Mormon - Beliefs - A civil Discussion Please

[JRKH]

I am trying to synergize much of what I have learned here about the various aspects of the Mormon belief system. Certain problems/questions seem to continue to crop up in my head. What it all seems to boil down to is a question of Authority - and lineage - and how God has chosen to bring us more closely to Himself.

God has kept man alive from Adam - Through Moses to Abraham and to us.
With Abraham God promised a “People” dedicated to Himself.
Through the decendants of Abraham we have the nation of Isreal who were led out of Egypt by Moses as “God’s Chosen People”.
Finally, after many trials and trubulations among the Isrealites/Jews, God sends His own Son to extend savation to the entire world through Christ and His Church.

In each case, God is building up a people to himself. As He does so He remains true to that people, loving and chastizing as needed but never completely abandoning them.
Thus is was with Adam and Eve after their sin, (when it could truly be said that all of humanity was apostate).
Thus it was after the Flood when God repopulated the Earth from Noah’s line.
With Abraham God expanded this people from a “family” to a “clan” and through this to a “Clan - Nation - Race” of people.
Lastly through Jesus Christ, God has expanded “His People” to all nations/peoples/clans by way of the Church which Christ founded and leads.

What strikes me about each of these “phases”, if you will, is that in each God remained completely faithful to that group. Calling them back through prophets and leaders from within the group and sent TO the group. God never sent a Prophet to the Jews telling them that the temple in Jerusalem is now Apostate and they need to build a new temple somewhere else. There is recorded no prophet telling the people that the office of the “Judges” needed to be restored and the king removed. In other words, God worked with the group from within the group.

This leads us to the question of how Christ would chose to “Restore” His Church given that God always restored His People from Within. This is actually a fairly easy question to answer for Christ has been Calling back His Church and “Restoring” it repeatedly throughout it’s history. The early heresies are examples of Christ’s protection of His Church. Many great Saints and writers of the Church, refer to the need for greater holiness and restorations. St Francis was called By God Personally to, “rebuild My Church”. Many other examples can be found up to and inclding our last two popes who are leading the call to greater holiness on the part of God’s People.

At no time did God, or Christ ever allow His People/Church to become so corrupt that it became “Apostate”. Each time He sent a prophet, chatizement, savior to call His people back. Thus it can be truly seen that God could never abandon His Own Church to complete Apostacy requiring the kind of “Restoration” from without that is taught by the LDS.

There have been many Apostacies, including the Protestant Apostacy which is still in force today, but one cannot equate such apostacies with an Apostacy of the original Church. After all, 10 of the twelve tribes of Isreal eventually went apostate and were lost, but God remaind true to the 2 tribes who remained true to the Temple in Jerusalem.

So from the LDS viewpoint, what could be the Biblical basis for such a “restoration” from outside of Christ’s own, original Church?

Thoughts?

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

James, Christ was talking of a specific incident. These were members of the Sadducees who did not believe in a resurrection.
As such, they also did not believe in marriage for all eternity and did not have such a marriage performed. So, his answer was to them specifically. Of these, none would be married to her in heaven and they would be single.

Other scriptures give us a different perspective on this and show that man and women are suppose to be together for ever.

MEgus

I’m sorry MEgus but you misunderstand my question. I am not asking for an interpretation of a scripture passage.
I am asking for the Mormon answer on the situation as described.

As to your specific interpretation here: by rights Jesus answer should have been, “She would be married to none of the Brothers because they were not sealed in the temple. Only those who are properely sealed will be married in heaven after teh resurection”.
Thus Jesus could have answered teh sadducees question - refuted their disbelief in the resurrection, AND resinstituted the proper form of Marriage. So Why did Jesus leave us with an improper form of marriage for another 1800years?

Peace
James

 

[RebeccaJ]

Again, you fail to look at all possibilities. Paul at least got most of the study right. But, again, it does not take things back to their beginnings.

