T
teancum79
Guest
hum funny the secular history I studied at a stat funded school had a take on the catholic churhc that most here would label anti-catholic.
- Status
M
majick275
Guest
no we are pretty cognizant of all the historical issues with the catholic church and are willing to openly discuss them. of course the origin lies in the new testament. LDS sources (the ones that haven’t been altered in recent years at least) are an excellent source of LDS history. you can see quite a lot from those alone. no need to go to “antimormon” sources. i would counter that the mormons are the ones that seem bent on embellishing the faith promoting stories and doing away with the pesky facts. boyd k packer leading the charge with his infamous criticism of historians. one of the problems is that mormonism really doesn’t have much historical basis to work with. it’s scriptures only exist in modern american form with no relics of it’s alleged past. it claims a heritage that has yet to be discovered anywhere. it claims to be a restoration thus implying a close level of conformity to the original yet we see no evidence of uniquely mormon doctrines or practices in the early christian church. we do not see it in the bible and strangely don’t even see it in the BoM. mormonism is one man’s claim to be a prophet and his accusation that the rest of the world was so apostate that only he could return sacramental grace to it. yet when we see all that God before we do not see this as even possible. joseph gives us no reason to believe in his improbable message either. this appears a personality cult that was so surprisingly successful that it had to change on the fly and reinvent itself multiple times to adapt to it’s increasing base. it benefited greatly from a time of isolation under BY in which it became a distinct culture capable of sustainable internal growth. otherwise it would have faded away like the shakers. it is similar to the SDA’s or JW’s in that respect. (although they didn’t have the benefit of their own country) mormonism has tried very hard to distance itself from it’s past in order to rebrand itself to compete in these modern times. problem is it’s too easy to now to see the facts and it cannot escape it’s past. it’s own claims to direct face to face revelation as answers to questions condemns it to be judged by it’s previous doctrines and practices as well as the present. it cannot repudiate it’s mistakes and thus is hoist on it’s petard. it’s growth is a myth now despite an aggressive sales force and very savvy marketing. it has minimal convert retention and few convert baptisms to begin with. it’s core members keep it afloat with high birth rates but even these are now starting to leave as they can no longer escape the truth. the cultural mormons are probably the only ones left that can be counted on to stay. like all heresies this too shall pass. as to individual mormons…it’s not too late, repent and be baptized.
M
majick275
Guest
which school? utah or utah state?
I
ibkc
Guest
Yes, that was how I was educated, too. That was the spin on historical facts taken. It still doesn’t change the fact that the history being taught was true, and verifiable. The Catholic Church has been around for coming up on 2,000 years now. Its beliefs, its development, its practices, and the people involved in it all really existed. Compare to the history taught by the LDS church, which involves people and events that cannot be shown to have happened, or even to have been possible.
T
teancum79
Guest
Last I check most of the OT is not verifiable and few if any of Christs miracles are considered possible. This is one of those double standard problems. Most though not all of the CC history has been under the exclusive control of the CC. That does not make is objective.
M
majick275
Guest
actually we can verify much of the OT. we may not verify individual people but we can sure see the civilizations and the evidence of their cultures. the CC history has had it’s detractors all along and once again we can see physical evidence. we have many of the old writings and artifacts. we have historical accounts of our interactions with other groups from their side. this is independent evidence. mormonism rests solely on the word of joseph smith. that’s not a double standard at all.
T
teancum79
Guest
The LDS do use the teachings of JS a lot, but out trust is in God. Many of our events can also be verified by others, but which version of the popes do you think is correct servants of God or evil dictators ?
I’ll wager that the opponents of the CC would choose the latter. The way we view events matters a lot. Many of the CC’s facts are in dispute as to their meaning. That you’ve got some nice old buildings is clear, but where they built by loving devoted people or by slave labor comes down to how things are viewed.
M
majick275
Guest
your trust is that joseph smith gave you god’s word. if he was false then you have nothing. what events can e verified by any non-mormons? that nauvoo existed? i’ll give you that. but what about BoM events? BoA translation? the events are critical if they are doctrinally significant. JS must be correct in his assertion that god commanded polygamy or else he is a wominzer who altered church doctrine to justify it. popes who acted badly did not change doctrine. in fact no pope has changed doctrine. some have behaved quite badly. to answer your question, it depends on which pope. many were servants of God and some were evil dictators. some of our buildings were made by loving devoted followers and some were made by forced labor of exploited peoples subjugated by catholic opportunists. the difference is the catholic church didn’t change it’s doctrine and it has always been evil to do these things. individual catholics even popes have sinned mightily and have done so in the name of the church and have gotten away with heinous acts (on earth at least) but we can look back and see they were wrong and they knew then they were wrong. what is right and wrong hasn’t changed.
