Mormon Church Trying to Keep the Wheels On

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris-Wa1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lilypadrees said:
Mormons wrongly give that distinction to Satan as well which is the way they justify the teaching that Jesus and Satan are brothers.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that Early Church Father Lactantius is also wrong? He said that The Father produced both Jesus and Lucifer:

Since God was possessed of the greatest foresight for planning, and of the greatest skill for carrying out in action, before He commenced this business of the world,–inasmuch as there was in Him, and always is, the fountain of full and most complete goodness,–in order that goodness might spring as a stream from Him, and might flow forth afar, He produced a Spirit like to Himself, who might be endowed with the perfections of God the Father… Then He made another being, in whom the disposition of the divine origin did not remain. Therefore he was infected with his own envy as with poison, and passed from good to evil; and at his own will, which had been given to him by God unfettered, he acquired for himself a contrary name. From which it appears that the source of all evils is envy. For he envied his predecessor, who through his steadfastness is acceptable and dear to God the Father. This being, who from good became evil by his own act, is called by the Greeks diabolus : we call him accuser, because he reports to God the faults to which he himself entices us. God, therefore, when He began the fabric of the world, set over the whole work that first and greatest Son, and used Him at the same time as a counselor and artificer, in planning, arranging, and accomplishing, since He is complete both in knowledge, and judgment, and power… ( Lactantius, Divine Institutes 2.9. in Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers , 10 vols. (1885; reprint, Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004), 7:52–53.)
lilypadrees said:
For Mormons to make such a claim, gazelam, is to promote Satan as also being God since Jesus truly IS God, or to demote Jesus to the status of an angel - and a fallen one at that. (Satan is a fallen angel.)
Click to expand...
Hardly. Cain and Abel were also brothers, but no one believes that they were equally righteous.
 
Horton said:
One day, when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, the satan also came among them.
Click to expand...
Latter-day Saint blogger Robert Boylan makes the following point regarding this passage that the Hebrew words used indicate that Satan was part of the group previously referred to:

In this text, Satan is presented as being among the “Sons of God” (בני האלהים) This can be seen in the verb יצב (to take [their] stand/position”) and that Satan is said to be in their “midst,” that is, he belongs among their ranks, clearly demonstrating that the theology of Job holds to a “Satan” who has real, ontological existence, in contradistinction to some Christadelphian interpretation of the "Satan" texts in Job. When one examines the phrase, “among them” (KJV), one finds that the Hebrew is a phrase consisting of the prefixed preposition (בְּ) meaning “in/among” and (תָּוֶךְ). When one examines the other instances of this phrase in the Hebrew Bible, it denotes someone being a member of a group, not independent thereof (e.g., Exo 28:33; Lev 17:8, 10, 13; Num 1:47; 5:3; 15:26, 29, etc.); indeed, commentators such as David J.A. Clines states that the phrase regularly denotes membership of the group in question (See Clines, Job 1-20 [Word Biblical Commentary, 1989], 19). The bare term תָּוֶךְ also denotes membership, not independence, of the group in question (cf. Gen 23:10; 40:20; 2 Kgs 4:13).

Furthermore, the "Satan" in Job 1:6, in Hebrew, is not just the bare term (שָׂטָן), meaning an "adversary," which, in and of itself, can denote anyone who opposes another, whether divine or not (e.g., the angel of the Lord is referred to as an adversary or שָׂטָן in Num 22:22), but is coupled with the definite article (השטן), “ the satan,” which denotes the supernatural tempter (cf. Zech 3:2); one should compare this with similar Greek locutions in the LXX and NT such as such as ο σατανας (Sirach 21:27; Matt 12:26; Mark 3:26; 4:15; Luke 10:18; 11:18; 13:16; 22:31; John 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:18; Rom 16:20; 1 cor 5:5; 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:14; 1 Thess 2:18; 2 Thess 2:9; 1 Tim 1:20; 5:15; Rev 2:9, 13, 24; 3:9; 12:9; 20:2, 7); ο διαβολος (Matt 4:1,5,8,11; 13:39; 25:41; Luke 4:2,3,6,13; 8:12; John 8:44; 13:2; Acts 10:38; Eph 4:27; 6:11; 1 Tim 3:6, 7; 2 Tim 2:26; Heb 2:14; James 4:7; 1 John 3:8, 10; Jude 1:9; Rev 2:10; 12:12; 20:10) and ο πειραζω (Matt 4:3; 1 Thess 3:5), all denoting the external, supernatural tempter in most of Christian theologies (some small groups denying a supernatural Satan notwithstanding).

