Mormon - Beliefs - A civil Discussion Please

[wilsonpd]

I would also like a member of Lds to clear up a few other questions:
Does the church teach polygamy in eternity? For example will each man who achieves godhood only be married to the woman he was sealed to on earth or will he have more than one wife?

Dianaiad: you said in the other thread that you would love to discuss “why some aspects of the Word of Wisdom are requirements for Temple Recommends and others are not”
I would love to understand this.

Also in talking with the missionaries extensively on the subject of apostacy their latest assertion is that the apostacy should not be looked at as an apostacy of succesion, but an apostacy of “plain and precious truths” and the corruption of doctrine. This confuses me. They tried for a long time to prove that the succesion was broken and therefore there was an apostacy. When they could not prove to me that there was a break or show me when the break occured they changed to the much more vague “loss of precious truths” but have not been able to tell me which “precious truths” were lost. Is it apostolic succesion that is important or is it the corruption of doctrine that is important and caused a need for a restoration? And if it is the corruption of doctrine can you state what has been lost or corrupted?

I can also state that the missionaries have told me that they don’t use the word “virgin” in the same way as Catholics do. They DO believe that God had sex with Mary to concieve Jesus but their definition of virgin still allows that Mary was a virgin because she was untouched by a mortal man. I probably should have posted that last part in the other thread but there it is. It is very confusing to try to understand the beliefs or doctrine, if you will, of LDS when you have several members telling you contradictory things.

 

[JRKH]

Huh?

You think that the bible badly translated is as valid as one that is translated correctly?

Ever read “The Good News” bible?

You know, this is a very goo point. A badly translated Bible is definitely NOT the Word of God that we all expect from the Holy bible.
And this brings up another good point re: the Catholic Church.
It was the Catholic Church which first assembled the Books into the bible, from Books written by Catholic Christians, during the 300 years of the Church. Thus is it that we, as Catholics, look for an imprimatur in the front of a Bible. It means that the Translation has been reviewed by the very church which assembled the Bible in the first place. It gives us great assurance as to the accuracy of the translation.
In addition, we are able to call upon the Early Church Fathers and nearly 2000
years of Church teaching as to actual and correct interpretation.

As for the Book of Mormon, there was a comment made on this thread or another that the BOM was first published with errors in it and that is because it was translated by Humans, who are of course fallible.
A thought occurred to me in that regard.
JS was sent to find the plates by an angel correct?
He was told to translate them, also by an angel correct?
This was done so as to restore, through JS, the True and Correct gospel of Jesus Christ, correct?
So thenm how is it that the very first time the plates are translated into English, God’s chosen prophet, through whom the gospel is to be restored, got it wrong.

I’m not trying to be confrontational here. These are logical questions I must ask. We are not talking about some committee of human translators trying to discern the exact nuance of ancient greek and hebrew texts so they can issue a new version of the Bible. Here we are talking about God’s Hand Picked Prophet - Charged with the Restoration of Christ’s Church on Earth.
It seems strange that Christ would permit his hand chosen prophet to get it wrong the first time.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I would also like a member of Lds to clear up a few other questions:
Does the church teach polygamy in eternity? For example will each man who achieves godhood only be married to the woman he was sealed to on earth or will he have more than one wife?

Dianaiad: you said in the other thread that you would love to discuss “why some aspects of the Word of Wisdom are requirements for Temple Recommends and others are not”
I would love to understand this.

Also in talking with the missionaries extensively on the subject of apostacy their latest assertion is that the apostacy should not be looked at as an apostacy of succesion, but an apostacy of “plain and precious truths” and the corruption of doctrine. This confuses me. They tried for a long time to prove that the succesion was broken and therefore there was an apostacy. When they could not prove to me that there was a break or show me when the break occured they changed to the much more vague “loss of precious truths” but have not been able to tell me which “precious truths” were lost. Is it apostolic succesion that is important or is it the corruption of doctrine that is important and caused a need for a restoration? And if it is the corruption of doctrine can you state what has been lost or corrupted?

