Mormon Beliefs

[kellie]

Because that church apostatized, and God had to start a new dispensation of the gospel through a prophet in the latter days.

zerinus

But the Gospel was here in person, with Jesus.

What prophesy is Joseph Smith meant to have given to us?

If what you’re saying is true, then Joseph Smith isn’t a prophet, but the founder of the church, the boss so to speak who is authorised by God to spread the Word.

Why do you call your leaders prophets?

How could God have more to be revealed than revealing Himself as man?

All we have now is His teachings in the shape of the Bible.

That is what He did, He worked through the writers of Scripture so in centuries to come we would have His Word in writing.

It is complete. As He Himself said on the Cross, it is done.

Fair enough if you think the teachings went askew, and God revealed Himself to Smith to tell Him he is now in charge and to recreate His church, but “prophet”?? I think not.

 

[Montalban]

Irelevant.

Z

Something you raised!

 

[Montalban]

Why do you call your leaders prophets?

One ruled fairly recently that black people could have this gospel message too! (they’d been excluded by earlier prophets)

so says this site…
christiandefense.com/mor_black.htm

 

[zerinus]

But the Gospel was here in person, with Jesus.

Yes, and the church later apostatized.

What prophesy is Joseph Smith meant to have given to us?

A prophet is someone who gives people the word of God, or what God wants them to hear. Joseph Smith gave us that.

If what you’re saying is true, then Joseph Smith isn’t a prophet, but the founder of the church, the boss so to speak who is authorised by God to spread the Word.

Why do you call your leaders prophets?

Actually, his official title is not “Prophet”. His official title in the Church is “President of the High Priesthood of the Church,” or “Presiding High Priest over the High Priesthood of the Church”. He is called “Prophet” because in popular culture that is the name given to someone who speaks on behalf of God, and tell us what God wants us to hear. The office of a “Prophet” is one of the functions associated with his high calling; but in reality his position is far higher than that of an ordinary prophet. He possesses the keys of the kingdom of God in all the world, the same that the Lord had promised to St Peter in the Gospels.

How could God have more to be revealed than revealing Himself as man?

He reveals Himself to us in His word; and we have lots more of it than you do. Read the Book of Mormon to find out.

All we have now is His teachings in the shape of the Bible.

Not true. We have lots more. Read the Book of Mormon to find out.

That is what He did, He worked through the writers of Scripture so in centuries to come we would have His Word in writing.

Sure, and we have lots more of it than you do. You can never have too much of a good thing. Read the Book of Mormon to find out.

It is complete. As He Himself said on the Cross, it is done.

The Atonement was complete. It doesn’t say Scripture is complete.

Fair enough if you think the teachings went askew, and God revealed Himself to Smith to tell Him he is now in charge and to recreate His church, but “prophet”?? I think not.

The office of prophet is one of his functions. He did all of that, and is a prophet in the bargain. See explanation given above. I don’t think you understand the meaning of a prophet. A prophet is not a fortune-teller. He is someone who tells us what God wants us to hear. He is God’s mouthpiece and representative on earth. The Apostles were all prophets. Jesus called Himself a prophet. The President of the LDS Church is much more than a prophet, as explained above.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Something you raised!

His comment was irrelevant in lots of ways. First of all, the fact that I spend a lot of time here dose not mean that I should spend more of it writing term papers explaining to him the obvious. Second, it is not true that I spend a lot of time here. Some people post more often than I do. I happen to spend a lot of time on the computer doing my own work, and it is easy to switch between the two and answer the occasional post. It helps to relive the tension, and it is good fun.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

First of all, the fact that I spend a lot of time here dose not mean that I should spend more of it writing term papers explaining to him the obvious.

Why not? Repetition is the mother of memory. You shouldn’t ever be unhappy about repeating the glories of your religion, if you really are in love with it, as you claim to be. I never, ever tire of talking about Jesus, or about the Church that He founded upon the Apostles and which we call Catholic.

Second, it is not true that I spend a lot of time here. Some people post more often than I do.

Ahem. Not very many, Zerinus, not very many, if any.

I happen to spend a lot of time on the computer doing my own work, and it is easy to switch between the two and answer the occasional post. It helps to relive the tension, and it is good fun. zerinus

I agree, and I know I speak for everyone at Catholic Answers when I say that we are glad you’re here. You’re the mouthpiece of Mormonism here. You give it to us as straight as it is possible for it to be given, and you illuminate your religion in a clear, bright, white light. And, you also get a good daily dose of exposure to Catholic thought. Also true for our other Mormon friends, like wussup, rmcmullan, IAMLDS, wademan, hope I didn’t leave anyone out, or misspell a username. Thanks for being here. You light up our lives!