Maybe I should ask you where did the Mongolians come from?

What we need to realize is that after Noah, there were not people of any decent upon the earth. Remember that event?

By the way, as a side note, DNA has also proved this event as well, with Eve as the mother dating back much farther than Noah as the father.

Now, we need to take the whole populations of the whole world back to this point with Noah. Then determine which of these groups went where if you want to prove something.

Where did the Mongolians come from?

Could they have been from a group of people from Noah in which Joseph’s wife came from?

You see, if your trying to find this answer, you need to have all the facts, which we don’t right now. One day, I’m sure we will, but for now, just as Paul said, this group goes back to six mothers. Now you need to trace these six back further. To a time when all the world only had four mothers. When that happens, we can talk.

MEgus

Hi MEgus, perhaps you are under the belief that Catholics believe the scriptures found Genesis are to be taken literally.

As has already been stated, the word of God is related using literary devices. The book of Genesis comes from an oral tradition, which existed long before it was ever written down. The word of God was passed down, by telling stories.

There are great truths to be found in the book of Genesis, but I think if you studied with a Catholic biblical expert, you would find that Abraham is the point where you can begin to see a relating of historical events.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Not quite accurate.

An interesting article:

mormontimes.com/studies_doctrine/research_discoveries/?id=3123

bukowski, i saw this at madb. which, that thread was pointless.

anyway, the study itself indicates it is most likely the DNA came from a Spanish ancestor who had a Jewish ancestor, in Spain.

There is nothing there that shows a migration from the middle east. That is wishful thinking and a extreme twisting of facts to mold to your wishes.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Why not? You guys go to Catholics to understand Mormonism!

LANGUAGE bukowski, Hebrew.

If we were talking the Deseret alphabet you might have a point.

 

[mfbukowski]

**Hi mf,

I am sorry, was there and answer there somewhere? The dictionary defination of a cult is a group with an unorthodox belief system.
Work with me here. Do you think your belief system is orthodox? No one else does :ehh: 61,000 Protestant groups and the Catholic church doesn’t, and as I am sure you must know we rarely agree on very much! So please don’t avoid my questions!Which I restate so I can learn the truth as you know it!

I asked: Do you actually believe you can become a god? Just like Jesus? How many gods are there going to be 144,000 ?? You sure have some explaining to do, as we say here in Texas! God may not understand any more then I do! And I am actually trying to see your point of view! There was One God he wasn’t a creation like the rest of us. Do you think Jesus was a creation of the One God? Is the HS a creation of the One God? Is your God the original One God which real Christians call the Trinity?

God(s) Bless**

Not really. Going to an ex mormon for mormon doctrine makes even less sense as going to a catholic for mormon doctrine.

I am not going to respond to real until he shows a change in attitude, but I will correct the incorrect doctrine posted by this poster.

God is God of the universe, and is infinite and omnipotent and eternal, and does not have “earths”; he created worlds without end. You know, like “per omnia saecula saeculorum?” OH I guess you don’t speak Latin anymore. Too bad.

" As man is God once was, as God is, man may become" is not scriptural nor is it doctrine. It was a couplet attributed to Lorenzo Snow, based on the King Follett discourse made by Joseph Smith and is not canonized scripture and is thus not doctrinal.

Adam-ondi-Ahman has nothing to do with the 144,000, which is not a big deal in our theology. That is found in the book of Revelations and here is what the 144k means to us:

D&C 77
11 Q. What are we to understand by sealing the one ahundred and forty-four thousand, out of all the tribes of Israel—twelve thousand out of every tribe?
A. We are to understand that those who are sealed are bhigh priests, ordained unto the holy order of God, to administer the everlasting gospel; for they are they who are ordained out of every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, by the angels to whom is given power over the nations of the earth, to bring as many as will come to the church of the cFirstborn.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Other scriptures give us a different perspective on this and show that man and women are suppose to be together for ever.