I can also state that the missionaries have told me that they don’t use the word “virgin” in the same way as Catholics do. They DO believe that God had sex with Mary to concieve Jesus but their definition of virgin still allows that Mary was a virgin because she was untouched by a mortal man. I probably should have posted that last part in the other thread but there it is. It is very confusing to try to understand the beliefs or doctrine, if you will, of LDS when you have several members telling you contradictory things.

These are some interesting questions and I hope we get some help on them.
I just want to add that I appreciate everyone trying to keep this about actual beliefs and not get into he-said-she-said debates.
Hopefully someone from LDS will be able to clarify these things for us from official sources.

Peace
James

 

[nebula]

I would also like a member of Lds to clear up a few other questions:
Does the church teach polygamy in eternity? For example will each man who achieves godhood only be married to the woman he was sealed to on earth or will he have more than one wife?

Dianaiad: you said in the other thread that you would love to discuss “why some aspects of the Word of Wisdom are requirements for Temple Recommends and others are not”
I would love to understand this.

Also in talking with the missionaries extensively on the subject of apostacy their latest assertion is that the apostacy should not be looked at as an apostacy of succesion, but an apostacy of “plain and precious truths” and the corruption of doctrine. This confuses me. They tried for a long time to prove that the succesion was broken and therefore there was an apostacy. When they could not prove to me that there was a break or show me when the break occured they changed to the much more vague “loss of precious truths” but have not been able to tell me which “precious truths” were lost. Is it apostolic succesion that is important or is it the corruption of doctrine that is important and caused a need for a restoration? And if it is the corruption of doctrine can you state what has been lost or corrupted?

I can also state that the missionaries have told me that they don’t use the word “virgin” in the same way as Catholics do. They DO believe that God had sex with Mary to concieve Jesus but their definition of virgin still allows that Mary was a virgin because she was untouched by a mortal man. I probably should have posted that last part in the other thread but there it is. It is very confusing to try to understand the beliefs or doctrine, if you will, of LDS when you have several members telling you contradictory things.

LDS STILL practice eternal polygamy-- how? Simple, if a man is sealed to a woman who dies, he may remarry and be sealed to a new woman. He will expect to be with BOTH women as wives in the Celestial Kingdom, still happens. The LDS church never repudiated the PRINCIPLE of celestial marriage, or polygamy, but suspended the practice. There is expectation from many Mormons that the practice will be reinstated at some time, perhaps during the millenial reign.

The Apostacy in Mormonism really has to be understood as a loss of authority on the earth. Most Mormons believe that priesthood authority was lost with the apostles’ deaths or shortly thereafter. With the loss of authority came the loss of the fullness of the gospel since there was not a prophet on the earth to make corrections.

As far as Mary having sex with God the father, that is pretty old school. I have heard that doctrine explicitly taught in a couple of Institute classes I attended as a Mormon, but most Mormons I do not think believe that is literally true anymore.

 

[wilsonpd]

LDS STILL practice eternal polygamy-- how? Simple, if a man is sealed to a woman who dies, he may remarry and be sealed to a new woman. He will expect to be with BOTH women as wives in the Celestial Kingdom, still happens. The LDS church never repudiated the PRINCIPLE of celestial marriage, or polygamy, but suspended the practice. There is expectation from many Mormons that the practice will be reinstated at some time, perhaps during the millenial reign.

The Apostacy in Mormonism really has to be understood as a loss of authority on the earth. Most Mormons believe that priesthood authority was lost with the apostles’ deaths or shortly thereafter. With the loss of authority came the loss of the fullness of the gospel since there was not a prophet on the earth to make corrections.

As far as Mary having sex with God the father, that is pretty old school. I have heard that doctrine explicitly taught in a couple of Institute classes I attended as a Mormon, but most Mormons I do not think believe that is literally true anymore.

