LDS worship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aelred_Minor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you therefore hold the Book of Mormon to be superior to the Bible? Do you believe that the Book of Mormon was translated correctly? “If there are errors, they are the errors of man.”
No, not me personally. I consider both the Bible and Book of Mormon, along with many other scriptures, as worthy religious texts that one might learn much from. However, Mormons are taught that the Book of Mormon, translated by the gift of God for the last days, is the most correct of any book on earth. I know intelligent Mormons who are amazed at the Book of Mormon and think that it is good evidence for the divine calling of Joseph Smith; and there are indeed some (although I suspect a minority) of Mormons who consider the Book of Mormon superior to the Bible. In general, in spite of the LDS claim of the correctness of the Book of Mormon, Mormons hold the Old and New Testaments on equal footing with the entire Mormon canon (so long as the King James Version is used). Joseph Smith did produce what we call the “Inspired” version of the Bible which was meant to clarify some doctrines, but interestingly, this version is not used much by Mormons at all and exists now primarily as footnotes in the LDS correlated version of the King James bible.
 
However, Mormons are taught that the Book of Mormon, translated by the gift of God for the last days, is the most correct of any book on earth. I know intelligent Mormons who are amazed at the Book of Mormon and think that it is good evidence for the divine calling of Joseph Smith; and there are indeed some (although I suspect a minority) of Mormons who consider the Book of Mormon superior to the Bible.

Anyone who knows the LDS Church knows this is not true. Almost every Mormon considers the BofM to be superior. And it is driven by the top. In my time as a Mormon, and even since, there was a constant “Book of Mormon Challenge” to read the Book of Mormon is “x” number of days. There was never a challenge to do that with Bible. In the MTC, we had to recite the books of the Bof M, NOT the Bible. We had to chant the names of the LDS prophets, NOT the Biblical Prophets.
 
A con-artist and chronic adulterer he may have been; I never knew the man personally. Plenty were willing to malign him, and plenty to defend him. The fact is that obviously none of this calumny is believed by devout Mormons, nor does it factor into their worship.
calumny |ˈkaləmnē|
noun ( pl. -nies)
the making of false and defamatory statements in order to damage someone’s reputation; slander.
• a false and slanderous statement.

From your response: A con-artist and chronic adulterer he may have been;
 
I see you are ignoring me, too…do I frustrate you Mormons that much? Anyway, That is not really true. We claim that Jesus gave Peter the keys to the Church and we have a direct line of authority from that. There is one version of that story, straight from the Bible. The LDS Church has a guy who was a known con man who has at least 9 versions of a tale of a visitation where in his church starts.
I don’t really follow your comment here. I’m aware of the Catholic claim of direct authority. I find that claim to be about as credible as the Mormon claim that errant humans soon enough forsook the gospel and threw the early Church into apostasy. You say that there are at least nine versions of Joseph Smith’s first vision (I don’t doubt you, but I am personally only aware of four of them).

Regarding LDS worship, the topic of this thread, Mormons believe in one account of Joseph Smith’s first vision as complete and authentic. There is one version of that story, straight from the Joseph Smith History published along with the Doctrine and Covenants in the LDS standard works. The rest of them are of historical interest to the various Mormons who know about them (and many do), but are not canonical, much in the same way that numerous writings were considered but not included in the Christian New Testament. It doesn’t matter to Mormons that Joseph Smith related his story multiple times in different ways; they accept his definitive written account as the final word.
Again, not really true. The Catholic Church is 2000 years old. Its origins are in a different time and different culture. Were their bad leaders? Yes. But that does not change the truth of the Church. Do our leaders claim face to face with God? No. The LDS Church, founded by the con-man who claims LDS prophets talk face to face with God has leaders who, despite those convos with God, have done and said things to prove beyond a doubt they are not led by God. It is LDS folks who try to foolishly compare the two eras and cultures…
Devout Mormons don’t think the Mormon leaders have done things to prove beyond a doubt that they weren’t led by God. I assure you that many Mormons are perfectly aware of much of the early Church’s controversial history, and not all of them leave over it. Mormons have apologists too, did you not know? While I am skeptical of the claims of the Mormon church and quite vocally critical and outspoken in my own right, let me say right now that Mormons are not stupid or foolish. They have their own very unique view of the world in which Mormonism and that “con-man” Joseph Smith are very important.
 
