Mormon apologetics 101

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prince_Hal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Prince_Hal

Guest
A friend of mine who is also a mormon, but not one who sees the truth of the Catholic church gave me this letter that was passed out to all members of a mormon stake not so far from me in northern California. (See attachment to this post).

The letter was in response to recent events (I assume this refers to the Presidential primaries) that has resulted in some antogonism towards the mormon church and “mis-information”. Anyway, quoting a current mormon leader it says that some of the problems are caused by the mormon members themselves - not being able to answer questions about their faith. So, it gives a guide as what to say in reply to questions and how to get people interested in mormonism. I thought the quote about polygamy was a nice half-truth. Oh how I wish they would just be honest. If they believe in polygamy, then just say it, and at least earn some respect for being honest, even if we deplore as un-Christian the practice.

Anyway, I will let you decide for yourself. Perhaps we might all do something to really assit the mormon people on the day that the Stake President is requesting them to fast ?

God bless,

Hal.
 
They no longer believe many wives are necessary for celestial attainment because Brigham Young changed that teaching for the temporal salvation of their Church. You know, like the way the apostles changed early Christian teachings so they wouldn’t be martyred for the faith. Yep, we disposed of that “sacrificing to false gods” thing so the Church would fluorish under the Romans.
 
I read that letter, but I fail to see how its apologetics… its more like an ad campaign. It doesn’t cover actual beliefs of Mormons but it covers lots of “pros” like good family values etc.
 
I agree with the last poster. The letter is all very ad-campaign-ish. There is very little meat here. I think it shows the very shallow level of an individual mormon’s understanding of his or her own religion. In the end all a mormon really needs to know is how to say: “I know that the (LDS) church is true”. To go beyond this is dangerous, but mormonism does not stand up to scrutiny.

In the end the letter I think and the advice it gives will be of very little help to the LDS members, but shows the real shallow and sandy their theological foundation really is.

God bless,

Hal.
 
I read that letter, but I fail to see how its apologetics… its more like an ad campaign. It doesn’t cover actual beliefs of Mormons but it covers lots of “pros” like good family values etc.
That letter was based on a conference address given by Elder M Russell Ballard last October. The four sections in it are quoted from his talk. But it is not a very well-composed letter. The order in which the four secions are presented have been changed, so that coherent theological relevance or interconnect between them have been lost. If you read Elder Ballard’s original talk, it will make much more sense than this poorly written letter does. You can read the original talk here:

lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-9,00.html

zerinus
 
T If you read Elder Ballard’s original talk, it will make much more sense than this poorly written letter does. You can read the original talk here:

%between%

zerinus invites us to see Elder M. Russell Ballards talk so I did and will respond to that talk.
Ballard Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles; "Mormons place particularly strong emphasis on family as the basic unit of the Church and of society. We have a deep commitment to marriage (defined as a union between one man and one woman). Polygamy, a limited practice in the early pioneer days of the Church, was discontinued in 1890, some 117 years ago.

NOT-- Actually POLYGAMY was never a “limited practice” but actually was required for all Mormons in order to gain their salvation…Brigham Young declared on August 19, 1866: “The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p.269).

NOT-- Actually polygamy was never “discontinued” in the LDS church. The current leaders of the LDS church heavily believe in polygammy and many of them have ended up with two wives or more. Now before you yell liar listen to the evidence.
Current LDS Leaders allow a living man to be sealed to another woman after the death of his wife, or after divorce. This leads to the obvious situation of establishing multiple sealings (marriages) on Earth that, according to Mormonism, will necessitate polygamy in heaven.

This doctrine was reaffirmed in October of 2007 at the funeral for the second wife of President Howard W. Hunter, the fourteenth President of the LDS Church. The Deseret News reported:

President Hinckley affirmed the eternal nature of the marriage between Sister [Inis] Hunter and the former church president, whose first wife, Claire Jeffs, died after a long battle with Alzheimer’s disease and is now buried beside him in the Salt Lake Cemetery.

Inis Hunter “will now be laid to rest on the other side,” he said. “They were sealed under the authority of the Holy Melchizedek Priesthood for time and for all eternity,” he said, recalling the marriage ceremony he performed for them in the Salt Lake Temple in April 1990. (“Sister Hunter’s humor and cheerfulness remembered as she is laid to rest,” Deseret News, Oct. 22, 2007).

Another example of plural sealings is Apostle Russell M. Nelson 's marriage in 2006 to a BYU professor. The BYU NewsNet for April 7, 2006 announced the temple marriage of Apostle Nelson, age 81, to Wendy Watson (see [link]). His first wife died in February of 2005 and this was the first marriage for his new wife. This would mean, according to LDS beliefs, that Nelson has two wives sealed to him for eternity.

Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth president of the LDS Church, remarried twice after the death of his first wife, and in his book, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 2, p. 67, he remarked: “…my wives will be mine in eternity.”

Harold B. Lee, the eleventh president of the church, also remarried after his wife 's death and was sealed to another woman and was looking forward to a polygamous relationship in heaven. He, in fact, wrote a poem in which he reflected that his second wife, Joan, would join his first wife, Fern, as his eternal wives:

My lovely Joan was sent to me: So Joan joins Fern
That three might be, more fitted for eternity.
“O Heavenly Father, my thanks to thee”
(Deseret News 1974 Church Almanac, p. 17)

The official LDS Church Handbook of Instruction says:

Living Men — If a husband and wife have been sealed and the wife dies, the man may have another woman sealed to him if she is not already sealed. (Church Handbook of Instruction, p.72)

The church leaders realize the quagmire their doctrine of “eternal families” becomes with blended families, but don’t have any good answers when asked “Well don’t you still openly practice polygamy in this manner”?.

Ballard talk says; "Third, there are now over 13 million members in 176 countries and territories. About 6 million of these are in the United States, making us the fourth largest Christian denomination in America, and one of the fastest growing Christian faiths in the world,
HO HO HO you have got to be kidding right? I highly question his statement in the light of actual retention of LDS Members and the percentage who remain in the church. The LDS church Newspaper Deseret Morning News Published: Thursday, Feb. 14, 2008 reported: “Late President Gordon B. Hinckley once told the Quorum of the Twelve, “Brethren, when my life is finished and the final services are concluding, I am going to rise up as I go by, look each of you in the eye and say, 'How are we doing on retention?”’ Retention has become a real focus. For you don’t need an abacus to know many members have left the building.
What happened to them?”

In the United States, Mormons are departing from the faith as fast as converts are joining. Converts rarely remain active in the Mormon Church. (The official Mormon reaction to the articles stating that there are significantly less than 12 million members worldwide).

This is from a Salt Lake Tribune article Sep. 1st, 2005 quoting Merrill Bateman, a Mormon Seventy

“…He agreed the LDS Church’s worldwide membership, reported at 12 million, includes many who no longer consider themselves Mormon, but he disagreed with researchers who estimated active Mormons equal only 4 million.

Bateman said that number doesn’t count those in undeveloped countries who find it difficult to attend sacrament meetings. ‘So you might have in the neighborhood of . . . 4 [million] and 5 million members attending church at any given time, but those who are active would be more than that.’

Point. Many have left and many more will leave, it is only a matter of someone telling the truth to those who are honest enough to hear it.

Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
 
They no longer believe many wives are necessary for celestial attainment because Brigham Young changed that teaching for the temporal salvation of their Church. You know, like the way the apostles changed early Christian teachings so they wouldn’t be martyred for the faith. Yep, we disposed of that “sacrificing to false gods” thing so the Church would fluorish under the Romans.
Mainstream Mormons aren’t supposed to have practiced polygamy in this world since the new revelation was received from heavenly father, as I recall in 1890. I understand that the practice did, however, continue on a limited basis for about another 20 years. “Celestial polygamy,” that is polygamy after death, is however required to reach the fullness of celestial glory; i.e., become a god. In order to simply gain admission to the celestial kingdom (the highest of the Mormon heavens in which the god of our planet resides) one must only believe in polygamy, one need not practice it, but in that case you don’t get all the extras, like your own planet, and cool stuff like that.

The purpose of celestial polygamy, as explained to me by Mormons, is so that worthy women without a suitable husband can attain the celestial kingdom. Women by themselves cannot enter the celestial kingdom, they need a worthy husband to bring them through the “veil.” Women are 50% of the population and tend to be more virtuous than men, and some never marry, therefore there are more women eligible for the celestial kingdom then there are worthy husbands to bring them through the “veil.” Thus, celestial polygamy is necessary.
 
i’m not so sure that belaboring the polygamy issue is the best way to work against mormon religion. The reason is that polygamy is gaining among seculars as a lifestyle choice, just like other various pagan practices are. especially with all the recent coverage of the small lDS sects in arizona and Utah who still practice it. this could actually make Mormons seem up to date, and kind of cool to the pagans with their full body tattoos and nose rings.

In states where marriage is being redefined away from traditional one-man, one-woman norms, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to have legalized polygamy and polyadnry as protected lifestyles.
 
i’m not so sure that belaboring the polygamy issue is the best way to work against mormon religion. The reason is that polygamy is gaining among seculars as a lifestyle choice, just like other various pagan practices are. especially with all the recent coverage of the small lDS sects in arizona and Utah who still practice it. this could actually make Mormons seem up to date, and kind of cool to the pagans with their full body tattoos and nose rings.

