Mormon Beliefs

[adrift]

There was no rebuttal. What the heck are you talking about?

zerinus

this is not what this thread is about so no further mention should be made but to answer you
Post 61 any further debate should be on that thread.

 

[dbacks5439]

There was no rebuttal. What the heck are you talking about?

zerinus

Yeah, when I read your quotes from the Early Church Fathers, I had the feeling things were left out. The rebuttal was the quotes around the ones you provided. This is a common problem with many people. They tend to not read in context. That is your problem. So I ask you again, what proof do you have from the ECF's, in context?

 

[Pjs2ejs]

HERE IT IS ZERINUS

[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).]

Straight from the LDS website

lds.org/library/display/0…-13-59,00.html

 

[zerinus]

This one:

lds.org/library/display/0,4945,11-1-13-59,00.html

That is the official LDS web site, not some anti-Mormon web site.

I had asked that question from adrift, not from you. He appears to be very uninformed about LDS, and what he thinks is LDS website most likely isn’t. As far as your specific comment is concerned, I am not going to address it because it has been addressed before, and you are very well aware of that fact.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Yeah, when I read your quotes from the Early Church Fathers, I had the feeling things were left out. The rebuttal was the quotes around the ones you provided. This is a common problem with many people. They tend to not read in context. That is your problem. So I ask you again, what proof do you have from the ECF’s, in context?

The ECFs taught what I said they did, even considering the context. They didn’t all teach it in the same way. Some tried to rationalize it; others did not.

zerinus

 

[Kristine1957]

wademann;1936664]]Well, I’m NOT an apostate ex-catholic and I can tell you that every catholic you talk to will give you conflicting information.
Their “doctrines” are constantly changing and getting a straight answer out of any of them about anything is like pulling teeth.
They are very nice people but with all the education that a lot of them have, they do not seem to put it to use in thinking and investigating their “religion” for themselves.

WADEMANN: is this your opinion that the doctrines of the Catholic church are constantly changing or do you have facts? Give me a break! If anything constantly changes it is the LDS Church!

 

[August]

For you Mormons, does it bother you that there is so much controversy about what you actually believe?
Like the Catholic Church, LDS has a hierarchical structure which should ensure uniformity of beliefs. While most people can agree on what Catholics believe, even Mormons don’t all seem to agree on what LDS doctrine is.
Mormons might be considered more mainstream if they didn’t seem so secretive about their religion. Or maybe that’s why you aren’t more open? No offense intended, by the way.

 

[adrift]

I had asked that question from adrift, not from you. He appears to be very uninformed about LDS, and what he thinks is LDS website most likely isn’t. As far as your specific comment is concerned, I am not going to address it because it has been addressed before, and you are very well aware of that fact.

zerinus

I am confused by what you are saying here. Who is the “he” that is uninformed you are speaking about? Is your answer that the website isn’t? would you please provide proof. It looked like LDS to me.
Not only that they say they are the OFFICIAL web site of LDS.

lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg

 

[zerinus]

For you Mormons, does it bother you that there is so much controversy about what you actually believe?

The controversy is created by the enemies of the Church. In reality there is no controversy about what we believe that I should be worried about it.

Like the Catholic Church, LDS has a hierarchical structure which should ensure uniformity of beliefs. While most people can agree on what Catholics believe, even Mormons don’t all seem to agree on what LDS doctrine is.

I don’t accept that. Not all LDS are equally informed about the intricacies of LDS doctrine, as I am sure is the case with Catholics. But in general there is unanimity of belief in the LDS Church as to what is LDS doctrine. Every well established religion is bound to have some areas of theological controversy about which there is not 100% agreement; but I don’t think that the LDS Church has more than its fair share of that than any other church.

Mormons might be considered more mainstream if they didn’t seem so secretive about their religion.

First of all I don’t accept that we are “secretive” about our religion. Secondly, it is not the aim of the LDS Church to be “considered more mainstream”.

Or maybe that’s why you aren’t more open?

Why do you say that? How do you want me to be “more open”?

No offense intended, by the way.

Not at all; thank you for your courteous responses and questions.

zerinus

 

[Rachey]

August,

Actually, I think you would find that many people believe that the Catholic church’s doctrine has been ever changing, with many former doctrines completely abandoned. Also, the Catholic church seems to be shrouded in secrecy as well. Truthfully I would think that, in general, people would consider the Catholic church to be the one harboring the most secrets.

However I do agree with you that there are many Mormon doctrines that have changed over time and some of the mistakes of the past are avoided or perhaps kept secret. It would probably be better if leaders of our church would come out and address those secrets, and perhaps apologize for some of them. I just think you need to realize that your church is not immune to this either.

 

[zerinus]

I am confused by what you are saying here. Who is the “he” that is uninformed you are speaking about?

LOL! I was referring to you!

Is your answer that the website isn’t? would you please provide proof. It looked like LDS to me.
Not only that they say they are the OFFICIAL web site of LDS.

Yes, www.lds.org is the official website of the LDS Church.

zerinus

 

[adrift]

LOL! I was referring to you!

Yes, www.lds.org is the official website of the LDS Church.

zerinus

In post number 3 you said

That has been taught in the past, but it has no scriptural foundation, and is no longer considered a valid doctrine of the LDS Church.

From the web site that you say is the official LDS site

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).

If it is not longer taught, was Joseph Smith wrong? Would you provide information that shows it is not longer taught? It is confusing to non LDS this contradiction. Now I have talked to my friend about this she is LDS and she said that some teachings are not explained until later, I think she said when attending temple, I am not clear on this. Is it possible that you just haven’t been taught it yet?