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I had quoted you Exodus 24:9-11 as evidence that God appeared to Moses and the elders of Israel. To that you had replied: “If you keep reading this to the end of the chapter it is clear it was God speaking from a cloud (also Ex 19:9-24. Ex 20:18-21)”. That just doesn’t hold water, something that I believe you are perfectly aware of. The fact that God had appeared to Moses and the rest of Israel in a cloud, it does not meant He could not have appeared to them on this occasion without a cloud. The verse clearly states that they “saw God,” and even describe what was paved under His feet. Now you want to tell me that that does not mean what it says.

God never appeared to people apart from an indirect manner like a cloud, even to Moses later down the road in Ex33:17And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name. 18And he [Moses] said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. 19And he [God] said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. 20And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. 21And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: 22And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: 23And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
It is clear from this talk Moses had not seen God directly previously and especially not a body. What God is saying here is that humans cant comprehend God as He is. This was a special revelation to Moses alone, and here it is clear even Moses doesnt get to see God in His fullness. In this event God uses figurative language to say He will reveal Himself to Moses in an indirect manner (ie “my back parts”) but is clear His fullness cannot be revealed nor comprehended (“see me and live”). When a verse says someone saw God “face to face” that is an expression for an intimate conversation.

The ONLY way to reconcile verses like these is to recognize God never showed Himself directly to anyone at any time. The context of the verse I provided above shows God’s glory was revealed from a cloud and other indirect manners.

(cont)

 

[Catholic_Dude]

(cont 2 of 2)

Here is another example. I had quoted you Numbers 12:6-8, commenting that “by the ‘similitude of the Lord’ is meant the very shape, form, and appearance of God.” To that you had replied: “You left off two important verses at the start and end of your quote, verses 5 and 10 which is clear God was appearing in and spoke from a cloud (as He often did). Your addition of the “*” is unwarranted. All that passage is saying is that God speaks to Moses in a very intimate manner and in a clear manner (eg not in riddles);” which is a nonsensical comment, and completely ignores the verse where it says that “the similitude to the Lord shall he behold”. Do you know what the word “similitude” means? It occurs on eight occasions in the Old Testament altogether. Here is a complete list of all of them:*Numbers 12:

8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses

Deuteronomy 4:12, 15,16

2 Chronicles 4:
3 And under it was the similitude of oxen, …

Psalms 106:
20 Thus they changed their glory into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass.

Psalms 144:
12 That our sons may be as plants grown up in their youth; that our daughters may be as corner stones, polished after the similitude of a palace

Daniel 10:
16 And, behold, one like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips: …So, now that you know what “similitude” means, what do you think it means when it says that “the similitude of the lord shall he behold”? First off it is very important to note that all the Deuteronomy passages you cited go directly against the notion God revealed Himself directly. Here is the Deuteronomy 4 passage:10Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. 11And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness. 12And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice. 13And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments… 15Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: 16Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, 17The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air,
This passage is very very powerful in regards to what they did and did not see. It is clear God spoke through fire and dark clouds, they never saw a body. Whats more important it says why in verse 15-17…"Lest Ye CORRUPT yourselves and make a graven image" in the likeness of a human! This says not only did God not fully reveal Himself but that His image is not that of any object most notably a human body.
Now in regards to the word “similitude” nowhere does it say the “similitude” of God is that of a human. In each verse where you cite “simlitude” that means in the likeness of, for example “similitude of oxen”. The “simlitude of God” means God’s glory, and as stated above terms like “face to face” is figurative language and means intimate conversation.

 

[zerinus]

God never appeared to people apart from an indirect manner like a cloud, even to Moses later down the road in Ex33: . . .

God did not appear to the Israelite people at that time except in a cloud because of their unworthiness. Their unbelief, sinfulness, and idolatrous disposition made that impossible. But that did not mean those that were worthy like Moses could not have seen Him.

The ONLY way to reconcile verses like these is to recognize God never showed Himself directly to anyone at any time. The context of the verse I provided above shows God’s glory was revealed from a cloud and other indirect manners.

There is another way to reconcile that. JST translates Exodus 33 verses 20 and 23 as follows. All the words in italics were added by Joseph Smith:

1. And he said unto Moses, Thou canst not see my face at this time, lest mine anger be kindled against thee also, and I destroy thee, and thy people; for there shall no man among them see me at this time, and live, for they are exceeding sinful. And no sinful man hath at any time, neither shall there be any sinful man at any time, that shall see my face and live.
2. And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen as at other times; for I am angry with my people Israel.

The Doctrine and Covenants has more to say about that:

D&C 84:

22 For without this {priesthood} no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

23 Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God;

24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.

25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;

26 And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;

It is possible to see the face of God. Just because some were unworthy to do so is neither here nor there.