MEgus

MEgus, is I am judged by God to be with him forever, and my husband is judged by God to be with Him forever, and my daughter is judged by God to be with Him forever…

Lookie there…we’re all with God, forever. Marriage is not required for this. We are not judged together as a family, we are judged by our own actions and beliefs.

Jesus clearly states neither marry or given in marriage.

Also, if you claim that you follow the teachings of St. Paul, the Gospel he taught. This is what Paul taught concerning marriage:

“Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek a separation. Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife.”

If you believe that marriage is required, then you are not following the teachings of St. Paul.

 

[mfbukowski]

I would like to touch again upon the idea of the Eternal marriage and ask the LDS answer to the following question:

Now, there were seven brothers who used to live here. The oldest got married and died without having children, so his brother married his widow. The same thing happened to the second brother, to the third, and finally to all seven. Last of all, the woman died. Now, on the day when the dead rise to life, whose wife will she be? All of them had married her

Now I’m asking for a simple and straightfoward answer from the LDS doctines.
Whose wife will she be?

Peace
James

No one’s because there is no marriage or giving in marriage in the resurrection. It is an ordinance which must be performed in this life before the resurrection. And those to whom Jesus was speaking didn’t even have the priesthood to perform those ordinances since that ordinance had not yet been instituted.

If you are actually interested in informed Mormon arguments on all these subjects, go to one of these two websites and research your argument:

farms.byu.edu/

fairlds.org/

If you do that, and show evidence that you have done that, and think there is a problem with THEIR position, I will be more than happy to respond if we also agree to have a genuine CIVIL discussion without insults about cult membership, ad hominems and irrational attacks and sloganeering against my church.

If you care to discuss the truth rationally, I will be happy to do that. Otherwise forget about it. And I am tired of posting the same stuff 900 times. So I think that will be my policy from now on – research it there, and if you have a problem with what it says there, I will discuss it here.

 

[RebeccaJ]

No one’s because there is no marriage or giving in marriage in the resurrection. It is an ordinance which must be performed in this life before the resurrection. And those to whom Jesus was speaking didn’t even have the priesthood to perform those ordinances since that ordinance had not yet been instituted.

Where/when did Jesus or any of the 12 Apostles ever teach this?

Once again, you are teaching another Gospel.

 

[web2009]

web2009;4818353:

Not really. Going to an ex mormon for mormon doctrine makes even less sense as going to a catholic for mormon doctrine.

I am not going to respond to real until he shows a change in attitude, but I will correct the incorrect doctrine posted by this poster.

God is God of the universe, and is infinite and omnipotent and eternal, and does not have “earths”; he created worlds without end. You know, like “per omnia saecula saeculorum?” OH I guess you don’t speak Latin anymore. Too bad.

" As man is God once was, as God is, man may become" is not scriptural nor is it doctrine. It was a couplet attributed to Lorenzo Snow, based on the King Follett discourse made by Joseph Smith and is not canonized scripture and is thus not doctrinal.

Adam-ondi-Ahman has nothing to do with the 144,000, which is not a big deal in our theology. That is found in the book of Revelations and here is what the 144k means to us:

You asked for an opinion, and I gave it to you. Your choice to accept it or not, but dont say that its useless asking an ex-mormon. You will most likely get more open-minded objectivity from us because we are simply looking for truth.

Im familiar with the teachings of the creation of the worlds - I used earth as an example, because that is what is taught. I do not know why you have this defensive undertone.

Why deny that passage about becoming as God. You know very well that it is taught in the church.

 

[RebeccaJ]

mfbukowski;4819198:

You asked for an opinion, and I gave it to you. Your choice to accept it or not, but dont say that its useless asking an ex-mormon. You will most likely get more open-minded objectivity from us because we are simply looking for truth.

Im familiar with the teachings of the creation of the worlds - I used earth as an example, because that is what is taught. I do not know why you have this defensive undertone.