In states where marriage is being redefined away from traditional one-man, one-woman norms, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to have legalized polygamy and polyadnry as protected lifestyles.
People outside of Mormon sects practice polyandry. And wife swapping, only they call it swinging. They defend this lifestyle. Where, Christians view these practices as immoral, and defend against them.

Mormons may not practice polygamy but they defend it as if they do, or would. And they defend the polyandrous, swinging behavior of Joseph Smith. Where, Christians view these practices as immoral, and defend against them.
 
Mormons may not practice polygamy but they defend it as if they do, or would. And they defend the polyandrous, swinging behavior of Joseph Smith. Where, Christians view these practices as immoral, and defend against them.
Because they have become so homophobic, and legalizing polyandry would also mean legalizing same-gender marriage, they will never support a movement to legalize polyandry. So-- they are caught. :rolleyes:
 
People outside of Mormon sects practice polyandry. And wife swapping, only they call it swinging. They defend this lifestyle. Where, Christians view these practices as immoral, and defend against them.

Mormons may not practice polygamy but they defend it as if they do, or would. And they defend the polyandrous, swinging behavior of Joseph Smith. Where, Christians view these practices as immoral, and defend against them.
right, and I want to be careful not to suggest that modern mormons are any more prone to practice multiple partner sex than any other group. Personally i think believe this is fairly widespread among the pagans, but rare among most religious people including nonChristians.

wasn’t there a popular show on one of the cable channels set among a polygamus family? I haven’t seen this but had heard about it through writtne commentary. It is my understanding that this family is mormon. again I have not seen the show since I don’t get cable and watch very little TV at all. But if the commercial TV people are picking up on an idea, it usually means that there is a market for it, otherwise they wouldn’t produce it.

Recently a girl associated with Tony Romo, I think it was Jessica Simpson, made a public comment that here sexual relationship preference was for polygamy.

i realize this isn’t exhaustive. Also that my gut isn’t necessarily reliable in such matters. But it seems not farfetched that polygamy as an evoloutionary development out of “wife swapping” could become seen as a valid alternative lifestyle same as the variations on homosexuality and other things. I could even imagine a situation where polygamy would become LEGAL in the U.S. and I wonder what mormons would think about THAT.
 
Mainstream Mormons aren’t supposed to have practiced polygamy in this world since the new revelation was received from heavenly father, as I recall in 1890. I understand that the practice did, however, continue on a limited basis for about another 20 years. “Celestial polygamy,” that is polygamy after death, is however required to reach the fullness of celestial glory; i.e., become a god. In order to simply gain admission to the celestial kingdom (the highest of the Mormon heavens in which the god of our planet resides) one must only believe in polygamy, one need not practice it, but in that case you don’t get all the extras, like your own planet, and cool stuff like that.

The purpose of celestial polygamy, as explained to me by Mormons, is so that worthy women without a suitable husband can attain the celestial kingdom. Women by themselves cannot enter the celestial kingdom, they need a worthy husband to bring them through the “veil.” Women are 50% of the population and tend to be more virtuous than men, and some never marry, therefore there are more women eligible for the celestial kingdom then there are worthy husbands to bring them through the “veil.” Thus, celestial polygamy is necessary.
To Catholics the next world is as real as this world. Belief in Polygamy there is acceptance and belief in polygamy period. The LDS church leadership is spiritually completely pro-polygamy. Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness)
 
right, and I want to be careful not to suggest that modern mormons are any more prone to practice multiple partner sex than any other group. Personally i think believe this is fairly widespread among the pagans, but rare among most religious people including nonChristians.
I agree they don’t practice multiple partner sex. But they do defend it, in the framework of their religious beliefs.
wasn’t there a popular show on one of the cable channels set among a polygamus family? I haven’t seen this but had heard about it through writtne commentary. It is my understanding that this family is mormon. again I have not seen the show since I don’t get cable and watch very little TV at all. But if the commercial TV people are picking up on an idea, it usually means that there is a market for it, otherwise they wouldn’t produce it.
You are thinking of “Big Love”. It is a portrayal of a polygamous family that has its roots in a Mormon splinter group. As a former Mormon, watching this was a trip and 1/2. Lots of references to Mormon practices and beliefs.
Recently a girl associated with Tony Romo, I think it was Jessica Simpson, made a public comment that here sexual relationship preference was for polygamy.
Yeah, I know people who are polyamorous. They are atheist. And are into a lot more deviance than multiple sex partners.
i realize this isn’t exhaustive. Also that my gut isn’t necessarily reliable in such matters. But it seems not farfetched that polygamy as an evoloutionary development out of “wife swapping” could become seen as a valid alternative lifestyle same as the variations on homosexuality and other things. I could even imagine a situation where polygamy would become LEGAL in the U.S. and I wonder what mormons would think about THAT.
Yes, I could see a “anything goes” becoming the legal norm. I don’t know what the Mormon church would do. I hear different things from different individuals who are Mormon. Some, I think would leave the religion altogether. Others would gladly embrace it, and some would accept it because they would believe it was commanded by God, but not find it particularly appealing.
 
uhhh, where is baptism for the dead in the book of mormon?

after all, it IS such an important doctrine.
 
