Mormon - Beliefs - A civil Discussion Please

[dianaiad]

There are consequences for sins and criminal behavior. And yes, we should turn from sin, including with our noses.

Then I suggest that you not practice polygamy.

Nor will I, for several reasons, not the least of which is that God has told us not to.

Tell me; should I look down my nose at you and get all self-righteous because you drink wine, or, perhaps, wear sleeveless blouses, or have a cup of coffee in the morning?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Then I suggest that you not practice polygamy.

Nor will I, for several reasons, not the least of which is that God has told us not to.

Tell me; should I look down my nose at you and get all self-righteous because you drink wine, or, perhaps, wear sleeveless blouses, or have a cup of coffee in the morning?

You wouldn’t be the first.

 

[PaulDupre]

Translated by God Himself through Joseph Smith by seer stones. The BOM states:

“And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell.” Alma 34:36

But the prophet Smith says: “The idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false.” D&C 130:3

If the Book of Mormon is the most correct book on earth, then why the contradictions?

Just another piece of evidence that Joseph Smith never read or studied the Book of Mormon. Sidney Rigdon wrote the BOM and Joseph Smith didn’t really care about it. Once Joseph wrested power away from Sidney, he invented his own religion and ignored the contradictions with Sidney’s book, as Mormons still do today. They only use the BOM as a device to hook people into the LDS church. But LDS doctrine has little to do with the BOM and everything to do with Joseph Smith’s later “revelations”.

 

[MEgus]

But they ARE facts. The verses in my post #566 are not opinions they are actual verses from the KJV and the BOM. Some are identical to the letter. The LDS say that God gave the translation to Joseph Smith. It is illogical to assume that God had to go to the KJV and pluck verses from it to put in the BOM. And if it was God who was doing this, why did he only use the KJV that Joseph Smith had? Why not a later version say in this century? One of your Mormon friends says that the KJV was the language used at that time, that’s not true, no one spoke the Kings English in 1830. Another Mormon said that JS put those verses from the KJV into the BOM cause he was more familiar with them. What?! Smith did not like God’s rendition so he put the KJV in its place? You guys are stumbling all over yourselves trying to defend a falsehood that you can’t get your stories straight. It takes only a little common sense to see that the BOM is an invention of Joseph Smith. The facts, not opinions, are overwhelming against the BOM.

Rick,

OK, Let me say this slower and maybe you will get it.

Suppose we have someone who gives a talk in Jerusalem and then gives the same take in America. We have people who wrote down what he talked about. OK?

Now, do you possibly think the two could write similar sentences?
Maybe even the exact same sentence?

You want to make an issue out of a non issue.

If God is the author of both books, both can and will and even should contain very similar sentences.

MEgus

 

[MEgus]

There are consequences for sins and criminal behavior. And yes, we should turn from sin, including with our noses.

Rebecca,

This was not criminal behavior when if was put into practice. And it was many years later that laws were passed against it. At the time they were passed, the Saints were in Utah which was not a state of the union. So, it was still not against the law.

And Utah was not made a state until long after it was stopped, but those who were already married did not want to abandon their families. And can you blame them?

You are passing judgment on something that was totally different in a totally different time with todays standards here.

Oh, and if I remember right, totally against what Jesus taught as well.

MEgus

 

[MEgus]

Translated by God Himself through Joseph Smith by seer stones. The BOM states:

“And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell.” Alma 34:36

But the prophet Smith says: “The idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false.” D&C 130:3

If the Book of Mormon is the most correct book on earth, then why the contradictions?

Ricko, is there a reason why you took this out of context???

Maybe you should also review the teachings in James and see just how well your keeping them.

Let’s look at what Joseph is really saying here.

1 **When the Savior shall appear **we shall see him as he is. We shall see that he is a man like ourselves.
2 And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy.
3 John 14:23—The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false.

John 14:23
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

You see, you took this out of the context it was in, did not quote the whole verse, and twisted and distorted things to make it look different that what it was saying. What does that make you?

One day you will stand before the Savior to account for your actions. These are clearly against the teachings of the Savior in the Bible that you profess to follow.

In my short time on this board, I have come to one conclusion. If I have to be in a “heaven” where people like you dwell, and if the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints will be in a “hell”, I’d rather be in hell with them than be in heaven with people who behave like you all do.

So far I have only encountered one person who is catholic who I would ever want to associate with as friend here. How sad.

