Mormon Patriarchal Blessing?

[majick275]

The operative word here is “principal”. We have never claimed that “all” American Indians have the DNA of Israel.

notice the syntax. all american Indians is implicit. principal is associated only with the ancestors. the meaning is clear. Especially if you read the BoM and see all of the places where it speaks of this land being preserved and kept from all others as a special inheritance.

scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/2/7-15#7

and

scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/1/5-9,20#5

if you want to wrangle over who was brought by the hand of the lord then I would have to refer you to the LDS prophets who have been pretty consistent on that meaning the “discoverers” of the new world. (many of whom were Catholic ) I would also refer to the many talks by LDS prophets speaking specifically to groups of people that we KNOW cannot be of Hewbrew origin and calling them “lamanites”. You might especially want to be aware of some of Spencer Kimball’s comments from back when righteous meant “white and delightsome”.

 

[zerinus]

You are correct in this, but you raised the issue of the Moslems against what I said about the survivability of a civilization, or, in this case, a religious culture. Did the Moslems conquer by military force? Surely. Did they convert every person under their domination? No. Did Christianity survive under Moslem domination? Obviously. Has Moslem civilization collapsed? Definitely! Also, it was extremely rare for Christians to convert by force. It did happen, but was very rare compared to the Moslems. But, what we were talking about, or at least, what I was talking about, was the survivability of Christianity. What has survived even as long? And is still vigorous and speaking a moral message to the world today? Is it Islam? Hardly.

Indeed, and that is partly YOUR fault for not getting with the program and submitting to the authority that Jesus established upon the Apostles. Yours and the Protestants. The rest of us are doing quite nicely, all one billion of us, submitted and thriving.

Name the Catholics that have flown passenger liners into buildings. Yes, there always are extremists, but Catholicism has, thoughout its long 2k year history, been remarkably peaceful considering what it has been through.

Thank you for the heads-up. But, to be very clear, I have no such opinions. You put the words “all Moslems are terrorists” into quotation marks as if I wrote them. I did not.

Possibly, but we aren’t having a discussion with Moslems about the viability of Islamic civilization. You and I are discussing the comparison, which YOU raised, between Islamic civilization, which has been steadily fading for centuries, and Christian civilization, which has not. You suggested that Islam could be compared to Christianity as an entity without a valid priesthood, without divine authority (your words, as I recall without verifying). I don’t see how they can be. Christianity, especially Catholicism, is in an entirely higher league, by pretty much any measure. You can argue about secularization, but that is a relatively recent phenomenon and is also affecting Islam, and even Mormonism.

I am not going to get into a protracted discussion with you about Christianity vs. Islam. That could go on forever. Suffice it to say that I disagree with you. Islam is not a boken up smashed up religion. It is very much a dinamic religion, and according to some reports is growing faster than Christianity. Christianity is more smashed up than Islam is.

zerinus

 

[chasjohn]

Whether this is true of chasjohn remains to be seen, because he has not yet expressed himself on the subject as definitively as has Zerinus.

All believing Catholics, as well as all believing Protestants, will be saved. However, there are degrees of salvation:

John 14:2 “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you”

2 Corinthians 12:2 “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven”

1 Corinthians 15:41 - 42 “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead…”

The degree of salvation that a person receives depends on the amount of gospel light he is willing to live by.

 

[Allweather]

I am not going to get into a protracted discussion with you about Christianity vs. Islam. That could go on forever. Suffice it to say that I disagree with you. Islam is not a boken up smashed up religion. It is very much a dinamic religion, and according to some reports is growing faster than Christianity. Christianity is more smashed up than Islam is.

“Christianity is more smashed up than Islam.” Whew. Brother Z, I’m just gonna strongly disagree with that statement and ask if you could produce some itemization to make that point.

Moving on. As I pointed out already, YOU were the one who raised Islam as an example of a religion that has survived, nay, thrived, though having no “valid priesthood or divine authority” (paraphrasing YOUR words here).

The original idea was that I stated that there is no way that Catholicism could have survived, let alone thrived, let alone salvaged civilization in the wake of the collapse of the Roman Empire, and then gone on to grow rapidly even under severe persecution, establish Christendom, invent things like hospitals and universities, build western civilization, explore the world, convert the savages, etc, unless it was under the guidance and protection of God. Mormons claim that divine authority was withdrawn from it right after the last Apostle died.

