Let's talk about Mormonism

  • Thread starter Thread starter adamhovey1988
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tarquin said:
(gazelam, post:22)
"One of the principles that governs the LDS Church is “Common Consent” . . . Both local and general officers are presented to the pertinent congregation for acceptance. A similar process happens with LDS scripture. The last time this occurred that I’m aware of was in 1976 when the revelations that later became D&C section 137 & 138 were canonized as LDS scripture. . . . The Adam-God doctrine was never presented to the Church for acceptance. … "

Was the ceremony for making your call and election sure presented to the Church for acceptance?
Was the implementation of the fast offering presented to the Church for acceptance?
When 137 was “presented to the Church,” was the Church informed that 137 was only part of the vision? Did the Church have the opportunity to give “Common Consent” to an honest representation of the vision, or were they led to believe that 137 was a vision in its entirety? Does “common consent” given to proposals that are incomplete or misleading make the proposal more truthful? Of course it doesn’t. And “common consent” in the Mormon Church is not voluntary consent to an issue, but an act of self-defense, to prevent criticism and possible excommunication. Look what happens at the people who every now and then, when a “vote” is asked at a General Conference, vote “no.” Historically their votes have never been counted at all. (I saw one more recent gathering, in which the speaker did say “a majority” rather than “unamimous,” but that was an atypical shock.) And when there is a vote contrary to the wishes of the Party Leadership, the truthful voter is immediately removed, letting everyone else know what will happen to them if they ever dare to cross the High Priests of Mormonism.
Click to expand...
I refer you to CCC 2104.
 
gazelam said:
CCC 2104.
Click to expand...
2104 "All men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and his Church, and to embrace it and hold on to it as they come to know it."26 This duty derives from "the very dignity of the human person."27 It does not contradict a “sincere respect” for different religions which frequently "reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men,"28 nor the requirement of charity, which urges Christians "to treat with love, prudence and patience those who are in error or ignorance with regard to the faith."29
 
I can’t speak for him but it sounded as if he were admonishing tarquin to be respectful of other religious beliefs per the Catechism. That’s why I asked gazelam if Mormon beliefs squared with that. Mormons believe that Catholicism is founded by the Devil and they teach it from their own scriptures. I didn’t think I would get a reply. The Mormons here won’t answer anything I ask. It’s like I said from the beginning. In the Mormon church you’re not allowed to ask questions. It will get you kicked out. I know several people who have been excommunicated for exactly that.

The truth should not fear examination.
 
I’ve invited everyone here to talk about it. I’ve noticed I’ve gotten responses from former Mormons, current Mormons, and people like me who’ve never been Mormon. Mormons are free to defend themselves from these accusations, this is why I started the dialogue.
 
Not to be unkind, but Mormons look at you as gullible because you don’t know much about their church, so they can say whatever they want to you and have it go unchallenged. I know first hand what goes on behind closed doors in the Mormon church regarding Catholicism and I promise you, it’s not nice. They talk nicey-nice to your face, but deride you in private. Unless they are honest, then they deride you to your face. But most of them won’t be honest about what they believe.
 
Last edited:
Well, I’ll tell you straight up what I believe no matter who it offends. I have to ask, what do you think about this video?
 
I’ll have to watch it when I have some time this evening. I’ll let you know.
 
Hello,
I have a question for the LDS that I’ve had for years and years. The BOM says:
2 Nephi 26:29": 29 He commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the
world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion. I can understand the Catholics having what they call a pope because the BOM isn’t a part of there sacred scripture, but, why does the LDS church have what they call a prophet?
 
There are not one, but fifteen men who are called and sustained as prophets. They receive healthy paychecks from the Church as well, so don’t let them tell you that there is no paid ministry in the LDS Church. They don’t get an income. They get living expenses. That way, they don’t have to pay taxes on it and since they have no “income”, they also don’t have to pay any tithing. They know how to work the system. My hat goes off to them for that. Priestcraft implies intent and nobody can prove intent, so you can’t automatically assume that their leaders are practicing priestcraft, although, one must wonder. Only God knows their hearts.
 