Mr. McComb,

I appreciate your honesty. You are making progress. Struggling with cognitive dissonance is not fun. 🤷
 
Mr. P. T. McComb,

If you want to say that B.Y. elevated J. S. to the status of a god, then how can you accept the Brighamite Church? What did B.Y. do that was good? I will suggest that you search jhuston.com/jod.htm for the word “blood.” Then read archive.org/details/tellitallstoryof00sten and ebershoff.com/pdfs/Wife_No_19_Ann_Eliza_Young.pdf

The influence of B.Y. in your cultural heritage remains, no matter how much the CoJCoLDS tries to distance itself from him.
Yes, there are various critics and detractors of my Church who make lots of scandalous claims, many of which may be perfectly true for all I know. And, much like the Catholic apologists do when there arise scandalous claims against the Catholic church, our legions of LDS apologists with their fancy PhDs and advanced degrees ride in to the rescue to set the record straight. We are to be delivered over to the wily mind of man, and whom shall we believe?

I don’t really buy any of it and don’t care either way, since I take whatever good I find in any church and believe however I please. I happen to be among the most critical of any when it comes to my own church. It’s BS all the way down, more so recently than in times past if you ask me; it also contains much beauty and truth and provides the glue for happy communities and families where I live. Mormons don’t believe many of the horrific claims leveled against their cherished faith (true or otherwise), as you can well imagine, and these claims don’t affect their worship which they find spiritually satisfying, believe it or not. The Mormon faith provides meaning and direction for many Latter-Day Saints. Isn’t that the point of having a faith? But folks get all jealous because, oh, it’s the wrong worship! Look how corrupted it is! You’re going to lose your soul! Nonsense, I say. I’m sure Mormons in some forums take a similar unfortunate and uncharitable view of those in other faith traditions. This sort of tyranny exists wherever “orthodoxy” (Mormon or otherwise) is found.
 
If you are going to be comfortable with being a cafeteria Mormon, reforming your church/culture from within, then I will double up onl my prayers for you. :tiphat: :gopray2:
 
The fact that Mormons turn a blind eye to Joseph’s crimes and cons does not make them less factual.
The fact that anti-mormons turn an eager eye to Joseph’s alleged crimes and cons does not make them more factual.

Mormon worship does not revolve around the supposed crimes of its first Prophet. Nobody in my Church believes in Joseph the Pedophile, whether those claims are true or not. Those things do not take much part in the Mormon narrative that gives meaning and understanding to Mormons. Why does that bother you? Like the religious of all persuasions, Mormons have a rich foundation in mythology that colors their whole world and gives them a purpose in it. For them, Joseph Smith is more than a prophet; he’s a legend and a folk hero. The man left a tremendous legacy, but our detractors demand that we acknowledge Joseph, the petty criminal and depraved adulterer.

Listen, Mormons today believe in a loving Heavenly Father, in a Jesus who can save them from their sins, and that they might be led through their lives with the help of a Holy Spirit. That’s fundamental to Mormon worship.

Mormons believe in receiving inspiration and guidance from inspired men whom they call prophets and apostles, and are grateful for whatever good advice and guidance they can get. They love their Book of Mormon and their scriptures, including the Bible. They believe in strong families, in faithful marriages, in helping each other, in loving their enemies (which is just as hard for us as it is for you), and in keeping the commandments.

We have stories that define us as a people and attempt to make sense of the past and of why we, as Mormons, came to be. Sure, these stories create outsiders who resent them and make every effort to discredit them, but they give us a sense of solidarity too.

So we take the good that we find and we overlook the bad! We like to paint ourselves and our heritage in shades of goodness; and with words and stories we craft truths to live by. Like all other religions, our best and truest stories are the ones that never happened quite like that. As your wonderful Chesterton once said (that awful heretic, eh?), our fairy tales are more than true, and we believe them with all our hearts (well, my neighbors do; I am the skeptic of the bunch) and think them eternal and immutable. Kind of like I imagine that you must regard your faith.
 
That’s the quandary of being Mormon, a true desire to follow Jesus, a non-Chrisitan context (Mormonism) from which to do it. It creates a struggle, or as Jerusha says, cognitive dissonance. Atheism and agnosticism are just two of the ways to cope. Apathy works too.

That’s not a criticism, just an experience, and observation.

God has not abandoned Mormons (or anyone) in their struggle.
 
Thank you pmccombs for the frank discussion, and for your civility in the face of some previously less-than-charitable posts further back.

I’m curious, it seems lately from my Morman best friend that the LDS church is becoming more Christ-centered. For example, the old rituals are being toned-down, the teachings from the bible are increasing, and texts like the Perl of Great Price are not being used as much.

Is that a fair statement?
 