And don’t forget the extension of western civilization that is manifest in the United States, Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand, and other places. Christian thought underlies even our secular societies, and has been the prime mover as we have come to dominate the world, financially and culturally (if sinfully at times).

Mormonism is almost 200 years old, and yet it only claims a little over 12 million adherents worldwide. Most Mormons now live outside the U.S. (I heard Rev. Hinckley say this a couple of days ago on BYU Channel) suggesting that Mormonism no longer appeals to Norte Americanos, but is having to dip into the poverty-stricken southern nations where Americans are still thought highly of, and people are glad to have young Americans come into their homes for any reason. Retention of converts is shockingly low. Actual numbers of practicing Mormons is probably closer to 6 million (my guess). JWs have more than double this number, and yet they are still nothing more than a pimple on the butt of Rome.

 

[Allweather]

All believing Catholics, as well as all believing Protestants, will be saved. However, there are degrees of salvation:

John 14:2 “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you”

2 Corinthians 12:2 “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven”

1 Corinthians 15:41 - 42 “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead…”

The degree of salvation that a person receives depends on the amount of gospel light he is willing to live by.

Fine. But those interpretations are at variance with what Christians have understood them to be for around 2k years. They are creative interpretations, innovative, and they are leading people away from unity with the True Church. This is how I can know, even without studying them closely, that they are false. Anything that leads away from unity with the True Church, which is the Catholic Church, is error. It is the Church, under the inspiration and authority of God, that interprets Scripture. I understand that Mormons have a doctrine that says that all will be saved, but unto varying levels of “heaven.” But that is not how 2k years of Christians have understood this. When a cult or sect separates from the authority of the Church, the people in it get into error, and the error gets worse over time.

It isn’t difficult for different people to arrive at different scriptural interpretations. Mormons don’t agree with the the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Protestants are all over the board with a wide, wide variety of interpretations and doctrines. The Christian Scientists can’t come to grips with what the Moonies teach, and they are not surviving the death of Mary Baker Eddy. I could go on and on listing the cults and sects and their various interpretations of Scripture. One thing we do know is that unity is critical. Jesus wants us unified. Anything that destroys unity cannot be of God. When Joseph Smith arrived with his new church in 1830 he was offering a few new, a few old interpretations of Scripture, and he was specifically rejecting the authority of the Church that wrote and protected Scripture. We can know that he was a false prophet, because he rejected the Church, he rejected the valid authority of it, he led people away from it into further error. We don’t need detailed studies of scripture verses. The error is obvious and easy to see, because of the lack of unity.

 

[chasjohn]

Fine. But those interpretations are at variance with what Christians have understood them to be for around 2k years.

How do you [the Catholic Church] interpret the scriptures I cited?

 

[PaulDupre]

It is hardly surprising that Mormons like Zerinus are sympathetic to Islam. After all, they are two versions of the same religion.

1. Both depend, for their very existence, on the bible being hopelessly corrupt and untrustworthy.
2. Both deny the eternal divinity of Jesus.
3. Both have new prophets after the apostles.
4. Both have new scriptures that correct the “corruptions” in the bible and are more “correct” than the bible.
5. Both instituted polygamy and the degradation of women.
6. Both teach that the reward for obedience to the religion on earth is lots of polygamous sex in heaven, but only for males.
7. Both instituted deadly punishments for “apostates” and those who betray the religion (Islam: beheadings; Mormons: temple penalties such as throat slitting and disembowelment).

It’s no wonder that Joseph Smith claimed to be the American Mohammed, and that Mormonism is called “the American Islam”

I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose
motto in treating for peace was “the Alcoran [Koran]
or the Sword.” So shall it eventually be with us –
“Joseph Smith or the Sword!”

Joseph Smith - October 14th, 1838 Far West, Missouri.

 

[truthsilence]

Speaking of restoring things. The following stood out to me during RCIA when we were discussing the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation. The instructor told us that, the usage of the term “Confirmation”, didn’t actually come along until about 500 AD. (Prior to that time, Baptism and Confirmation were a “one in the same” Sacrament) I thought to myself, "how interesting that the LDS church also practices “Confirmation”; something that came along so far into the supposed “apostacy”, through the directive of the Catholic Church.