Thank you for your response but these are all very simple answers to very complex questions. I actually knew that a man can be sealed to two or more woman for eternity but my question was wanting to know more along the lines of whether or not there will be multiple wives for every “god” in eternity.

Your answer on apostacy is the standard stock answer that I got from the missionaries the very first time that I met with them. We have debated the apostacy…and well, no reason to restate my question–I am just looking for a more in depth answer since the missionaries seem to have trouble providing proof for either of their theories.

 

[zerinus]

Sorry again - I am just trying to get some terminology clarified. Also I should read my posts better before hitting the send button. I meant to say:

In Mormon belief the term “Priest” and “Priesthood Authority” do not connect. I say this since, in the Old testament there was a Priesthood Established by God among the Isrealites. But in the LDS liturature the “Priesthood Authority” is not equated with them, but with individuals whom God chose directly - These are called Prophets.
Hope that is clearer.

I think the best way that I can clarify that for you is to ask you to temporarily forget how you understand the priesthood in your tradition, and try to get into the LDS mindset of how it is to be understood. God anciently instituted a priesthood among the Israelites that was hereditary. It is called the Aaronic or Levitical Priesthood, because it was bestowed on the tribe of Levi, and on Aaron and his descendents (who were also Levites). That is what we call the lesser priesthood, because it is a priesthood of a lower order. John the Baptist was the last in the line of descendents of Aaron who officiated in this priesthood, before the “kingdom of the Jews” were overthrown, meaning that they lost status as the propagators of the gospel of Jesus Christ through Apostasy and the rejection of the Messiah at that time. The spiritual “kingdom” of God was then transferred to the Gentiles. There is also a higher priesthood that we call the Melchizedek Priesthood, that was not bestowed on Aaron or the Levites, but we believe was selectively bestowed on some of the ancient prophets. That was also the priesthood that was bestowed on the Apostles of Jesus Christ and Elders of the church in New Testament times. As a result of the Apostasy, we believe that that priesthood was lost to the Christian church, but has now been restored to the LDS Church by revelation and visitation of angels from heaven.

So the Priesthood Authority DID continue on After the Original Apostles, to any whom they Layed Hands opon and ordained into the Priesthood. This would include those called deacons, presbyters, priests, Bishops or whatever.

Yes, it continued as long as the Apostles were alive to lead the church. But it died out after they disappeared from the scene as result of the Apostasy. I have written a lengthy article in my Blog to explain the LDS concept of the apostasy, which you can read here. It would take too long to explain it all in this thread.

Could you be more specific?
I know from your pamphlet that JS recieved his “Laying on of hands” from Peter, James and John, (Not angels)

Both the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods were restored to Joseph Smith and his associate by the ministration of angels. John the Baptist returned as a resurrected being and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on Joseph Smith; and later on, Peter, James and John came and ordained them to the Apostleship, which includes the higher Melchizedek Priesthood. John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John returned as resurrected beings. Resurrected beings can act as God’s messengers, which is another definition of an angel. They are agents in the hands of God to minister to mankind for the salvation of the human family.

So what is the procedure for ordination and the passing on of “Priesthood Authority” in the Mormon Church.

The procedure is through the laying on of hands, as was done anciently.

Are the Apostles elected from among certain elders like the Pope is chosen from among the Cardinals?

Apostles are called by revelation to the Prophet and President of the Church. They are usually people who have had long experience in the work of the Church, and may come from all walks of life. Prior to their being called to the Apostleship, they will have served in various capacities in the Church, which means that they will have been ordained to various priesthood offices previously.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

But again…how do YOU know which parts are translated correctly? Missionaries often quote from the Bible (KJV), how do you or they know that they are not quoting a verse that has been translated incorrectly?

We accept all parts of the Bible as correct unless we have reason to believe otherwise. See my earlier post.

zerinus

 

[nebula]

Thank you for your response but these are all very simple answers to very complex questions. I actually knew that a man can be sealed to two or more woman for eternity but my question was wanting to know more along the lines of whether or not there will be multiple wives for every “god” in eternity.

