uninformed, then by all means get informed or stay silent on a subject.

Well, I brought up the topic and I am not trying to dilute your belief, I am trying to understand why at the end of a public speaking it seems all Mormons say the same basic thing found in Post #1.

It is a type of testimonial witness so I was trying to figure out where it got its foundation and who decided that Mormons should recite it.

 

[ParkerD]

JMJ4:
ParkerD- What did you mean by that?

I’ll expand. I think the Pope was giving good counsel to the world, and I hope they follow his counsel about women and their place in the family.

I also wish Islam had whatever they would want to call their own worldwide leader (just one) who would have love in their heart for all humankind as the brotherhood of man, and who would teach their people clearly and emphatically to follow a course of peace and love in the world.

(The reason I brought up Islam, of course, is that it has been brought up on this thread, and a huge flaw in Islam is the lack of an acknowledged world leader who teaches their own people about love and forgiveness. I don’t think Mohammed was inspired at all, but at least he could have seen that Islam was going to need more than himself for his followers to look to after he had gone the way of all the earth.)

 

[Xavierlives]

What does “threw it down” mean.

Threw it down made me think of “Throw Down with Bobby Flay” and how I was annoyed he won the Mac and Cheese “throw down” when he put MEAT in it. MEAT in Mac and Cheese huh!!!

Well throw it down, as I know it, is in sense that while one is having a verbal battle or debate, they let loose some phrase or verbage.

I have Mormons visiting and we were having a discussion about Joseph Smith having earthly witnesses, and BAM, the missionary threw down the statement in post #1, “I believe JS to be God’s prophet, etc.”

 

[ParkerD]

Well, I brought up the topic and I am not trying to dilute your belief, I am trying to understand why at the end of a public speaking it seems all Mormons say the same basic thing found in Post #1.

It is a type of testimonial witness so I was trying to figure out where it got its foundation and who decided that Mormons should recite it.

Xavierlives,
I haven’t attended the meetings you have attended, but I’ve attended enough LDS meetings in many parts of the United States to know that you would never have heard the words you cited in the phrasing you presented. The phrasing you presented was “slanted” to convey a certain deliberate comparison, which anyone can see.

Why do speakers close with their “testimony”? Have you not read Paul’s teaching to King Agrippa? See Acts 26:22-23, and you will be reading Paul’s “testimony” to Agrippa. He gives his “testimony” over and over in his epistles. His “testimony” is built right into his message, and it is a testimony about Christ, Christ’s resurrection, the apostles and prophets, and the workings of the Holy Spirit among humankind.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Well throw it down, as I know it, is in sense that while one is having a verbal battle or debate, they let loose some phrase or verbage.

I have Mormons visiting and we were having a discussion about Joseph Smith having earthly witnesses, and BAM, the missionary threw down the statement in post #1, “I believe JS to be God’s prophet, etc.”

I used to travel more often for business. Sometimes I’d be surrounded by LDS missionaries on a plane back to SLC. Once in a while a missionary would “throw down” on a passenger who happened to be sitting next to them. Always the saying the same thing.

It is the training the LDS missionaries receive at the start of their mission. They are trained to say certain phrases. That is where it comes from.

 

[Jay53]

Jay53,
I guess it would help if you say what you mean. You can re-explain, since I evidently didn’t understand you. If you think the Pope is given “recognition”, then I suppose you would want to acknowledge that if you are trying to assert that the LDS give “recognition” to a “living prophet.” One on my “side of the line” is trying to understand how one on your “side of the line” “differentiates” between “recognition” of the Pope or “recognition” of the prophet. I see no substantive difference.

I was answering this question from a previous poster:

How exactly is “I know the Book of Mormon is true, and I know Joseph Smith is a prophet of God and I sustain Thomas S. Monson as a prophet of God” much different than “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, creator of Heaven and Earth, and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilot…”?

The Apostle’s Creed, which is what xixxvmcm85 is quoting above and which I posted in its entirety in my previous answer, is an affirmation of our faith and what we believe. Nowhere in this affirmation do we mention a man/prophet/saint to single them out for recognition nor is it necessary as an affirmation of our faith. Our faith is affirmed through God and there is no need to mention nor recognize by name any of the leaders/saints etc. that have gone before us. That was all I was saying. I certainly did not say that no one is worthy of recognition, which, given the number of canonized saints in the Catholic Church, would certainly not support such a position.

 

[Xavierlives]

Formulaic is a good way to describe it, Rebecca.

Personally, when I was investigating, I found the repetition of the formula at the end of most every talk to be rather … well, I can’t even find a word to describe it… group think?

In any case, my reaction to it was not a positive one. It kinda gave me the creeps, for lack of a better description.

…Particularly when the little kids would get up and do it, just imitating mommy or daddy.

Well no offense to the Mormon missionaries who have been visiting me for the past 6 weeks, but they have had to bring a person from the Church to address my questions because I went off script from day 1.

Nothing like a little 3-on-1 I guess.

 

[Xavierlives]

If I use LDS criteria to describe my Catholic faith I would say without question I KNOW it’s true. Every fiber of my being tells me it is. The miraculous nature of my conversion, the radically reorienting of my life, the inescapable logic, everything I feel tells me the Catholic Church is true. But in reality I don’t KNOW. I won’t KNOW until I die. If LDS used this criteria they would not say they know. Their definition is different than ours in this context. Plain and simple.

This is the one sad, reoccurring thing I hear from Catholics.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The Nicene Creed:

Et unam, sanctam, cathólicam et apostólicam Ecclésiam
And (we believe) in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church

…the “apostolic Church” covers a whole lot of understanding, including every Bishop, which includes every Pope.