First off it is very important to note that all the Deuteronomy passages you cited go directly against the notion God revealed Himself directly. Here is the Deuteronomy 4 passage:

Not true. They show that God did not reveal Himself to the Isralites because of their unworthiness; but DID reveal Himself to Moses who was worthy to see Him.

This passage is very very powerful in regards to what they did and did not see. It is clear God spoke through fire and dark clouds, they never saw a body.

He did not reveal Himself to the Israelites because of their unworthiness. That did not mean that He did not, or could not have revealed Himself to Moses and others who were worthy to see Him.

Whats more important it says why in verse 15-17…"Lest Ye CORRUPT yourselves and make a graven image" in the likeness of a human! This says not only did God not fully reveal Himself but that His image is not that of any object most notably a human body.

No, that is not what it means. It means that they simply did not see Him, therefore had no knowledge of what He looked like. It doesn’t mean that He didn’t look like anything.

Now in regards to the word “similitude” nowhere does it say the “similitude” of God is that of a human.

In the first chapter of Genesis, that God “made man in His own image;” and in every other appearance of God that I had cited; and above all, in the appearance personage of Jesus Christ, who is the very “express image of his {Father’s} person” (Hebrews 1:3).

In each verse where you cite “simlitude” that means in the likeness of, for example “similitude of oxen”. The “simlitude of God” means God’s glory, and as stated above terms like “face to face” is figurative language and means intimate conversation.

Not true. The “similitude of God” is in the human form. That has been shown from numerous instances in both the OT and the NT.

zerinus

 

[Tmaque]

There is another way to reconcile that. JST translates Exodus 33 verses 20 and 23 as follows. All the words in italics were added by Joseph Smith:

1. And he said unto Moses, Thou canst not see my face at this time, lest mine anger be kindled against thee also, and I destroy thee, and thy people; for there shall no man among them see me at this time, and live, for they are exceeding sinful. And no sinful man hath at any time, neither shall there be any sinful man at any time, that shall see my face and live.
2. And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen as at other times; for I am angry with my people Israel.

zerinus

Why do you quote the JST when your own Church doesn’t believe it to be inspired enough to use as scripture?

It’s clear that scripture teaches us that God cannot be seen…period.

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time

1 Tim. 6:16 Whom no man hath seen nor can see.

Did you get that???
No man CAN see God at ANY time…and
…no man hath seen or CAN see

Pretty definitive unless you’re coming at it with tunnel vision.

 

[PaulDupre]

D&C 84:

22 For without this {priesthood} no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

zerinus
​

Okay, so how did Joseph Smith survive his “first vision”, wherein he saw the Father and the Son? This supposedly occured when Joseph was 14 years old - many years before he allegedly received either of the priesthoods.

Just another irreconcilable contradiction in the maze of Mormonism. Old horny Joe should have hired a script continuity person to keep all his lies organized,

Paul​

 

[zerinus]

Okay, so how did Joseph Smith survive his “first vision”, wherein he saw the Father and the Son? This supposedly occured when Joseph was 14 years old - many years before he allegedly received either of the priesthoods.

Just another irreconcilable contradiction in the maze of Mormonism. Old horny Joe should have hired a script continuity person to keep all his lies organized,

Paul

The scriptures are full of apparent contradictions; but there are always explanations for them.

zerinus

 

[Montalban]

His comment was irrelevant in lots of ways. First of all, the fact that I spend a lot of time here dose not mean that I should spend more of it writing term papers explaining to him the obvious. Second, it is not true that I spend a lot of time here. Some people post more often than I do. I happen to spend a lot of time on the computer doing my own work, and it is easy to switch between the two and answer the occasional post. It helps to relive the tension, and it is good fun.

zerinus

You are the one who raised the issue about your time. You then said his comment in respect to this was irrelevant when you raised the issue.

 

[zerinus]

You are the one who raised the issue about your time. You then said his comment in respect to this was irrelevant when you raised the issue.

You can’t have both points at once.

Frankly, I don’t understand what point you are trying to make either.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

The scriptures are full of apparent contradictions; but there are always explanations for them.

zerinus

In this case, though, it seems to me you’re looking at a contradiction between what Scripture, that is, the Holy Bible, says about the nature of God, and what Joseph Smith claims he saw in a vision.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

God did not appear to the Israelite people at that time except in a cloud because of their unworthiness. Their unbelief, sinfulness, and idolatrous disposition made that impossible. But that did not mean those that were worthy like Moses could not have seen Him.

Your kind of changing the story now. First you made it appear as if it was a nation wide revelation of God appearing as a man to everyone and now your saying only a select few worthy people can really see Him.