Your answer on apostacy is the standard stock answer that I got from the missionaries the very first time that I met with them. We have debated the apostacy…and well, no reason to restate my question–I am just looking for a more in depth answer since the missionaries seem to have trouble providing proof for either of their theories.

As far as whether or not men will have to have multiple wives in the CK in order to be exalted I would guess not along the following lines of reason: men in this era are not required to have multiple wives in order to do so because the prophet of the church suspended the practice. If the practice were in effect, the answer would be different.

You aren’t going to get a more specific answer about apostasy because that’s all there is to it. What more are you looking for? Official LDS sources say nothing beyond what I said.

btw- why are you wasting your time debating with Mormon missionaries??

 

[wilsonpd]

We accept all parts of the Bible as correct unless we have reason to believe otherwise. See my earlier post.

zerinus

Yeah–I read that already. What is your “reason to believe otherwise” and who are you to question it? You can obviously point out something in the Bible that you believe to be translated incorrectly but WHY do you believe THAT VERSE or PART as been translated incorrectly? What proof do you have? Give me an example of a part that is incorrectly translated and how you or your church came to that conclusion.

 

[zerinus]

I’m sorry, but what do you mean “know?” Why use quotation marks?

What I’m really wondering about is, if the Bible is the Word of God “as long as its translated correctly” then, as in the verses you quoted previously, if someone translates “furniture” or “vast array” when the LDS church believes it should be “host,” does that mean that Bible is no longer the Word of God? In other words, since the LDS church accepts the KJV as the Word of God(meaning it is “translated correctly”), then do you believe that the NIV or RSV are not the Word of God(because neither is “translated correctly”)?

I understand that the LDS church works very hard to make sure that the Book of Mormon is accurate, but I still don’t know why there is no translation qualifier regarding it, like there is with the Bible. For instance, let’s suppose I decided to translate the Book of Mormon into French, or I wanted to write my own “The Message” style version. Now I don’t know French, so the translation would naturally be abysmal, and I don’t know what the message of the Book of Mormon is, so I’d probably get it wrong. Would those translations still be considered the word of God, or is the Book of Mormon in the same boat as the Bible, and only considered to be the Word of God as long as its translated correctly?

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as it was penned by the original authors. Errors will have entered the text in several different ways, such as copyinsts errors, and possible imperfect translations. The errors are not the word of God. But they may be inevitable consequences of human transmission. The phrase “as far as it is translated correctly” means nothing more or less than that. It doesn’t mean that we mistrust the Bible, or think that it is not reliable.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I will not presume to speak for the Mormons here, but it is my understanding that since the term apostle disappears from use early in the Church, the assumption is that there were no more apostles.

No, that is not the reason. We know that firstly because the institution of the Twelve Apostles no longer existed in the Church; and secondly, because we can see that the church was no longer being led by revelation, as was the case when the Apostles were still alive.

Those called Bishops by the Early Church don’t seem to count.

Bishops were not Apostles and never have been. Bishops are bishops and Apstles are Apostles. Two different things.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Glad to!

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I would also like a member of Lds to clear up a few other questions:
Does the church teach polygamy in eternity? For example will each man who achieves godhood only be married to the woman he was sealed to on earth or will he have more than one wife?

We believe that marriage was intended by God to be eternal. That means that those who are married according to the rite of the priesthood for eternity (which only LDS can perform) will have their marriage sealed for eternity. Their marriage will remain in force after death and after the resurrection. Since polygamy was originally ordained of God, that means that those who have entered into polygamous marriages by the same rite of the priesthood, their marriages will remain in force after death, beyond the grave.

Also in talking with the missionaries extensively on the subject of apostacy their latest assertion is that the apostacy should not be looked at as an apostacy of succesion, but an apostacy of “plain and precious truths” and the corruption of doctrine. This confuses me.

I can’t vouch for what the missionaries have told you. The Apostasy was one of succession.