Why deny that passage about becoming as God. You know very well that it is taught in the church.

bukowski is part of a mormon segment that has gone sola scriptura.

As an off-topic thing here, I find this fascinating. As, mormonism claims to have the authority to speak for God, and used to very much be about what the prophet says, God has said, period. No fine print about it needing to be printed in their scriptures.

But now they have gone sola scriptura. Along with following your own feelings. Which makes their church pointless, and a mirror image of every other protestant church. As a mormon you can believe whatever you like, within the boundaries of their scriptures, which you can interpret for yourself however you like.

Nothing new under the sun.

 

[JRKH]

No one’s because there is no marriage or giving in marriage in the resurrection. It is an ordinance which must be performed in this life before the resurrection. And those to whom Jesus was speaking didn’t even have the priesthood to perform those ordinances since that ordinance had not yet been instituted.

If you are actually interested in informed Mormon arguments on all these subjects, go to one of these two websites and research your argument:

farms.byu.edu/

fairlds.org/

If you do that, and show evidence that you have done that, and think there is a problem with THEIR position, I will be more than happy to respond if we also agree to have a genuine CIVIL discussion without insults about cult membership, ad hominems and irrational attacks and sloganeering against my church.

If you care to discuss the truth rationally, I will be happy to do that. Otherwise forget about it. And I am tired of posting the same stuff 900 times. So I think that will be my policy from now on – research it there, and if you have a problem with what it says there, I will discuss it here.

Thank you for the answer and links.
If I have time to do such research and reading in between caring for my DW who has Alzheimers Disease, I shall certainly do so. If I do not have the time to do the research I will continue to ask my questions here and hope that the good folks on these pages will give me good answers.
I will also endevour to continue having a CIVIL discussion with ALL who come here. If you do not wish to discuss this with me I understand that. I’m sure another member of the LDS Church will provide an answer. In fact MEgus already has.

Peace
James

 

[web2009]

web2009;4819297:

bukowski is part of a mormon segment that has gone sola scriptura.

As an off-topic thing here, I find this fascinating. As, mormonism claims to have the authority to speak for God, and used to very much be about what the prophet says, God has said, period. No fine print about it needing to be printed in their scriptures.

But now they have gone sola scriptura. Along with following your own feelings. Which makes their church pointless, and a mirror image of every other protestant church. As a mormon you can believe whatever you like, within the boundaries of their scriptures, which you can interpret for yourself however you like.

Nothing new under the sun.

The irony of it all is that I did a search on the subject on the LDS website, following bukowskis comment, and there are numerous occassions when the quoted passage is used by apostles, and other senior church members. It is also found in the church magazine, the Liahona which is considered modern day scripture for the members today.

 

[mfbukowski]

Likewise, having your name removed from the records is also an ordeal, involving the completion of documents and a series of interviews, where they will try and to convince you otherwise.

Not so. All you have to do is write a letter and sign it and your name will be removed. You can even send it directly to the church and avoid your bishop if you like, but there is no reason to do so. Per the handbook of instructions, he will write you back a letter confirming that he received a letter requesting that your name be removed (this is to prevent weirdos and pranksters from requesting this on “your behalf”-- that is also why you have to sign the letter) and give you 30 days to reverse your decision if you want to. (Again, this is to protect you from others who might send a letter without your permission) After the 30 days expires, your name will be removed. I have been in positions where this is done all the time and it is done promptly and without interviews.

 

[mfbukowski]

mfbukowski,

Virtually everyone I know enters into scripture reading beginning with prayer.

You might be interested to learn about lectio divina, if you haven’t already.

I don’t claim to know alot but I do know that I can trust God to hear my prayer and to guide me into His truth. So I’m reading Ephesians with that promise in mind.

Enjoy the day.

Tami

Thanks, haven’t heard of it, will look it up – I have discussed this idea of Catholic “revelation” many times but this is the first I have heard this term.