Hello jaygunter,

I don’t know what you mean by proving intent. The significant part of the definition for priestcraft is behold priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world. The rest of the definition merely gives a reason to establish priestcraft.
 
huck said:
The significant part of the definition for priestcraft is behold priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world.
Click to expand...
You left off the end of the sentence: " . . . that they may get gain and praise of the world;"

Jesus told us to let our light shine. I don’t see anything wrong with that. But don’t do it for praise. That’s all.

My point is, we don’t know that that’s their intent. I’m not defending them, I’m just stating my opinion. And it’s not for me to judge.
 
Last edited:
Hello Jaygunter,
Letting your light shine is different from preaching and having your teachers preach that you are a light. The prophet and the pope are both viewed as lights because the adherents to a faith are instructed to view these leaders as such.
 
huck said:
Hello,
I have a question for the LDS that I’ve had for years and years. The BOM says:
2 Nephi 26:29": 29 He commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the
world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion. I can understand the Catholics having what they call a pope because the BOM isn’t a part of there sacred scripture, but, why does the LDS church have what they call a prophet?
Click to expand...
Hey Huck,
I’ll provide my 2 cents worth. Ephesians 4:11-13 states:

11 And he [Jesus] gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

These verses clearly state that prophets are a necessary part of the Church that Jesus founded, and that the intent was to continuing having prophets until a “unity of faith”. There clearly isn’t a unity of faith on the Earth yet so prophets continue to be necessary element of Christ’s Church on the Earth, priestcraft issues aside. Clearly the Prophet shouldn’t be absconding with Church funds. I guess I would reject an argument that says if there is a leader of a church, there must be a practice of priestcraft occurring. I hope this helps…
 
Based on that argument the true church also must have evangelists and pastors. Does the Mormon church ordain men to those offices?
 
So, who is the one “mighty and strong”? Why is this person important?
 
gazelam said:
I guess I would reject an argument that says if there is a leader of a church, there must be a practice of priestcraft occurring.
Click to expand...
I also would reject it. If however the religious training being given promotes the claim that the leader is somehow special then I would say that priestcraft is occurring based on the provided definition of priestcraft in the BOM.
*
With regards to apostles and prophets, these are job titles. From reading the OT you can gain some understanding of what the job of prophet entailed. I believe that if a person wants to claim that job title he needs to do something similar to what the OT prophets did. I could claim the job title of brain surgeon if I could redefine the title any way I wanted to but that would be misleading.
 
huck said:
I also would reject it. If however the religious training being given promotes the claim that the leader is somehow special then I would say that priestcraft is occurring based on the provided definition of priestcraft in the BOM.
Click to expand...
No question that they treat the leader as if he is someone special. The LDS regularly sing hymns of praise about/to their beloved prophets:

We Thank Thee, O God for A Prophet

We Ever Pray for Thee

Oh How Lovely Was the Morning

Praise to the Man

Come Listen to a Prophet’s Voice

Follow the Prophets

We Listen to A Prophet’s Voice

God, Bless Our Prophet Dear

There are probably others.

I used to joke, when I was a Mormon, that general conference was like a football game. People would paint their faces and chests with the names of their favorite prophets, or wear jerseys with names like Holland, Oaks, Eyring, Uchtdorf, Packer and Monson printed on the backs. It is true. In church, I have heard many a discussion on the subject of “Who is your favorite prophet (apostle) and why?” Of course, they don’t actually paint themselves or dress like that, but the sentiment is there. It’s totally about giving praise to the leaders and not to Jesus Christ. People leave general conference saying, “Isn’t Elder Bednar just wonderful!” when they should be saying, “Isn’t the Savior just wonderful!” It’s all about praising the men and not God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top