That’s the quandary of being Mormon, a true desire to follow Jesus, a non-Chrisitan context (Mormonism) from which to do it. It creates a struggle, or as Jerusha says, cognitive dissonance. Atheism and agnosticism are just two of the ways to cope. Apathy works too.

That’s not a criticism, just an experience, and observation.

God has not abandoned Mormons (or anyone) in their struggle.
Well, I like how you cast it in terms of a struggle, and for me it’s only worthwhile if it’s a struggle. But you will find that most believing Mormons do not have a struggle where their belief is concerned. Their struggles are more the day-to-day struggles of good people who accept that their actions have moral significance. To deal with this dissonance when it crops up (rarely enough in the heart of Mormon country), average Mormons choose to cast off the dissonant information that is challenging and unappealing, and, if I might suggest it, this is the very same tactic employed by the faithful of most religious backgrounds when confronted by a challenge. Mormons have many defenses and much apologia to fall back on, to bolster and build their faith.

Nor do Mormons consider their religion as one arising from a “non-Christian context” as you say. While Mormon worship does not have a typical “pedigree,” so to speak, that relates it back to the orthodox Christian trunk, Joseph Smith and his cohorts operated within a Christian milieu and had little other influence from which they might draw. Folk magic? Frontier superstition? Maybe, but Joseph himself attended various Christian denominations and considered becoming Methodist, as that was the church that apparently suited him best. But there was a lot of speculative and experimental religion going on in those days (at least in America), and Christianity was the hotbed for it. Because there was innovation taking place, many Christians want to label the thing as “Non-Christian.” Oh, Mormons consider themselves very much Christian indeed.

Now, to your other points, yes atheism is a way to escape dissonance… by resolving it. Atheism resolves the dissonance by rejecting one part of the conflict and accepting another seemingly more likely possibility that ultimately eliminates belief. Some Mormons (and members of other faiths too) who encounter dissonance, perhaps by discovering something about history or science (but not necessarily), may choose the path of the atheist.

Agnosticism despairs of ever really knowing at all, and thus it can’t intrinsically cope with dissonance. Instead, the agnostic must bring some other component to the table, and sometimes that is apathy. Of course, Mormon worship is anything but apathetic, and as an agnostic (though one who applies apathy very carefully), I am myself an aberration in Mormondom.

The Latter-day saint’s belief itself is very much Catholic in its quality, if not in its content. Mormonism is about knowing and having certainty of truth. Mormons appeal to reason, to history, to scripture, to miracles, and to spiritual witness for confirmation of their faith. There are many intelligent Mormons for whom Mormon doctrine makes eminent sense, who see evidence of God’s hand in Mormon history, who relish and admire Mormon scripture, who have witnessed miracles, and who have had the confirming voice of the Holy Spirit speak to their minds and hearts of the truth of their church. It’s all very curious, I know; but I understand the same sorts of things happen to the Catholic also, regarding their faith. Surely you can relate.
 
The fact that anti-mormons turn an eager eye to Joseph’s alleged crimes and cons does not make them more factual.

Actually, the crimes ARE facts. That is my point. Mormons ignoring them does not change that.

Mormon worship does not revolve around the supposed crimes of its first Prophet.

The crimes are not supposed. Read some history. And the worship DOES revolve around Joseph.

Nobody in my Church believes in Joseph the Pedophile, whether those claims are true or not.

And if nobody believes in Ted Bundy, the killer, is Bundy less of a killer?

Those things do not take much part in the Mormon narrative that gives meaning and understanding to Mormons.

Exactly. It is the burying the head in the sand that I am talking about

Why does that bother you?

Why does what bother me? That there was a con man who became a false prophet and he has led many, many people to a false church?

Like the religious of all persuasions, Mormons have a rich foundation in mythology that colors their whole world and gives them a purpose in it. For them, Joseph Smith is more than a prophet; he’s a legend and a folk hero. The man left a tremendous legacy, but our detractors demand that we acknowledge Joseph, the petty criminal and depraved adulterer.

I do not demand anything. If you choose to ignore the fact that he was a conman, thief, adulterer, etc. that is your choice. My goal on this CATHOLIC site is make sure anyone who reads about Mormons read the truth.

Listen, Mormons today believe in a loving Heavenly Father, in a Jesus who can save them from their sins, and that they might be led through their lives with the help of a Holy Spirit. That’s fundamental to Mormon worship.

Where, in the loving God scenario, do the blood oaths come in?

Mormons believe in receiving inspiration and guidance from inspired men whom they call prophets and apostles, and are grateful for whatever good advice and guidance they can get. They love their Book of Mormon and their scriptures, including the Bible. They believe in strong families, in faithful marriages, in helping each other, in loving their enemies (which is just as hard for us as it is for you), and in keeping the commandments.