 

[MEgus]

Similar message maybe but not the exact same words (from the KJV) seeing how the bible was written by men guided by the Holy Spirit, but they wrote in their own style and method and words. But like the JWs have been caught in many glaring errors and they changed their teachings (in Louisiana we call it crawfishing) so also with the Mormon church. See below:
The LDS Church now concedes that Smith used the King James Bible as one of his primary sources when it came to extended quotes from the Bible.52 The long passages quoted from Isaiah as well as from Malachi and other books of the Bible have **forced **them to this admission. This causes a problem, because the official position of the Church for many years was that the Urim and Thummim which accompanied the golden plates was the exclusive means of translation and that every word of the Book of Mormon was divinely translated.53

Since they have been proven wrong on their teaching of this they now take a new approach and claim “it’s not a problem” My question is Are they awake in the Temple?

You want to quote your source on this Rick?

 

[mfbukowski]

So far I have only encountered one person who is catholic who I would ever want to associate with as friend here. How sad.

Precisely. I originally came here looking to see if there was ANY truth in Catholicism, and now thanks to these fine folks I know there is NONE.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Precisely. I originally came here looking to see if there was ANY truth in Catholicism, and now thanks to these fine folks I know there is NONE.

That’s sums up the way I feel about LDS after spending time on MAAD and Faces East.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca,

This was not criminal behavior when if was put into practice. And it was many years later that laws were passed against it. At the time they were passed, the Saints were in Utah which was not a state of the union. So, it was still not against the law.

And Utah was not made a state until long after it was stopped, but those who were already married did not want to abandon their families. And can you blame them?

You are passing judgment on something that was totally different in a totally different time with todays standards here.

Oh, and if I remember right, totally against what Jesus taught as well.

MEgus

Bigamy laws have existed in the US since before it was the US. The laws were strengthened because of Mormon polygamy.

It wasn’t a different standard. Why do you think Mormons had to end this practice?

Jesus taught that a man should marry a woman and they should cling to each other as ONE, with no divorce allowed. This is also seen as the basis for marriage in the Genesis. God created one man, one woman, and commanded them to be as one. God did not create one man and 5, 10 or 30 women for this one man. A marriage is two people, being one. Not 3 people or 5 or 30.

Polygamy is humans, distorting and corrupting God’s design.

 

[MEgus]

Bigamy laws have existed in the US since before it was the US. The laws were strengthened because of Mormon polygamy.

It wasn’t a different standard. Why do you think Mormons had to end this practice?

Jesus taught that a man should marry a woman and they should cling to each other as ONE, with no divorce allowed. This is also seen as the basis for marriage in the Genesis. God created one man, one woman, and commanded them to be as one. God did not create one man and 5, 10 or 30 women for this one man. A marriage is two people, being one. Not 3 people or 5 or 30.

Polygamy is humans, distorting and corrupting God’s design.

Rebecca, you want to show me these laws?

And your saying that Abraham, Issac, and Jacob were vile sinners, right?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca, you want to show me these laws?

I’m not going to go through every colony. They all had marriage laws. Divorce was outlawed, except in the case of abuse, adultery and bigamy.

But, for your perusal, Pennsylvania:

1682 – William Penn granted the land named Pennsylvania, he instituted the Great Laws of Pennsylvania – bigamy: penalty life imprisonment

1705 – bigamy law changed: 39 lashes, imprisonment for life and total or partial confiscation

1786: branding of the hand was added to the 1705 law (also the law in Connecticut)

And Virginia: laws passed in 1632 defined bigamy as illegal (also parental consent required for marriage for anyone under 21 yrs old). 1792 General Assembly defined bigamy as a felony. 1847-1848 General Assembly passed an act titled “Of Offenses Against Chastity, Morality and Decency”, which established fines for adultery, bigamy, fornication, cohabitation, interracial marriages, and marriages of close relations (consanguinity).

etc…most of the Colonial laws were based on English Common Law, which, defined bigamy as illegal, and one of only a few legal reason given for divorce.

And your saying that Abraham, Issac, and Jacob were vile sinners, right?

Vile is your word. We all sin.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca, you want to show me these laws?

Also MEgus, an Illinois state law was enacted February 12, 1833, making all who practiced Mormon polygamy/polyandry in Illinois, criminals.