They tried for a long time to prove that the succesion was broken and therefore there was an apostacy.

That is nonsense. It don’t make sense.

Is it apostolic succesion that is important or is it the corruption of doctrine that is important and caused a need for a restoration?

Both are important. The loss of Apostolic authority led to doctrinal corruption, and the Restoration was intended to fix both.

And if it is the corruption of doctrine can you state what has been lost or corrupted?

One thing at a time, or we will be all over the place!

I can also state that the missionaries have told me that they don’t use the word “virgin” in the same way as Catholics do. They DO believe that God had sex with Mary to concieve Jesus but their definition of virgin still allows that Mary was a virgin because she was untouched by a mortal man. I probably should have posted that last part in the other thread but there it is. It is very confusing to try to understand the beliefs or doctrine, if you will, of LDS when you have several members telling you contradictory things.

Then the missionaries who talked to you must have come from a different planet; that is not how the missionaries I have met talk!

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

These are some interesting questions and I hope we get some help on them.
I just want to add that I appreciate everyone trying to keep this about actual beliefs and not get into he-said-she-said debates.
Hopefully someone from LDS will be able to clarify these things for us from official sources.

Peace
James

I will try to answer them as I can. Let me know if I miss something, and I will try again.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Thank you for your response but these are all very simple answers to very complex questions. I actually knew that a man can be sealed to two or more woman for eternity but my question was wanting to know more along the lines of whether or not there will be multiple wives for every “god” in eternity.

There is a lot that we don’t know about what happens to us in the next life after we die. What we know is a drop in the ocean compared to what we don’t know. In answering your questions I can only go as far as what God has revealed. Anything beyond that is speculation, which I am not interested in. What has been revealed is that 1) Marriage is eternal when performed by the proper priesthood authority. 2) Polygamy is permitted when approved of God. 3) A polygamous marriage can be as eternal as a monogsmous marriage, when sealed by the same priesthood authority. 4) We conclude that polygamous marriages can exist in eternity as much as they can exist here on earth.

Your answer on apostacy is the standard stock answer that I got from the missionaries the very first time that I met with them. We have debated the apostacy…and well, no reason to restate my question–I am just looking for a more in depth answer since the missionaries seem to have trouble providing proof for either of their theories.

I gave a link to one of my Blog posts in which I have given a comprehensive treatment of the Apostasy. Have read through that, and if you have more questions about it you can come here and ask me.

zerinus

 

[wilsonpd]

We believe that marriage was intended by God to be eternal. That means that those who are married according to the rite of the priesthood for eternity (which only LDS can perform) in your opinion] will have their marriage sealed for eternity. Their marriage will remain in force after death and after the resurrection. Since polygamy was originally ordained of God, that means that those who have entered into polygamous marriages by the same rite of the priesthood, their marriages will remain in force after death, beyond the grave.

Thank you for clearing that up. So a man who was only married and sealed to one woman here on earth will only have one wife for eternity?

I can’t vouch for what the missionaries have told you. The Apostasy was one of succession.

I am sorry but you act as if “the apostacy” is a historical fact. When in fact history supports that the Catholic church has maintained succession from the time that Jesus established the church to today.

That is nonsense. It don’t make sense.

I am sorry if my language confused you. What is confusing so I can clear it up?

Both are important. The loss of Apostolic authority led to doctrinal corruption, and the Restoration was intended to fix both.

I understand that this is what LDS believe but why? You cannot unequivically point to anytime in history that the Catholic church lost her authority to baptise nor can you (or will you) say which doctrines were corrupted or lost.

One thing at a time, or we will be all over the place!

Now you sound like a missionary!

Then the missionaries who talked to you must have come from a different planet; that is not how the missionaries I have met talk!

zerinus

I assure you they are from Earth but if they were from another planet that would still be okay by LDS standards because they are going to another planet someday anyway, right? Sorry–couldn’t resist! What do you mean " that is not how the missionaries I have met talk!"? Is it the wording or the concept?