(These are also the four marks of the True Church.)

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavierlives,
I haven’t attended the meetings you have attended, but I’ve attended enough LDS meetings in many parts of the United States to know that you would never have heard the words you cited in the phrasing you presented. The phrasing you presented was “slanted” to convey a certain deliberate comparison, which anyone can see.

This? “I believe that Joseph Smith is the true prophet of God, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the true church of God, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

How does that offer a slant? I’ll have to go find my Bible notebook, and flip though the pages, but I am pretty sure this is a close representation of what I heard 3-4 times on one Sunday and then again when the missionaries visited. It might have been a slight variation as I do not have a decent shorthand notetaking ability yet.

Why do speakers close with their “testimony”? Have you not read Paul’s teaching to King Agrippa? See Acts 26:22-23, and you will be reading Paul’s “testimony” to Agrippa. He gives his “testimony” over and over in his epistles. His “testimony” is built right into his message, and it is a testimony about Christ, Christ’s resurrection, the apostles and prophets, and the workings of the Holy Spirit among humankind.

But to me, a testimony is a personal one. Maybe I am thinking like a lawyer, but when someone gets on the stand, they aren’t expected to regurgitate something, they are expected to give their testimony. That’s what I do when the time calls for it.

EDIT: I found one note from my book that also seems to add the phrase “I bear testimony that these things are true.”

 

[RebeccaJ]

This is the one sad, reoccurring thing I hear from Catholics.

hmmm, no reason to be sad Xavierlives. We understand in Hope we are saved. We don’t presume God’s judgment, neither do we despair.

 

[Xavierlives]

hmmm, no reason to be sad Xavierlives. We understand in Hope we are saved. We don’t presume God’s judgment, neither do we despair.

It isn’t a presumption to have assurance, it is confidence that God means what he says.

 

[RebeccaJ]

We are assured of Salvation. We will also face His judgment. Why believe one thing He has to say, and not the other?

 

[ParkerD]

This? “I believe that Joseph Smith is the true prophet of God, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the true church of God, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

How does that offer a slant? I’ll have to go find my Bible notebook, and flip though the pages, but I am pretty sure this is a close representation of what I heard 3-4 times on one Sunday and then again when the missionaries visited. It might have been a slight variation as I do not have a decent shorthand notetaking ability yet.

But to me, a testimony is a personal one. Maybe I am thinking like a lawyer, but when someone gets on the stand, they aren’t expected to regurgitate something, they are expected to give their testimony. That’s what I do when the time calls for it.

EDIT: I found one note from my book that also seems to add the phrase “I bear testimony that these things are true.”

Xavierlives,
I was referring to your post #5, not your post #1 which was OK although LDS don’t use the specific words “is the true prophet” (more likely “a true prophet of God”. The words as presented about Joseph Smith in your post #5 are what created a slant, which is why I have not quoted it again because it is not a fair representation of what you would have heard in an LDS meeting.

I agree that a “testimony” should be personal and not necessarily the “same” as everyone else’s, but how many ways can one say those things from their heart since they involve similar matters of belief and innermost “knowledge”? Paul had similar expressions of testimony during his different epistles, as did Peter and John.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I’ll expand. I think the Pope was giving good counsel to the world, and I hope they follow his counsel about women and their place in the family.

I also wish Islam had whatever they would want to call their own worldwide leader (just one) who would have love in their heart for all humankind as the brotherhood of man, and who would teach their people clearly and emphatically to follow a course of peace and love in the world.

(The reason I brought up Islam, of course, is that it has been brought up on this thread, and a huge flaw in Islam is the lack of an acknowledged world leader who teaches their own people about love and forgiveness. I don’t think Mohammed was inspired at all, but at least he could have seen that Islam was going to need more than himself for his followers to look to after he had gone the way of all the earth.)

There was also counsel about the need for society to change in order to facilitate women being actively involved in all aspects of public life, you seemed to have missed that part, like The Boxer.

 

[Xavierlives]

This happens every time I go to a Mormon service. I’ll have to go back and look at my calendar, but I am pretty sure I’ve visited more than just the 1st Sunday of the month. My Mormon guests a few weeks ago threw it down.

It does remind me of the Muslims, but my issue is a little bigger. Why don’t they say lagniappe? The Apostle’s Creed is brimming with important doctrine, but the Mormons have Joseph Smith is God’s prophet, LDS is God’s Church, Christ is God’s Son.

The problem is even the demons of Matthew 8:29 recognize Jesus as God’s Son. So what are are the Mormons left with?

Xavierlives,
I was referring to your post #5, not your post #1 which was OK although LDS don’t use the specific words “is the true prophet” (more likely “a true prophet of God”. The words as presented about Joseph Smith in your post #5 are what created a slant, which is why I have not quoted it again because it is not a fair representation of what you would have heard in an LDS meeting.

I agree that a “testimony” should be personal and not necessarily the “same” as everyone else’s, but how many ways can one say those things from their heart since they involve similar matters of belief and innermost “knowledge”? Paul had similar expressions of testimony during his different epistles, as did Peter and John.

Well I am not saying everyone said the same thing word for word, but it was collectively about the same thing.

Hmmm… I’m not sure where post #5 (above) is a slant. I am only saying, Muslims have their saying (which is, as I understand, is expected verbatim). Then some denominations use a variety of creeds (as mentioned). Which are an exactment. Then the Mormons have a general reoccurring statement. I think someone here called it creed-like. That is what I am trying to flush out. Where and why that statement used?