Please feel free to correct me if you have any evidence contrary to what I was told. If not, why would an “apostate” term and practice need to be “restored”?.

When you realize just how much the LDS church claims to possess that is simply a counterfeit copycat of the real thing, it is truly astounding. It is sickening, really.

 

[christianley]

chas, I realize you are ignoring me, but I will pose this anyway and see if you can be roused.

Bear in mind I know almost nothing about DNA. Unlike the troll Zerinus who recently stated carbon dating is not very accurate, and has ignored my request for his qualifications in that field, I do not claim any qualifications with respect to DNA. Therefore I will defer to your authority in this area.

You stated that “some of the native Americans do not have the blood of Israel…” Does this imply that some do have the blood of Israel?

I have seen a film in which some identified scientists, admittedly evangelicals with bones to pick, state that there is no possibility that any Hebrew DNA exists in any pre-Columbian peoples anywhere on the American continent, which as I recall includes north, central, and south America. They appear to be rather confident of this. They spend quite a bit of time in the film explaining their research methods, and it seems pretty convincing to a layperson like me. The thing that makes me doubt just a bit is that they are religionists trying to make a point. I guess what I’m getting at, are you competent enough in the DNA field to be able to debunk the DNA research by a simple explanation to a layperson like me?

While the film is produced by evangelicals, I don’t believe the scientists in the film are evangelicals. In fact Murphy and Southerton are from everything I can tell are agnostics. Murphy is a Mormon and Southerton was a fomer Mormon recently ex’d over other issues.

 

[Allweather]

Perhaps this article is a little more “reader friendy” on the subject of the Apostacy:
fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2004_Apostasy.html

chasjohn, thank you for this link. I briefly scanned over it last night before bed, but have not had time to read it carefully. Here’s the impression I get from my brief scan: The writer, Roger Keller, seems to be vigorously backing away from the UNIVERSAL apostasy charge against Christianity. For instance, here is one quote lifted from the article:

““So, who carries the gospel to the people of the earth for almost two millennia? Catholics and Protestants. Our Catholic brothers and sisters, our Protestant brothers and sisters, are part of God’s plan that the fulness of the gospel may come in the Latter-day days.””

Based on my conversations with other Mormons, both here on this forum, as well as in Mormon church, Mormons as a general rule do not share Mr. Keller’s revisionism. I have been told, point-blank, by a Mormon TBM, a man my age ('round 60), that the so-called apostasy was and is UNIVERSAL, meaning it covers everyone, everywhere, then and now, except Mormons. I gather the same thing from my reading of McConkie in Mormon Doctrine.

FWIW two things above all else have led to my fiance’s departure from Mormonism after over 20 years: The first was my relentless pointing out to her the illogical nature of the Mormon apostasy charge. I would do this by asking her, every time we saw some sacred object, such as, say, various renderings of the Pieta, whaddaya think, hon? Was that an apostate who did that work, were those apostates who have cried before it for all these centuries? It took maybe three months of this almost daily pointing things out to her in the REAL WORLD before the scales fell from her eyes, and she saw the lie of the apostasy charge. The other thing was polygamy, but that is a separate story we can tell later!

However, as I said, I have not studied this article yet, and so apart from that quick impression given here, I am not yet able to thoroughly interpret it. I plan to do that tonight.

 

[Allweather]

How do you [the Catholic Church] interpret the scriptures I cited?

I will leave specific interpretations of Scripture to others more qualified in that area. I am not a Scripture interpretor. I am a member of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and I accept, without reservation, every teaching, however minute, of that Church. The teachings of the Church are developed out of the authority that Jesus bestowed upon it through the Apostles. The Bible (NT) is a product of the people of that Church, an outgrowth of Sacred Tradition. I strongly believe, based on my years as a Protestant, that very few humans in and of themselves have the ability to properly interpret Scripture. Scripture MUST be understood in the light of authority, Tradition, and universality, not according to my interpretation, or yours, or any other single individual, or sect, or cult of individuals.

And this is one area in which Mormons, along with their Protestant forebears, get off the track. They believe in private interpretations. These private interpretations, held without reference to authority and Tradition, are what lead to schisms, fractures, heresies, cults, sects, apostates, and lost souls.