Yeah, I know people who are polyamorous. They are atheist. And are into a lot more deviance than multiple sex partners…
And the letting go of sexual self-control in such a lifestyle can easily lead to child sexual abuse and multiple generational incest, as Warren Jeff’s community so obviously illustrates. I once explored that community on the internet, wondering if LDS could find any commonality with them. :nope:
 
Punishment of people for the “sins” of their ancestors is writ large across the BOM, so, yes, it does fit in.
Hi Jerusha. interesting. I’ve been trying to read the BoM but just not able to digest it. I keep being distracted by the “and it came to pass” fillers, and once I get aggrivated I just put it down and go to sleep. I accept this as part of my own learning disability, because obviously there are mnay who read and even study the BoM without being irritated over these little things the way I am. I wish I could read the thing, then I wouldn’t have to ask so many questions about it.

Anyway i am curious about what you say above, Jerusha, about cross generational punishment for sins being an important part of the BoM story. Joseph’s articles of faith, I think it is article #2, says:

"We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression."

when I first saw that, I felt like it is a repudiation of original sin. Is this one of those things in which the BoM tells one thing, and then Joseph’s developed mormon doctrine tells something else?
 
Remember that skin color is a marker that one’s ancestors were excessively sinful. Read 1 Nephi and the story of the white fruit as a realization of the concept of race, and apply it to Adam and Eve, and those who ate of the fruit and realized race (that they could become like gods because of their whiteness) and were therefore favored by the Mormon god, and refused to assimilate into the Native population, unlike their evil bretheren who assimilated into the population and whose descendants were therefore “dark and loathsome”. [long sentence, but I think it is understandable]

Check my back posts for further insight.

As for that JS quote, one can cherry-pick among conflicting statements to shape Mormonism into whatever one wants. With Baptism for the dead, one can gain forgiveness for one’s ancestors’ sins, and I suppose then one can become whiter??? :eek:

If one can state that original sin is the human predisposition to believe that “we are good and you are evil”, yes, in practice, they deny that that kind of thinking is sin. That kind of thinking is good.
 
Remember that skin color is a marker that one’s ancestors were excessively sinful. Read 1 Nephi and the story of the white fruit as a realization of the concept of race, and apply it to Adam and Eve, and those who ate of the fruit and realized race (that they could become like gods because of their whiteness) and were therefore favored by the Mormon god, and refused to assimilate into the Native population, unlike their evil bretheren who assimilated into the population and whose descendants were therefore “dark and loathsome”. [long sentence, but I think it is understandable]

Check my back posts for further insight.

As for that JS quote, one can cherry-pick among conflicting statements to shape Mormonism into whatever one wants. With Baptism for the dead, one can gain forgiveness for one’s ancestors’ sins, and I suppose then one can become whiter??? :eek:

If one can state that original sin is the human predisposition to believe that “we are good and you are evil”, yes, in practice, they deny that that kind of thinking is sin. That kind of thinking is good.
Original sin is an idea that Christians took from Manichaeism, and perhaps they grabbed it from the original Zooastrians. In any event, it doesn’t seem well supported in the Christian Canon of today, either.

Spencer W Kimball gave speeches in which he claimed that Native Americans were “turning Whiter” because they had joined the Mormon church. No, I’m not kidding. Funny, in a sad way.

You’re right about Mormonism’s radical transformations. The Book of Mormon was written in the very early years, before Kirtland, polygamy, Orson Pratt, etc. In that way it’s a lot like Christianity, which originally had doctrines about reincarnation and such stuff.
 
And the letting go of sexual self-control in such a lifestyle can easily lead to child sexual abuse and multiple generational incest, as Warren Jeff’s community so obviously illustrates. I once explored that community on the internet, wondering if LDS could find any commonality with them. :nope:
It is a fine line the Mormons walk when they embrace such beliefs. The older Mormon temple ritual included a few clues. A wife promised to obey her husband as her god. The Mormon doctrine of men becoming gods is also in this realm. Polygamous societies, by nature, require that equality between man and wife be replaced by one person who is dominant to the rest. In Mormonism, it is the man.

This is also seen in the secular groups who practice various forms of polygamy. There is one, dominant person, and the others obey that person, sometimes slavishly so.

How anyone can believe this is how God intended anyone to live is beyond me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top