T
teancum79
Guest
Well you are the first person here that I’ve run into who openly admits that the CC has not been saintly 100% of the time. I do appreciate that honesty (its kind of rare).
Here is the thing with JS. A lot of the accusatoins of his “womanizing” are subject. That he had more than one wife is clear . The other information however is not. That plural marriages happened in the OT is clear. The CC tends to see it a sin forgiven while the LDS see it (in some, but not all cases) as a commandment of God kept.
If JS did not in fact see God and Christ and was not doing their will when he translated the BoM and organized the church than yeah I’m in a whole lot of trouble, but I know that he did. I’m not trusting JS to really be anything more than Moses or Peter, but I also don’t view him as any less.
M
majick275
Guest
moses had alot of history to work with and was leading an existing church. Peter was one of at least 12 who was personally taught and mentored by god incarnate. that’s a bit of a difference. as to JS polygamy let’s just go with LDS scriptures and LDS records. we know he had more than one wife and that some were underage and some legally married to other men. we also know that at that time and for many years afterwards the D&C had a section that stated that polygamy was a crime and that LDS did not practice it. obviously that scripture was a lie. section 133 didn’t get put in the book until much later and then the contradictory section was removed. (without a vote BTW) even the BoM condemns polygamy. section 132 is problematic in it’s doctrine. we know the doctrine by the way in which LDs prophets have spoken on it and the practices they directed as a result. polygamy and eternal marriage are linked forever and in a mormon celestial kingdom the only marriages will be polygynous ones. those who cold not practice it on earth get their plural wives during the millenium and get the sealings all done and go on to exaltation. this is not the teaching anywhere in the bible (or boM) in fact it directly contradicts what jesus said on marriage. mormon exaltation REQUIRES marriage. jesus spoke very clearly that he does not. he praises those who give up marriage for the kingdom of god. JS hastily threw this doctrine together, hiding it while he could to indulge his lust. even DC132 shows emma wasn’t on board with it and that it was already going on. the temple ceremony did not exist in kirtland. the temple there was used in a wholly different manner like the temples in the BoM. in nauvoo where he was womanizing the temple became a secret society with bloody oaths to keep the folks from spreading his secrets and to get them to go along with the secret “higher learning” (aka further light and knowledge) an interesting read is the salt lake newspapers final interview with william law. he is very objective and he was a counselor in the first presidency when this stuff came to light. he defends joseph against what he thought were rumors and propaganda but indicts him for what caused him to split with joseph. this very doctrine. you can take it with a grain of salt since in your eyes he is an apostate but he sure connects the dots. even without sources like him though we know what was going to be printed in the expositor, we know he illegally ordered it’s destruction, we know he had many wives and who they were, their ages and marital status. we know when the temple ceremony changed. you’d have to do some pretty deep denial, torturous mental gymnastics and still accept cognitive dissonance to get around all the facts. the standard method is to proclaim a testimony often until it is so burned into your brain that you believe it without thinking. then you ignore any doubts, avoid anything that is contrary to it and devote your time to studying faith promoting materials and fellowshipping with others who also have testimonies so that you can strengthen each other. go to the temple often so that you can go through all of that without any interactive learning or discussion and tell yourself that you receive revelations that it’s true.
but yet here you are on a catholic board…where folks who know mormonism inside and out (thus don’t require any questions answered ) and who are here to preach the catholic faith…why is that? God is calling you…i know you hear it. you can pull a jonah if you want…you have your freedom…but you are here because god calls you to his church. repent and be baptized
M
majick275
Guest
when i went through RCIA we talked about the crusades, inquisition, bad popes, even the priest abuse scandals. all were fair game and were dealt with openly and honestly.
T
teancum79
Guest
Lets back up the assumption truck a bit.
First off the BoM is quite clear that God can command plural marriages. Christ never said that their could not be eternal marriage. That idea is a conclusion based on a statement made. Plural marriage unless commanded by God is a big sin. So is killing people. I will not profess to know every bit of who said what and when but I have found a large number of inaccuracies in the statements made about JS in the past so naturally view more of the same with caution. The whole under age bit is pointless beacuse “underage” marriages legal and not unheard of. I’m not even going to get into the finer points of plural marriage hare. As to the news paper its destruction was not inconsistent with the laws of the time.
The reason I’m here is to protest the disinformation about my faith that is so common and to better understand the CC’s position on issues. I have a few times misrepresented the belief systems of others. It was done in honest ignorance, but given that I dislike my faith being misrepresented I’m attempted to better understand others so that I do not make the same mistakes again.
As to God church calling me I’ve heard the call and serve quite activity.