• “Bigamy consists in the having of two wives or two husbands at one and the same time, knowing that the former husband or wife is still alive. If any person or persons within the State, being married, or who shall hereafter marry, do at any time marry any person or persons, the former husband or wife being alive, the person so offended shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned in the penitentiary, not exceeding two years.” (Revised Laws of Illinois, Vandalia: Greiner & Sherman, 1833, pg. 198-199).

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

By ‘not reasonable’ do you mean that he isn’t willing to agree with you that everything he believes in is bunkum, weird and something out of the 'manual of crazy cults?"

Try…asking him to invite the missionaries over, and then try listening with some courtesy and respect–if not for what they believe, but THAT they believe it. You love him…but you seem to be forgetting that his Mormonism is part of what made him the man you love. You need to understand that and not treat his beliefs as if they were something to love him in spite of.

You need to be willing to treat his beliefs with the respect they deserve, so that he can treat yours with the respect YOURS deserves. Get to a place where you can talk openly about them, joke about them…get comfortable about them. Right now you come across as someone who is ashamed of your husband, and quite frankly, if he’s not willing to talk to you about his beliefs, he may well think you are ashamed of him, too.

I’ve seen a few Mormon/other religion marriages that have worked well, and while each one is different, there is one thing they all have in common; while they may not AGREE with each other regarding their beliefs, they respect each other’s faith. You don’t respect your husband’s faith, quite obviously. Why should he talk to you about it?

Your right, I do love him for who he is entirely! You’re very mistaken though if you think I do not respect him because of his religion. Just because I do not believe in this “religion” doesn’t mean I don’t respect him. We have a wonderful bond that a lot of people who are married for years and years don’t even have. We talk about everything with each other, everything except religion. He won’t go to his church. I have never seen the inside of a LDS church, so I really do not know what goes on or how it is decorated. I dont know how y’all show your adoration for Jesus or anything. How do y’all show it? Don’t worry, I pray for him all day that he will see the truth, and I do that because I love him more than words could say! Another thing is, I love a lot of mormons and they love me as well. I would never make someone feel bad about who they are. I just do not believe in it, and if your confusing me not believing in it as me disrespecting him, than you are very mistaken. The reason we don’t talk about his religion, isn’t because he doesn’t agree with me that it is wrong, but rather that he immediantly attacks my faith, and I told myself that I will never bring it up again until I learn how to defend my Faith. I was never taught to “defend” my faith. To me it wasn’t about knowing why we do something, but that I just do it because Jesus said to do it. Everything we do is because it was commanded of us. So another words, I at the time, didn’t know how to answer is attacking questoins because I had never been questioned the way he was questioning me.
So that’s why I am trying to learn everything I can. http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f202/lancomegirl1979/wedding/myspace77.jpg

 

[RebeccaJ]

Your right, I do love him for who he is entirely! You’re very mistaken though if you think I do not respect him because of his religion. Just because I do not believe in this “religion” doesn’t mean I don’t respect him. We have a wonderful bond that a lot of people who are married for years and years don’t even have. We talk about everything with each other, everything except religion. He won’t go to his church. I have never seen the inside of a LDS church, so I really do not know what goes on or how it is decorated. I dont know how y’all show your adoration for Jesus or anything. How do y’all show it? Don’t worry, I pray for him all day that he will see the truth, and I do that because I love him more than words could say! Another thing is, I love a lot of mormons and they love me as well. I would never make someone feel bad about who they are. I just do not believe in it, and if your confusing me not believing in it as me disrespecting him, than you are very mistaken. The reason we don’t talk about his religion, isn’t because he doesn’t agree with me that it is wrong, but rather that he immediantly attacks my faith, and I told myself that I will never bring it up again until I learn how to defend my Faith. I was never taught to “defend” my faith. To me it wasn’t about knowing why we do something, but that I just do it because Jesus said to do it. Everything we do is because it was commanded of us. So another words, I at the time, didn’t know how to answer is attacking questoins because I had never been questioned the way he was questioning me.
So that’s why I am trying to learn everything I can. http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f202/lancomegirl1979/wedding/myspace77.jpg

Beautiful photo!

My husband was raised LDS, is now atheist. We don’t talk about religion much. He might ask me things once in a while. He came to my baptism and goes to Christmas Mass with me.

He likes to take jabs at Catholicism and Christianity, but I know he respects my beliefs. He is expressing how he feels, not attacking me. I know where he is, as I have been there myself.