 

[chasjohn]

I accept, without reservation, every teaching, however minute, of that Church.

That’s what I’m asking. What does your church teach regarding life after death. Does everyone either go to heaven or hell? Or are there degrees of salvation, as the Bible says?

 

[Allweather]

That’s what I’m asking. What does your church teach regarding life after death. Does everyone either go to heaven or hell? Or are there degrees of salvation, as the Bible says?

Since no one has jumped in with a more technical reply to this, let me do what I can. Bear in mind, I am not at home, do not have a Catechism in front of me. But, it is pretty simple, really, and none should be necessary. I think I can get it right, if not perfect.

Orthodox Christianity (and by this I mean both Catholicism AND pretty much all Protestants) do not see Heaven as divided into layers, the way Mormons (and perhaps other cults) appear to do. The exact nature, structure, of Heaven is not, as far as I know, defined by Christianity. There is, however, a state of Heaven commonly called Purgatory, a word derived from the meaning of “purge” where most souls spend at least some “time” being prepared for the full beatific vision of God, which is Heaven. I’m not sure whether Purgatory is actually considered an aspect of Heaven itself, but it probably doesn’t matter for purposes of this discussion, since when a soul is in Purgatory, it is guaranteed to “eventually” come into the full beatific vision of God.

Upon death, the soul, which is eternal, having been created at the instant of conception by God (another aspect of difference between us, since Mormons teach about a pre-existence, while Christians teach that the soul does not pre-exist the physical body, yet is eternal thereafter) is judged by Jesus Christ. This, I believe, is known as the specific, or particlar (or some other word like that) judgement. Based upon that judgement, the soul is either dispatched to Heaven (most likely via Purgatory, since few will be fully prepared for the full beatific vision) or to Hell. If it goes to Hell, there is no return from there. Hell is eternal damnation and separation from God and the Saints already in Heaven.

I believe there is also another judgement that takes place at the end of time, at the resurrection of all, when Jesus returns to earth. The Nicene Creed states: “He (Jesus) will come again in glory, to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.” However, I am not very clear as to every aspect of this final judgement, so will refrain from further comment, and leave it for another, more knowledgable person who might want to jump in here.

BTW the Catechism is online in various places. Also, CA has a very excellent set of articles that can explain an awful lot of this.

 

[chasjohn]

Since no one has jumped in with a more technical reply to this, let me do what I can. Bear in mind, I am not at home, do not have a Catechism in front of me. But, it is pretty simple, really, and none should be necessary. I think I can get it right, if not perfect.

Thank you! That was very helpful. Thanks also for letting me know that the Catechism can be found online.

 

[Allweather]

Originally provided by PaulDupre, this quote attributed to Joseph Smith:

""I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose
motto in treating for peace was “the Alcoran [Koran]
or the Sword.” So shall it eventually be with us –
“Joseph Smith or the Sword!”

Joseph Smith - October 14th, 1838 Far West, Missouri.""

This is astounding to me. Can anyone link me over to the full context of this speech?

 

[majick275]

as best I can:

• If the people will let us alone we will preach
  the gospel in peace. But if they come on to molest
  us, we will establish our religion by the sword. We
  will trample down our enemies and make it one gore of
  blood from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean.
  I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose
  motto in treating for peace was “the Alcoran [Koran]
  or the Sword.” So shall it eventually be with us –
  “Joseph Smith or the Sword!”

now understand that in the orwellian LDS church their “ministy of truth” likes to obscure embarassing history. So here is the bibliography of that quote with all of it’s “inadequacies”.

Joseph Smith made this statement at the conclusion of a speech in the public square at Far West, Missouri on October 14, 1838. This particular quote is documented in Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, second edition, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), p. 230–231. Fawn Brodie’s footnote regarding this speech contains valuable information, and follows. “Except where noted, all the details of this chapter [16] are taken from the History of the [Mormon] Church. This speech, however, was not recorded there, and the report given here is based upon the accounts of seven men. See the affidavits of T.B. Marsh, Orson Hyde, George M. Hinkle, John Corrill, W.W. Phelps, Samson Avard, and Reed Peck in Correspondence, Orders, etc., pp. 57–9, 97–129. The Marsh and Hyde account, which was made on October 24, is particularly important. Part of it was reproduced in History of the [Mormon] Church, Vol. III, p. 167. See also the Peck manuscript, p. 80. Joseph himself barely mentioned the speech in his history; see Vol. III, p. 162.”