B
Benadam
Guest
**I agree Teancum, misrepresenting another’s faith is a serious matter. Please do correct me if i do that.
**LUKE 20
34 And Jesus said to them: The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: **35 But they that shall be accounted worthy of that world, and of the resurrection from the dead, shall neither be married, nor take wives. **
At this time Jesus also teaches that the reason for marriage is to reproduce and the reason we reproduce is** because we die.**
I find Mormon theology curiously void of an eternal perspective. The vision of reality constructed by Mormonism isn’t able to resolve the concept of God as eternal being who always was. Joseph Smith doesn’t seem to be in the sight of that God.
T
teancum79
Guest
I’m not going to look it up just yet, but as I recall Christ was telling off some twits who where not trying to learn simply trap him.
I believe he stated that in the resurrection people would not be getting married. That is quite different from when we are resurrected no one will be allowed to stay married.
I believe he stated that in the resurrection people would not be getting married. That is quite different from when we are resurrected no one will be allowed to stay married.
B
Benadam
Guest
Jesus was refering to what He often refered too as the ‘next life’ And the Saduccees didn’t believe in the Resurection nor Angels.
T
teancum79
Guest
They are asking him a question about the resurrection which they don’t buy into in the first place and he kindly tells them to take a hike. To assume that answer encompasses all passable after life issues relating to marriage is nuts.
M
majick275
Guest
i would say the one sentence in the BoM you are referring to is a real stretch to use as justification.
i think he was pretty clear, certainly
more clear than what you assert is boM justification of polygamy.
where did you see it commanded in the OT? early LDS history indicates some rather global “commanding of it.”
as do i. much of the inaccuracy is in whitewashed LDS manuals. i have seen the manuals change over the years enough to see downright blatant revisionist history.
but we know what was common and what was considered appropriate and 14 is reason for alarm.
why not and please!!! a mayor orders a newspaper destroyed? maybe in stalinist russia but not in the US at that time. do you even know what charges he was brought to carthage on?
and you have yet to show any disinformation here and furthermore why here when there are so many places with obvious disinformation on them? why would you care if catholics said inaccurate things about mormons on a mormon site? do you go to chinese sites and correct their misconceptions of americans? that’s weak and you know it… there is a reason why you are at this site at this time.
like what? you have yet to inquire about catholic positions on issues. you cam as a missionary. i merely point out the way that God that turns our efforts to a path enabling what’s best for us. you are called.listen…
see above. i’m not buying it.
and yet here you are…quite a lot…i contend you haven’t understood the call yet and are serving that which is false. you still have time to make it right. repent and be baptized
T
teancum79
Guest
Aren’t we full of ourselves. Check some of the post I’ve started. It is also rather informative to read what others say.
You apparently aren’t getting it so I’ll be blunt. I’m not Catholic and I never will be catholic. I can read the bible the CC is not even close to what Christ set up.
None of your misinformation about my church’s history or leaders will change that.
You apparently aren’t getting it so I’ll be blunt. I’m not Catholic and I never will be catholic. I can read the bible the CC is not even close to what Christ set up.
None of your misinformation about my church’s history or leaders will change that.
B
Benadam
Guest
Jesus slam dunked their construct of reality by refuting the beliefs that support them.
Teancum, They were trying to stump Him about the resurrection . The Sadducees believed that through memory preserved by patristic traditions they could possess immortality. They didn’t believe in the afterlife or heaven as such. Now bringing up plural marriage as a means of stumping Jesus’ teaching of the resurrection offered Jesus the opportunity of exposing their error with a revelation of truth about the resurrection and marriage. Your beliefs line up more with the Saduccees in that you extend the earthly order of ‘becoming’ into the ‘changeless’ order of eternity. There is no reason to reproduce our kind where there is no death. We reproduce our kind because our earthly lives end.
M
majick275
Guest
i have read every post. i get it. saul of tarsus said the same thing. your perception is colored by mormon dismissal of the bible as “not translated correctly” and the fact that JS claimed a restoration. the catholic church is easily shown to be the same doctrinally as it was in the age of the apostles. who do you think assembled and preserved the Bible?
i’ll be blunt back, i have yet to give any misinformation and you have yet to show any. no one here is going to become mormon and your attempts to spin and misdirect will not fool anyone. we are well acquainted with the mormon practice of lying for the lord. paul dunn? original D&C? JS talking to Emma about his other wives? the one truly “full of themselves” is the one claiming some need to come here and correct the information catholic answers has about mormons. at best you’re tilting at windmills. ( no one here is gonna drink the koolaid and we have a strong record of showing proof for our claims). CA is not going to change it’s library either. worst case you are preaching the heresies of a false prophet. when you read the bible (since you felt it important to assure us that you can)make sure you pay careful attention to hebrews 1 , matthew 19, 22 , luke 20 and 2peter 2. (of course there’s the chance that weren’t translated correctly or they are missing plain and precious parts) my faith is based on one everlasting omnipotent God who is the only God anywhere ever and has always been fully divine.
- Status