No argument there. But doing good means little when you are following a false prophet and worship a fake god.

So we take the good that we find and we overlook the bad! We like to paint ourselves

I know. I have seen reports on Mountain Meadows Massacre.

and our heritage in shades of goodness; and with words and stories we craft truths to live by. Like all other religions, our best and truest stories are the ones that never happened quite like that. As your wonderful Chesterton once said (that awful heretic, eh?), our fairy tales are more than true, and we believe them with all our hearts (well, my neighbors do; I am the skeptic of the bunch) and think them eternal and immutable. Kind of like I imagine that you must regard your faith.

You can’t compare the two, no matter how badly you need to

Be blessed
 
From a perspective of Catholicism, Mormonism is not a Christian religion. That isn’t to say Mormons aren’t like all people, a mix of good and bad.

You should understand that I was raised LDS but had become an atheist by my early 20’s. I converted to Catholicism, from atheism, in my mid 40’s. So I do have the perspective of being all three. 🙂

I know the struggle. The day I had the brilliant idea that there didn’t have to be God, I remember as one of the best days of my life. Simply because, I didn’t have to try and figure it out any more. It was a relief. But atheism has its problems as well, the sort of atheist that I was, reliant on secular humanism or nihilism, it fell apart very rapidly for me. It was far more difficult than trying to figure out Mormonism, in the psychological sense, as well as the more important questions of being.

Everyone is on their own journey. The Christian proposition is, we aren’t journeying alone. There is something, rather than nothing. I set out, in my nihilism, to find that something.

God calls to all, whether you accept that or not, believe or not. God is not reliant on our belief.
 
Thank you pmccombs for the frank discussion, and for your civility in the face of some previously less-than-charitable posts further back.

I’m curious, it seems lately from my Morman best friend that the LDS church is becoming more Christ-centered. For example, the old rituals are being toned-down, the teachings from the bible are increasing, and texts like the Perl of Great Price are not being used as much.

Is that a fair statement?
Oh, I would say it’s fair. I’d go as far as to make the claim that Mormonism today looks a whole lot more orthodox than ever. I’m even having an increasingly hard time really distinguishing the Mormon doctrine of the Godhead from the Orthodox understanding of the Trinity. Naturally, our critics point more to the amorphous ghost of Mormonism Past to describe us today.

But Mormonism wants to be mainstream, and I think this is a development along those lines. Me, I’m interested in the adventure of Mormonism’s past worship. It was outrageous and exciting; almost anything could have been possible in those days. Now we are standardized, generalized, correlated, and all that boring stuff. 😉 That’s my assessment of Mormon worship in the 21st century, anyway.
 
But Mormonism wants to be mainstream, and I think this is a development along those lines. Me, I’m interested in the adventure of Mormonism’s past worship. It was outrageous and exciting; almost anything could have been possible in those days. Now we are standardized, generalized, correlated, and all that boring stuff. 😉 That’s my assessment of Mormon worship in the 21st century, anyway.
I agree that the Mormonism of JS time was much more of a believe what you like, and who is anyone to tell me I can’t believe X. Unless of course, it was a Catholic belief…no one is allowed to believe what the Catholic Church has to teach. Then or now.

Mormonism is absolutely founded as an opposition to orthodoxy. It can never embrace it, as there is no such thing as orthodoxy in Mormonism. Not even today.

Mormon apologists attempt to create some sort of orthodoxy, but reduced to the lowest common denominator, Mormon apology is just someone’s opinion.
 
After being LDS for over ten years, I feel disgusted with the idea that I associated with an organization that considers men such as Brigham Young and Joseph Smith as prophets and witnesses of our Lord Jesus Christ.*
Brigham Young taught that the blood of our Savior was not sufficient for certain sins. It is HIGHLY ABHORRENT to me as a disciple of Christ. The Mormon Church still describes Brigham Young as an “Apostle” of Christ. See Journal of Discourses, volume 3, pages 243 - 249: "The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it". Also seeDoctrines of Salvation, Volume 1, Chapter 8, pages 133-134.

And many other sources. A man who claims to an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ should NEVER undermine or challenge the blood shed by our Savior.*

Joseph Smith as a false prophet according to the Bible. Deut. 18:20-22: "Deut. 18:20-22 (NIV) “A prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death. You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?’ If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously…”
How many FAILED prophecies Joseph uttered? He certainly was human and consequently imperfect. But he proved to be either a liar or a deceived man himself.