This can be found at: Scriptural Mormonism: Refuting Jeff Durbin on "Mormonism"

I hope this helps…
 
Cain and Abel were human beings. JUST human beings. They didn’t claim to be angels. Nor did either one equate himself to God.
 
This is a writing by an ECF, it is not doctrine. People are free to write what they chose. Why do you think Lucifer fell? He wanted to be God and was jealous that we humans were given a soul so that we can spend eternity with Him. God wanted His angels to love us but Lucy didn’t like that along with a 1/3 of the angels. So they were cast out. Did God make Lucifer? Sure. But he is not a son of God but one of His first creations. Those are 2 different things. If im correct, it seems like you are using this quote to strengthen your position but the writer was not saying God had Lucifer as a counselor but His 1st son, Jesus. I could be wrong though.
 
gazelam said:
Do you believe that Early Church Father Lactantius is also wrong? He said that The Father produced both Jesus and Lucifer:
Click to expand...
Lactantius may not have the best credentials as an orthodox apologist. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes that he made a good case against pagan beliefs, however,
“The beauty of the style, the choice and aptness of the terminology, cannot hide the author’s lack of grasp on Christian principles and his almost utter ignorance of Scripture.“
Click to expand...
Wikipedia,
“He was considered somewhat heretical after his death, but Renaissance humanists took a renewed interest in him, more for his elaborately rhetorical Latin style than for his theology.”
Click to expand...
The passage you quote may be simply Lactantius’ unintentional clumsy attempt at describing the opposition of the principal fallen angel to the Godhead of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
 
Last edited:
Hoosier-Daddy said:
…
5. Noooooo not pants! This is proof the wheels are coming off. Now I need to go get my daughters veils…oh wait…

…
Click to expand...
In areas where for cultural reasons it is not acceptable for women (including sister missionaries) to wear dress slacks, sister missionaries may choose to wear ankle-length skirts for additional protection from extreme weather and vector-borne diseases such as Zika, dengue fever, West Nile virus, Lyme disease, and malaria, according to the letter.

The adjustment to dress standards, which takes effect immediately, was approved by the First Presidency and is primarily motivated by safety concerns.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
My guess is that had more to do with the problems of history. I’ve seen LDS church statements declare that they can not figure out the geographic Book of Mormon claims. The pageant play would stir up too many unanswerable questions, so I think they will try to avoid facts, and stick more to feelings.
 
Huh. Interesting. I live nearby and it’s always been a huge deal — sort of shocking to see it fold. But I guess even in the birthplace of Mormonism, problems exist…
 
Using a Mormon blogger to prove a point that doesn’t exist in scripture is meaningless. Many have replied to your claim of Jesus and satan being brothers and using Job 1:6 as proof. The Christian world does not accept the Mormon view on the relationship between Jesus and satan. What does that tell you?
 
Wow, I find the policy that missionaries could only call their family twice a year to be absolutely ridiculous.

I do want to post, that according to the Association of Religion Data Archives, which does the most detailed religion statistics in the U.S., that I know of, said that Mormons were the fastest growing religion between 2000 and 2010 in the U.S. Idk what’s been going on since then, but it could be similar. I guess we’ll learn after the 2020 census data becomes available.

This is a screenshot for the national data of the U.S. The Mormons and the Muslims were the religions that gained the most converts or new members between 2000 and 2010. They list both as being from a religious tradition of “Other” Ie: Not Christian or Jewish.

So, if there are a lot of Mormons leaving, then they’re being more than offset by new converts/ babies. Because the Mormons are growing. They were the group with the largest increase in most states during that time as well.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
When I read it, it immediately sounds like Satan doesn’t belong.

Job 1:6 “One day, when the sons of God* came to present thesmelves before the Lord, Satan also came among them”.

So, my first instinct from reading it is like this “A group of boyscouts came to the tent, one of their sisters also came with them”. Or something like that. Or the Apostles came there, and Judas was with them. He’s singled out because he doesn’t belong.

I left the asterisk in, because my Bible has a note right after ‘sons of God’. And it just says: *Sons of God: angels. Satan: literally, “adversary”.