There is another way to reconcile that. JST translates Exodus 33 verses 20 and 23 as follows. All the words in italics were added by Joseph Smith:20. And he said unto Moses, Thou canst not see my face at this time, lest mine anger be kindled against thee also, and I destroy thee, and thy people; for there shall no man among them see me at this time, and live, for they are exceeding sinful. And no sinful man hath at any time, neither shall there be any sinful man at any time, that shall see my face and live.

1. And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen as at other times; for I am angry with my people Israel.

I understand you accept the above a scripture but to Catholics it looks like the text was altered to fit your theology.
Futher the context of that passage gives no indication God was mad a Moses or that Moses was unworthy (lest mine anger be kindled against thee also -JST), infact God explicitly says He is pleased with Moses and that is why Moses is going to be lucky enough to see God in a intimate yet indirect manner.17And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name. 18And he [Moses] said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. 19And he [God] said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.Further the discussion in this context was between Moses and God, nothing about the nation getting to see God as the context indicates again:21And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: 22And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
This was all about Moses and God. It was a display of God’s love for Moses, nothing to do with the Jews and their sins. However that is what the JST is saying “no man among them see me” and “they are exceeding sinful” and “for I am angry with my people Israel.”

The Doctrine and Covenants has more to say about that&C 84:

22 For without this {priesthood} no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

23 Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness, and sought diligently to sanctify his people that they might behold the face of God;

24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.

25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;

26 And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;It is possible to see the face of God. Just because some were unworthy to do so is neither here nor there.

So the Priesthood was taken away? Whats the difference between the regular and “lesser” priesthood? As far as the Bible says there was the Levites and Aaron who were the only priests.
(cont)

 

[Catholic_Dude]

(cont)

Not true. They show that God did not reveal Himself to the Isralites because of their unworthiness; but DID reveal Himself to Moses who was worthy to see Him.

Your changing your story. First you were pushing the notion that it was a nation wide revelation now your limiting it to a select few. Further there is no indication He revealed Himself to Moses apart from an indirect manner.

He did not reveal Himself to the Israelites because of their unworthiness. That did not mean that He did not, or could not have revealed Himself to Moses and others who were worthy to see Him.

See above comments.

No, that is not what it means. It means that they simply did not see Him, therefore had no knowledge of what He looked like. It doesn’t mean that He didn’t look like anything.

So why were you using those passages to try and prove God revealed Himself as with a human body?

p.s. The fact they made a golden calf instead of a human figure says to me they didnt know what God looked like.

In the first chapter of Genesis, that God “made man in His own image;” and in every other appearance of God that I had cited; and above all, in the appearance personage of Jesus Christ, who is the very “express image of his {Father’s} person” (Hebrews 1:3).

It was demonstrated by your own claims “man in His image” is equivalent to “male and female in His image” indicating “image” is in regards to spirit/soul. Further Jesus appearing as man, when Jesus became man, is not the same as the Father being man or ever becoming man.

Not true. The “similitude of God” is in the human form. That has been shown from numerous instances in both the OT and the NT.

It never says “similitude of God…IN HUMAN FORM”. And it has not been shown “numerous times”.

 

[zerinus]

In this case, though, it seems to me you’re looking at a contradiction between what Scripture, that is, the Holy Bible, says about the nature of God, and what Joseph Smith claims he saw in a vision.

No, he was referring to what appeard to be a contradicton within LDS scripture.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Your kind of changing the story now. First you made it appear as if it was a nation wide revelation of God appearing as a man to everyone and now your saying only a select few worthy people can really see Him.

Your changing your story. First you were pushing the notion that it was a nation wide revelation now your limiting it to a select few. Further there is no indication He revealed Himself to Moses apart from an indirect manner.

No, I never said anything to imply any of that. On the contrary, I both said and implied the opposite. You are making that up. If you can’t even be honest about what I actually said, then we have nothing further to discuss.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

No, he was referring to what appeard to be a contradicton within LDS scripture.

zerinus

Minor point, but let me reconstruct this exchange and see how it goes:

PaulDupre wrote:

""Okay, so how did Joseph Smith survive his “first vision”, wherein he saw the Father and the Son? This supposedly occured when Joseph was 14 years old - many years before he allegedly received either of the priesthoods.

Just another irreconcilable contradiction in the maze of Mormonism. Old horny Joe should have hired a script continuity person to keep all his lies organized,

Paul""

And then Zerinus quoted that, and wrote in reply:

""The scriptures are full of apparent contradictions; but there are always explanations for them.

zerinus""

and then I Allweather quoted that, and wrote in reply:

““In this case, though, it seems to me you’re looking at a contradiction between what Scripture, that is, the Holy Bible, says about the nature of God, and what Joseph Smith claims he saw in a vision.””

Now, the contradiction may also exist within LDS scripture, which makes it even more a wonderment how Joseph Smith survived seeing God. But the comparison was between the Bible, and the claim of JS to have seen God.