Let’s not even get started with polyandry and Masonry origins of the temple ceremonies.
The great majority of LDS are fantastic people and I love them for their faith in Christ. The Mormon church does produce some good fruits.*
With that said, the LDS faith is ridden with lies, contradictions, and deceit.
 
Actually, the crimes ARE facts. That is my point. Mormons ignoring them does not change that.
Fine, fine… I have no reason not to believe your facts, just like I have no reason to disbelieve the evidences mounting against a Jewish Exodus from Egypt, the notion of original Christianity, and the need for a God to create anything at all in this absurd Universe. I bet you could point to a corpus of apologia that gives a million great reasons why I’m wrong about those things, just like I could point to a volume of apologia that gives reasons why your facts on Mormonism are just plain silly or irrelevant. We’ll call each others’ evidence “ignoring the facts,” shall we?
The crimes are not supposed. Read some history. And the worship DOES revolve around Joseph.
You’re not the first to tell Mormons what they worship. It’s called building a straw man. See, it’s way easier to burn down Mormons who worship Joseph Smith than ones who worship Jesus.
And if nobody believes in Ted Bundy, the killer, is Bundy less of a killer?
Ted Bundy is dead and gone and now only exists in the imagination of people who might choose to believe something about him. I believe Ted Bundy was a murderer because I have no reason to deny someone’s evidence on the matter. I have, from long tradition, learned to give Joseph Smith a little more benefit of the doubt when it comes to historical claims, even though I realize there’s little chance that he was what he claimed to be. The point of this thread is what Mormons believe and how they worship, not the facts of their past history which are so easily mangled by the artifices of men. Trust me, we barely remember our own history aright before we’ve finished living it.
Exactly. It is the burying the head in the sand that I am talking about
Yes, it’s a reflex some call “religion.” It’s what keeps us happy in the midst of this dark abyss where nothing really matters. 😉 I suspect you may suffer from it as well, but are less inclined to admit it.
Why does what bother me? That there was a con man who became a false prophet and he has led many, many people to a false church?
Oh well, by those standards, Mohammed did worse, as did all those nonsense con men who thought Jesus was divine and gave rise to all the false churches of Christianity; and don’t even get me started on those imposters of the Vedic tradition who can’t even seem to understand that someone has to be right and someone else wrong. One of my Jewish friends assures me that at least his people are recovering from all this nonsense and likes to point out the fact that most of them are now atheist.

Oh, now look what you’ve gone and made me say! Typically I’m quite happy when folks believe in their Allahs and Jesuses and Vishnus. And empty Nirvanas. But the world is MUCH better for Catholicism, you know, and for Mormonism and all the rest of them. I love to join with the believers with my own hopes and dreams from time to time. It’s a pity that we have this talk of false churches.
I do not demand anything. If you choose to ignore the fact that he was a conman, thief, adulterer, etc. that is your choice. My goal on this CATHOLIC site is make sure anyone who reads about Mormons read the truth.
Yeah, I know Mormons who have that same type of goal on Mormon sites. Only somehow their truth looks different than yours, and they’d like if you’d read history and stop ignoring stuff too. Ah, the arguments of men. We get convinced and will not bend. Such certainty.
Where, in the loving God scenario, do the blood oaths come in?
Nowhere. Mormons don’t have that anymore. I’m tellin’ ya. It’s not a part of Mormon worship these days. Oh we had it in the past? I don’t care. I don’t do the blood oath thing. Never did.
No argument there. But doing good means little when you are following a false prophet and worship a fake god.
Actually, I think it means more if folks still manage to do good in spite of their false prophets and fake gods. Even more remarkable when they somehow manage it with none at all.
I know. I have seen reports on Mountain Meadows Massacre.
Alas, my murderous forebears. Massacres and strong, unbending belief seem to have a curious affinity, do they not?
You can’t compare the two, no matter how badly you need to
That’s what Mormons think too, otherwise, like me, they may begin to wonder whether or not their faith ought to be truly privileged above the faith of another. The first rule of True Belief is to never, ever admit that someone else’s belief and conviction is comparable to your own. It all falls apart from there. So, I’ll leave you with it and return your blessing and well wishes.
 
It was outrageous and exciting; almost anything could have been possible in those days. Now we are standardized, generalized, correlated, and all that boring stuff. 😉 That’s my assessment of Mormon worship in the 21st century, anyway.
I certainly understand - though I don’t agree with older LDS doctrine, there was a certain spirit that must have been very tantalizing in those times. The novelty of it all.

If course, I’m obliged to tell you that it was nothing but needless rebellion. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top