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

I thought this was an interesting post from Karl Keating from another thread:

First, our character counts are not unduly restrictive. They’re intended to help long-winded people write more concisely.

Second, your references do not remotely prove what you think they prove. When the OT, for example, refers to “gods,” it doesn’t thereby affirm their existence. It recognizes that pagans believed in multiple gods, and it repeatedly pits the one, true God against these false gods (some of whom were mere chimera, others no doubt demons).

Similarly with writings by the Fathers of the Church. You think that when they refer to Christians becoming “gods” that they meant that Christians somehow “grew into” divine nature. Not so.

If that is what they really meant, they would not have been so diligent in writing against the multiple gods of the pagans.

What Mormonism teaches is that the god who rules this world used to be just a man. He lived on some other world, he lived justly, and he was divinized. One might say he “evolved” from having a human nature into having a divine nature.

He was set over his own universe–the one we know–and so, in a certain sense, may be termed the only god known to us. But there are countless gods like him, each with a separate universe. Good Mormon men have the prospect, in the afterlife, of following the same path. They too can be divinized and can be set up to rule a universe of their own, peopling it with their wives.

No matter how one examines it, the god of Mormonism is one of many equally powerful gods. And, frankly, he isn’t all that powerful. He does not share the perfections of the Christian God: omnipotence, omnipresence, and so on.

So, just as I lose interest in Mormonism because of its polytheism, so I can’t take Mormonism seriously because its god is too small. I am not interested in worshiping a super-man, which is all the Mormon god is.

---

Karl

Additionally, as I’ve stated before, if this divinization “evolving” is applied to Jesus Christ as I have heard from an LDS that it is in their theology, then it contradicts Heb 13:8–Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.

 

[zerinus]

In post number 3 you said

From the web site that you say is the official LDS site

If it is not longer taught, was Joseph Smith wrong? Would you provide information that shows it is not longer taught? It is confusing to non LDS this contradiction. Now I have talked to my friend about this she is LDS and she said that some teachings are not explained until later, I think she said when attending temple, I am not clear on this. Is it possible that you just haven’t been taught it yet?

This subject has already been discussed in this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1779012&postcount=125

Start with the above post, and follow the thread of the discission that follows. I percieve that you are not really interested in understanding LDS doctine, but just trawling and asking questions for the same of asking; and I am not really interested in wasting my time with that kind of thing.

zerinus.

 

[adrift]

This subject has already been discussed in this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1779012&postcount=125

Start with the above post, and follow the thread of the discission that follows. I percieve that you are not really interested in understanding LDS doctine, but just trawling and asking questions for the same of asking; and I am not really interested in wasting my time with that kind of thing.

zerinus.

I am glad you can see into my mind but I got news for you you can’t.

I have LDS friends and they say that you are wrong. When missionaries came they said the same thing that Joseph Smith is quoted as saying and they also said there was a progression of gods. So something isn’t right. Like I said my friend said that it is not taught until later. Please give a reference where this teaching was denied and that Joseph Smith was wrong.

 

[August]

August,

Actually, I think you would find that many people believe that the Catholic church’s doctrine has been ever changing, with many former doctrines completely abandoned. Also, the Catholic church seems to be shrouded in secrecy as well. Truthfully I would think that, in general, people would consider the Catholic church to be the one harboring the most secrets.

Could you provide evidence for this? Strictly in terms of defining what the Church believes, we have the Catechism which spells everything out.
As I mentioned before, when I ask Mormons about their beliefs, they usually don’t want to talk about it in depth. “We’re Christians” is typical “brush off” response I’ve gotten when asking many of the questions with which I started this thread.

 

[zerinus]

I am glad you can see into my mind but I got news for you you can’t.

I have LDS friends and they say that you are wrong. When missionaries came they said the same thing that Joseph Smith is quoted as saying and they also said there was a progression of gods. So something isn’t right. Like I said my friend said that it is not taught until later. Please give a reference where this teaching was denied and that Joseph Smith was wrong.

Your questions have all been answered in my discussions in that thread. If you follow those discussions, you will find the answers to the questions you are asking.

zerinus

 

[adrift]

Your questions have all been answered in my discussions in that thread. If you follow those discussions, you will find the answers to the questions you are asking.

zerinus

That is a dodge. I read the thread and it doesn’t answer in specifics only generalities. I want to know the exact document that says that Joseph Smith was wrong on this as this is exactly what the missionaries told me.

Maybe you are just to young to have been told this?

 

[chasjohn]

Just curious - where in Scripture does it state that human souls pre-existed in Heaven?

Here is a list of scriptures showing that man had a pre-mortal existence. Just click on the reference and you will be taken to the scripture.
scriptures.lds.org/en/tg/m/25

 

[JonathanKinsman]

This subject has already been discussed in this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1779012&postcount=125

Start with the above post, and follow the thread of the discission that follows. I percieve that you are not really interested in understanding LDS doctine, but just trawling and asking questions for the same of asking; and I am not really interested in wasting my time with that kind of thing.

zerinus.

Adrift,

This is Zerinus-doublespeak for

"OOPS! I caught lying about official Mormon doctrine again!"

You caught him lying, I’ve caught him lying, every Christian on these threads has caught him lying.

We know he is intellectually challenged because he uses the same old "I’ve said it before (gives a link which says “I’ve said it before”) and you’re not interested in this question about Mormon doctrine (id est, “I can’t admit what a load of hooey Mormon doctrine is”) so I’m gonna ignore you too. Neener neener.

It’s Mormon Apologetics 101.

Pax Christi