 

[web2009]

web2009;4819297:

bukowski is part of a mormon segment that has gone sola scriptura.

As an off-topic thing here, I find this fascinating. As, mormonism claims to have the authority to speak for God, and used to very much be about what the prophet says, God has said, period. No fine print about it needing to be printed in their scriptures.

But now they have gone sola scriptura. Along with following your own feelings. Which makes their church pointless, and a mirror image of every other protestant church. As a mormon you can believe whatever you like, within the boundaries of their scriptures, which you can interpret for yourself however you like.

Nothing new under the sun.

What you are saying is true Rebecca: heres an extract as indicated below

Liahona, June 1980. First Presidency message - Nelson M. Tanner
Title: The Debate is Over

'We cannot serve God and mammon. Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks the debate is over."

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=5769fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

 

[web2009]

Not so. All you have to do is write a letter and sign it and your name will be removed. You can even send it directly to the church and avoid your bishop if you like, but there is no reason to do so. Per the handbook of instructions, he will write you back a letter confirming that he received a letter requesting that your name be removed (this is to prevent weirdos and pranksters from requesting this on “your behalf”-- that is also why you have to sign the letter) and give you 30 days to reverse your decision if you want to. (Again, this is to protect you from others who might send a letter without your permission) After the 30 days expires, your name will be removed. I have been in positions where this is done all the time and it is done promptly and without interviews.

thanks for the info. pleased to hear thats how its supposed to be done, but not the case with a friend of mine, who left the church 5 years prior to me.

if its that simple, i will do it. but if it isn’t ill let you know

 

[mfbukowski]

I am trying to synergize much of what I have learned here about the various aspects of the Mormon belief system. Certain problems/questions seem to continue to crop up in my head. What it all seems to boil down to is a question of Authority - and lineage - and how God has chosen to bring us more closely to Himself.

God has kept man alive from Adam - Through Moses to Abraham and to us.
With Abraham God promised a “People” dedicated to Himself.
Through the decendants of Abraham we have the nation of Isreal who were led out of Egypt by Moses as “God’s Chosen People”.
Finally, after many trials and trubulations among the Isrealites/Jews, God sends His own Son to extend savation to the entire world through Christ and His Church.

In each case, God is building up a people to himself. As He does so He remains true to that people, loving and chastizing as needed but never completely abandoning them.
Thus is was with Adam and Eve after their sin, (when it could truly be said that all of humanity was apostate).
Thus it was after the Flood when God repopulated the Earth from Noah’s line.
With Abraham God expanded this people from a “family” to a “clan” and through this to a “Clan - Nation - Race” of people.
Lastly through Jesus Christ, God has expanded “His People” to all nations/peoples/clans by way of the Church which Christ founded and leads.

What strikes me about each of these “phases”, if you will, is that in each God remained completely faithful to that group. Calling them back through prophets and leaders from within the group and sent TO the group. God never sent a Prophet to the Jews telling them that the temple in Jerusalem is now Apostate and they need to build a new temple somewhere else. There is recorded no prophet telling the people that the office of the “Judges” needed to be restored and the king removed. In other words, God worked with the group from within the group.

This leads us to the question of how Christ would chose to “Restore” His Church given that God always restored His People from Within. This is actually a fairly easy question to answer for Christ has been Calling back His Church and “Restoring” it repeatedly throughout it’s history. The early heresies are examples of Christ’s protection of His Church. Many great Saints and writers of the Church, refer to the need for greater holiness and restorations. St Francis was called By God Personally to, “rebuild My Church”. Many other examples can be found up to and inclding our last two popes who are leading the call to greater holiness on the part of God’s People.

At no time did God, or Christ ever allow His People/Church to become so corrupt that it became “Apostate”. Each time He sent a prophet, chatizement, savior to call His people back. Thus it can be truly seen that God could never abandon His Own Church to complete Apostacy requiring the kind of “Restoration” from without that is taught by the LDS.