 

[Sixtus]

chasjohn
New Member
Posts: 27

No amount of discussion or debate will change what you or I believe, so what’s the use?

Chasjohn when I had achieved 27 posts I would have said the same as you. But 900 + later, I have learned a lot and my opinion is somwhat now different

 

[truthsilence]

Thank you! That was very helpful. Thanks also for letting me know that the Catechism can be found online.

chasjohn,

I came across the following link through a website called “The Coming Home Network”. chnetwork.org/

It looks like a fair and comprehensive comparison between Catholic and LDS beliefs, using the Catechism and LDS teaching manuals.

comparing-views.com/ss/compare.htm

God Bless.

 

[Allweather]

Perhaps this article is a little more “reader friendy” on the subject of the Apostacy:
fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2004_Apostasy.html

OK, a little more comment on the Roger Keller article at the FAIR site you linked us to (above) and which I am finally reading. I have already made the comment earlier that Mr. Keller appears to be rather furiously backpedaling from typical Mormon understanding of the apostasy. When I say “typical” I am referring to the understandings of Mormons at street level, as well as the Mormon theologian Bruce McConkie.

""I also had the chance to do some zone conferences down in the Jackson Mississippi Mission, right in the heart of the Bible belt. I went into the first one and said, “Okay how many of you know people who are not Latter-day Saints who really know Jesus Christ?” Well a lot of hands went up; these are missionaries, okay? I said “How many of you know people who are not Latter-day Saints who really have the Holy Ghost in their life?” A lot of hands went up. I said okay, so what do you have to teach them? What’s the ‘more’ of Mormonism that you need to help convey? Because they were beginning to realize that God does not limit His work only to the Latter-day Saint community and consequently they were having to struggle with the issue of what is it that I have to say to people who already know the Savior.

""That was the issue and the problem that Flo Beth and I had to wrestle with as we came into the Church because there were a lot of Latter-day Saints who basically gave us the impression that if we would stop believing what we did, they’d teach us what was right. **And that’s really offensive **to people who know the Lord; or to people who already have had experience with deity under whatever heading or name they may encounter that God.

““So, when we deal with apostasy we’re not dealing with something where suddenly the lights went out, all spiritual light and life went out of the human family in about 100 A.D. and didn’t show back up until somewhere around 1820.””

As we can see from these three paragraphs, Mr. Keller has assumed the tack of the kinder, gentler Mormon church since around 1900, which has made a determined effort to appear mainstream, rather than bizarre, as it did prior to 1900.

He appears to be admitting that there was no UNIVERSAL apostasy, as Bruce McConkie said there was, and as Mormons I’ve met have said there was/is. If there was no UNIVERSAL apostasy, then the Mormon claims that there was, are false, which we all knew. This puts a mighty rickety foundation under Mormonism, which is all about Restoration. If there is no need for a Restoration, there is no need for Mormonism, or any of the other Protestant-derived cults which claim an apostasy and a restoration.​

 

[Allweather]

Continuing on with comment on the Keller article provided by chasjohn:

“”…when we talk about apostasy as Latter-day Saints what we should be focusing on first and foremost is this issue of authority because that’s what vanished in 100 A.D. or C.E.

It was the authority to administer the saving ordinances of the gospel and, yes, with that some knowledge vanishes also. But the lights didn’t go out. Any competent historian is not going to use the term “Dark Ages” anymore because they know that while the Germanic invasions of Europe and so on were taking place the Light of Christ, the Light of the gospel was being preserved in the context of the monastic orders there and the lights never went out in the Eastern portion of the empire. The Eastern Orthodox Church was growing and healthy and vital and was sending missionaries out into Russia and other points.

So, it was the “authority to administer the saving ordinances of the gospel” that vanished, but not all of the “knowledge” of the gospel. Well, then, how were the Christians brought to Christ? How were they spiritually fed? Through knowledge? I don’t see how the Catholic Church could have expanded the way it obviously did if there were no Apostolic authority present within it. How could it have survived, intact, for 2k years and going, without the divine protection of God? Maybe Mr. Keller will reveal this later in the article, but so far, I am not finding any evidence of an apostasy, but just some double-talk.​