Do you know this teaching…

**1637 **In marriages with disparity of cult the Catholic spouse has a particular task: "For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband."138 It is a great joy for the Christian spouse and for the Church if this “consecration” should lead to the free conversion of the other spouse to the Christian faith.139 Sincere married love, the humble and patient practice of the family virtues, and perseverance in prayer can prepare the non-believing spouse to accept the grace of conversion.

We bring the universal truth of Christ’s Church into our marriage and our homes. I knew this the day I brought a Bible into our house, followed by a rosary, a crucifix and Mary. Advent candles before Christmas. And now we’re planning on lamb for Easter. These are things that did not exist at our house before. These are outward things. I pray the outward is sinking into the souls of my family.

Take care and God bless.

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

Beautiful photo!

My husband was raised LDS, is now atheist. We don’t talk about religion much. He might ask me things once in a while. He came to my baptism and goes to Christmas Mass with me.

He likes to take jabs at Catholicism and Christianity, but I know he respects my beliefs. He is expressing how he feels, not attacking me. I know where he is, as I have been there myself.

Do you know this teaching…

**1637 **In marriages with disparity of cult the Catholic spouse has a particular task: "For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband."138 It is a great joy for the Christian spouse and for the Church if this “consecration” should lead to the free conversion of the other spouse to the Christian faith.139 Sincere married love, the humble and patient practice of the family virtues, and perseverance in prayer can prepare the non-believing spouse to accept the grace of conversion.

We bring the universal truth of Christ’s Church into our marriage and our homes. I knew this the day I brought a Bible into our house, followed by a rosary, a crucifix and Mary. Advent candles before Christmas. And now we’re planning on lamb for Easter. These are things that did not exist at our house before. These are outward things. I pray the outward is sinking into the souls of my family.

Take care and God bless.

Rebecca, That was very beautiful! Thank you for sharing! I have faith he will convert! I leave it in God’s hands! I used to worry and pray, but now I don’t worry anymore because Someone told me you can not worry and pray, that it is an oxymoron to do both. I now just have faith and pray! I will also pray for your husband when I pray for mine! One more person praying can’t do anything but good !!!

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

Then I suggest that you not practice polygamy.

Nor will I, for several reasons, not the least of which is that God has told us not to.

Tell me; should I look down my nose at you and get all self-righteous because you drink wine, or, perhaps, wear sleeveless blouses, or have a cup of coffee in the morning?

God actually turns wine into His Blood. Why wouldn’t he have done that with water or juice? He knew the diffrence between wine and JUice. You can have wine and caffine in moderation.

 

[ricko]

The bible says “drink a little wine for thy stomach’s sake” “Everyhing created by God is good and nothing is forbidden”

 

[dianaiad]

You wouldn’t be the first.

Ah, so this is a tit for tat sort of thing?

Someone (not me, by the way) has ‘looked down [their] nose’ at you for drinking coffee or wine or wearing sleeveless blouses, and so it is acceptable for you to condemn me for something I do NOT do?

Odd method of getting justice, there, Rebecca.

 

[dianaiad]

God actually turns wine into His Blood. Why wouldn’t he have done that with water or juice? He knew the diffrence between wine and JUice. You can have wine and caffine in moderation.

If this is how you react to your husband, Alisha…

You do not have to defend your practice of drinking coffee or wine or wearing strapless (and absolutely beautiful, by the way) wedding gowns or clothes. You are not sinning when you do any of those things. I, however, because of my beliefs, WOULD be sinning should I do any of them.

Now, how would you react if I said that it was ‘what you deserved’ if the government raided your home and took your children because you had a cup of coffee in the morning, or a glass of wine with dinner? What if it raided your home and shattered your family because you had crucifixes upon the walls of your children’s bedrooms? Do I have a right to make you live according to MY beliefs?

I shouldn’t actually have to answer that, but what the hey—

No. I don’t.

Yet I tell a story about my great grandparents and the love and family that they had, a family that was shattered because someone ELSE thought they had the right to make them live according to laws in place somewhere else, made by folks who would never see them, or live near them, or understand them: folks who, by the way, still treated THEIR women like chattel, without vote or privilege or ability to get an education or exercise their God given gifts and talents.

Because they were looking down THEIR noses, a thousand miles away, four women and nine children lived the rest of their lives in hiding, in poverty and in constant fear. A community lost a physician, a poet and a legal advocate…but oh, that’s OK, because at least they weren’t living in polygamy, so that’s alright then.

The hypocrisy is getting a little noisome. More than a little.