 

[wilsonpd]

.

btw- why are you wasting your time debating with Mormon missionaries??

Any time spent talking about God is not wasted. I am not sure where you are coming from. You seem to defend mormon beliefs but think that talking with their missionaries is a waste of time?

 

[zerinus]

Yeah–I read that already. What is your “reason to believe otherwise” and who are you to question it? You can obviously point out something in the Bible that you believe to be translated incorrectly but WHY do you believe THAT VERSE or PART as been translated incorrectly? What proof do you have? Give me an example of a part that is incorrectly translated and how you or your church came to that conclusion.

I thought I explained that in that very post. You can’t have read it very carefully. Here is what I said there:

For example, the Book of Mormon contains quotations from Isaiah that have variations with the passages in the Bible. We consider the Book of Mormon variant to be more correct. But the differences are not such that would make us want to “mistrust” the Bible. We still revere it as the word of God, alongside the Book of Mormon and other scriptures that we have.

What is ther about that passage that is not clear to you?

zerinus

 

[nebula]

Any time spent talking about God is not wasted. I am not sure where you are coming from. You seem to defend mormon beliefs but think that talking with their missionaries is a waste of time?

I am an ex mormon who knows that debating with missionaries is a waste of time. They are trained to avoid debates and what is said in such a context goes in one ear and out the other. Now if you what you are saying is that you have a very polite, low key discussion that may register. I’ve found that Mormons in general shy away from any hint of confrontation- it’s just Mormon culture “contention is of the devil”.

Anyway, I’m not defending Mormonism, just explaining to you what it is. Those are different things.

 

[zerinus]

Thank you for clearing that up. So a man who was only married and sealed to one woman here on earth will only have one wife for eternity?

We don’t know. That has not been revealed. But if you want me to speculate, I would guess that marriages may very well continue to take place after death. But that is just a guess, not revealed doctrine.

I can’t vouch for what the missionaries have told you. The Apostasy was one of succession.

I am sorry but you act as if “the apostacy” is a historical fact. When in fact history supports that the Catholic church has maintained succession from the time that Jesus established the church to today.

You asked me a question about what the missionaries had purportedly told you, and I was responding to that. If you have other issues to raise, please start another thread.

That is nonsense. It don’t make sense.

I am sorry if my language confused you. What is confusing so I can clear it up?

The confusion was in your purported quote from the missionary. I have no way of knowing whether you had misunderstood the missionary, or he had told you a load of baloney.

Both are important. The loss of Apostolic authority led to doctrinal corruption, and the Restoration was intended to fix both.

I understand that this is what LDS believe but why? You cannot unequivically point to anytime in history that the Catholic church lost her authority to baptise nor can you (or will you) say which doctrines were corrupted or lost.

Again, we will go far afield if we get into that discussion. You can start another thread on that topic if you are interested.

Then the missionaries who talked to you must have come from a different planet; that is not how the missionaries I have met talk!

I assure you they are from Earth but if they were from another planet that would still be okay by LDS standards because they are going to another planet someday anyway, right? Sorry–couldn’t resist! What do you mean “that is not how the missionaries I have met talk!”? Is it the wording or the concept?

Humor is OK, provided you get the serious stuff correct first. You are a long ways from doing that yet.

zerinus

 

[wilsonpd]

Humor is OK, provided you get the serious stuff correct first. You are a long ways from doing that yet.

zerinus

I appreciate your responses but the condescension is unnecessary. I will admit that I do not know as much about LDS doctrine as you do but that is why I am here, correct? I do however know a great deal about the history of the Catholic Church and that part I do have correct. And the last time I checked you are not a god yet so please don’t presume to tell me when humor is okay.

Please tell me what it is that I have wrong so that I might be enlightened. I read your blog post and while it is considerably well thought out it contains many errors. You take many liberties in explaining things that rely on your own speculation which you claim to not be interested in. I have to go for now but will be back with examples of things you have speculated on that you pass off as truth.