So yeah, Satan is an angel, and he’s an adversary. Is Jesus Christ a brother to every angel? No. He is not a brother to anyone. This is how bad theology begins. Most heresies are rooted in not understanding the persons of the Trinity.
 
Last edited:
I follow Mormon discussion groups on Reddit who talk about how the numbers are propped up by bulk Baptisms in Africa and South America.
They’ll host a big party, then turn it into a Baptism event and then count everyone who doesn’t even show up again.

The folks at cumora.com say that the best measure is the number of Stakes, because those are people who are active over the year. They’ve had a lot of shrinkage and stagnation there, and I think the shrinkage is going to accelerate. More here:


It’ll be interesting to see how the next few years go.
 
Chris-Wa1 said:
Considered taboo in the Mormon Church until just recently, caffeinated drinks are now being sold at BYU and are no longer considered sinful to consume. For decades, consuming caffeinated drinks was highly discouraged and you would never find them in most Mormons’ homes and certainly not at their institutions.
Click to expand...
“Just recently” = the last 10 years.

“Considered taboo in the Mormon Church/Most Mormon’s homes” = bigger in Utah than it was anywhere else I’ve been. Sort of a cultural thing tied into Mormonism, in some places, not in others.

“Highly discouraged” = Been an active LDS for 20+ years, been drinking diet Coke/Pepsi longer than that. Nobody at any time ever discouraged me. Yes, I could find LDS internet arguments on the topic in which to participate.

This is one of those things that gets less weird the more you hear from an adherent about it. Kind of like how I used to think it was weird at all the Catholics in South America making a big deal about finding an image of Mary in their tortillas, then I talked to some Catholics about it, and saw sort of where it fit in y’alls faith system. I don’t think it’s weird any more.
 
Well I mean, hopefully you’re right. The ARDA is pretty good though. I don’t know exactly what their methodology is, but this is the note that they give on their site in several places:

" * In an effort to better match the ASARB standards for adherents, a few religious bodies changed the way their adherents were reported in 2010, including the Catholic Church, Amish groups, Friends groups, Jewish groups, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Non-denominational Christian Churches, and the United Methodist Church. This change does not affect any of the data in the newly released 2010 U.S. Religion Census: Religious Congregations & Membership Study. In fact, the data for these groups are now more comparable to that of other bodies than it was in previous decadal reports."

With the Catholic Church, I know that they don’t take the official numbers we have of baptized Catholics, and similarly they try with the Jews to only count Jews who are somewhat religious, and to exclude most of the Jews who are purely ‘cultural’ or ethnic secular Jews. So, I imagine they have a similar methodology towards the Mormons. Where they’re not accepting at face value Mormon baptism numbers. So, I do believe that Mormonism is a growing religion. Between 2000 and 2010 they surpassed Catholics as the largest denomination in the State of Wyoming. And, they’re very close to surpassing Catholics as the largest denomination in Alaska. Other states out West they’re the second largest, but I wouldn’t say they’re close to becoming the largest. Those are in: Colorado, Oregon, Montana, and Nevada.

I just want Catholics to be aware of this. I find that many aren’t. All of those Mormon missionaries knocking on doors have apparently borne some fruit. Or misled a number of people, however you want to say. We just need to be aware of it. Its entirely different than Evangelical Protestants evangelizing. Its an entirely different thing in America. A non-Christian religion gaining a good deal of converts.
 
I’m a former LDS, and all I can tell you is that the church is five steps from completely falling apart. Many, many people are leaving and the leadership knows this. In fact, they are terrified of it.
 
I mean, God-willing. The Mormon religion is clearly a man-made religion. They’re not at all like our Protestant brothers and sisters, or even our Jewish brothers and sisters. Occasionally I’ll pray for Mormons to come into contact with any Christian church, if not ideally a Catholic one.
 
I live in the state with the second highest population percentage of mormons. A second temple was just built in my area. The religion is growing. By other estimates Catholics number about 1/3 that of mormons. About 1 in 4 are mormon and 1 in 10 are Catholic. Mass attendance is falling.
 
From what I’ve seen in surveys is that the largest growth in religion is among the “nones”. More people are leaving or never joining a faith than are maintaining or converting to faith.

Note: not all nones are atheist but it seems they are rejecting identifying with any religion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top