There have been many Apostacies, including the Protestant Apostacy which is still in force today, but one cannot equate such apostacies with an Apostacy of the original Church. After all, 10 of the twelve tribes of Isreal eventually went apostate and were lost, but God remaind true to the 2 tribes who remained true to the Temple in Jerusalem.

So from the LDS viewpoint, what could be the Biblical basis for such a “restoration” from outside of Christ’s own, original Church?

Thoughts?

Peace
James

Having not been steeped in catholic tradition, I don’t accept your “phase” perception of history, though I have heard it many times on these threads.

In our interpretation, it is clear that God’s people have always had “ups and downs”- so we don’t see phases, we see dispensations.

We think the scriptural evidence points to the fact that Adam understood the “gospel” the way we do, in an OT sense however. He offered sacrifice for the same reasons that Moses etc offered sacrifice - looking forward to the Great Sacrifice of the savior. Wicked people took over and the Lord wiped them out, and “restored” the church with Noah. Abraham was himself a figure of the Father, with his son nearly being literally sacrificed. Then came the Egyptian captivity, another “apostasy”. So Moses had to “restore” the church again. By the time the Savior arrived and brought the New Covenant, the Jews had again apostasized from the “gospel of Moses” if you will, and the savior had to totally restore his church. And of course you know that we believe it was again lost, and had to be restored again by Jospeh.

So you see history as a progression, and we see it as a series of apostasies and restorations, and both historical views of course support our theologies. I have a feeling I know what conclusion you will come to about that!! I must have ESP or something!

Incidentally, I personally think that Francis was one of the most cool and spiritual people in all of history. IF you don’t tell anyone, I will tell you a secret. My middle name is Francis. He is a great role model for me, but I certainly don;t live up to his peaceful nature.

 

[truthsilence]

Thanks, haven’t heard of it, will look it up – I have discussed this idea of Catholic “revelation” many times but this is the first I have heard this term.

Awesome. You’ll love this.

fisheaters.com/lectiodivina.html

I have a feeling there’s alot you don’t realize that you left behind when you walked away from the Church. Not meaning to criticise you, just an impression I have. Most folks have no idea of the richness of the Catholic Faith. I’m hoping you’ll reinvestigate.

 

[PaulDupre]

mfbukowski:

“As man is God once was, as God is, man may become” is not scriptural nor is it doctrine. It was a couplet attributed to Lorenzo Snow, based on the King Follett discourse made by Joseph Smith and is not canonized scripture and is thus not doctrinal.

If it is not doctrinal, then why is it still taught consistetly in your church manuals and by your prophets?

The prophet Joseph Fielding Smith:

“The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his kingdom. In other words we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fullness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring. We will have an endless eternity for this.”

• Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation (Vol. 2 pg 48)

The current Gospel Principles manual:

Those who receive exaltation in the celestial kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ will receive special blessings. The Lord has promised, “All things are theirs” (D&C 76:59). These are some of the blessings given to exalted people:

1. They will live eternally in the presence of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ (see D&C 76).
   **2. They will become gods.
2. They will have their righteous family members with them and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit children will have the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father.** They will be an eternal family.

• Gospel Principles manual, Chapter 47

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: “When you climb up a ladder, you must begin at the bottom, and ascend step by step, until you arrive at the top; and so it is with the principles of the Gospel–you must begin with the first, and go on until you learn all the principles of exaltation. But it will be a great while after you have passed through the veil [died] before you will have learned them. It is not all to be comprehended in this world; it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348).

This is the way our Heavenly Father became God. Joseph Smith taught: “It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us; . . . God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-46).

• Gospel Principles manual, Chapter 47

If your prophets and apostles and church teaching manuals are teaching it, then it is your church’s doctrine. Stop denying it - your denials indicate that you are ashamed of your church’s teachings, or else you are being deliberately deceptive.

Paul