Mormon shift toward more traditional Christianity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter searcher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Malachi4U:
Catholic math:

1+1+1=1

It’s true and it’s a mystery. It’s the Catholic Trinity.

I never saw the Jesus x Holy Spirit x Father equals one God math till now.

Mormon Math is:

1+1+1=3 gods

1 man x 76 woman = Celestial heavan with lots of new gods for other planets. I guess woman are just baby factories and can never be a god?
This has been a very interesting thread especially for one who is contemplating conversion to Roman Catholicism. But really? the comment on Celestial Heaven and baby factories is unbecoming the general level of intelligence that is being demonstrated by most contributors to this thread. It is also a bit rich for Roman Catholics to debunk fertility and the co-creation of life with God.

The LDS have a childrens song that goes:

When Jesus Christ was baptised
Down in the River Jordan
Three members of the Godhead
Were present there in love.

The Father spoke from Heaven
When Jesus Christ was baptised
The Holy Ghost descended
As gently as a Dove.

Adds up to three distinct beings to me, and very biblical!
 
40.png
tkdnick:
You’re right. Nowhere in that chapter does it say anything about priests. And I made no claims about priests. However, you said “To me this says that there are men who for no fault of their own ca n not marry or produce children.” And yet, one verse says “and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” This verse means that there are those who have made the decision not to marry and have children (they chose it). That means it can’t be through “no fault of their own”. And they did so for “the kingdom of heaven’s sake”. That means, what they did was a good thing. They sacrificed marriage and children for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Using an English-Greek Biblical lexicon, here are some definitions of “eunuch”: one naturally incapacitated 1) for marriage 2) begetting children; one who voluntarily abstains from marriage. Most versions specifically say eunuchs, however, here are some other translations:

KJV Version: “and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
NIV Version: “and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven.”
NLT Version: “and some choose not to marry for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven.”
NAB Version: “Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven”
Sorry to be sticking my oar in again but I thought I would respond to this one.

The Bible in English is at best an interpretation and NOT the infallible word of God. So also is the Book of Mormon an interpretation/translation of the plates given to Joseph Smith! I often wonder what some tehologians would come up with if they had done the job of bringing this remarkable thing to the world!

Rather it behoves each individual to so live as to be able to receive divine inspiration personally through the medium of the Holy Spirit. One of the attractions of the Mormon and Roman Catholic Churches is the idea that we do not rely wholly upon the Bible which is often wrested by crafty and designing individuals, but upon inspiration. Inspiration, may I add, that is personal and not to be foisted upon the faithless, ignorant or feckless.

If the LDS Church chooses to jettison some of the more fantastic ideas of the 19th. Century American frontier then good for them. I suggest the Roman Catholic Church does the same for some of the teachings as described in the contributions above.

If I were to convert to the RCC please do not expect me to swallow some of the stuff that was thought up in the Dark Ages.

Salvation is through believing that Jesus Christ is the Beloved Son of God and the promised Messiah of the Jewish Scriptures; who taught that we should love one another, even the least amongst us, and be ONE with each other as He is ONE with the Father
 
I’ve been reading a book on masons published by TAN which has some quotes from prominent masons on what they believe. it was surprisingly close to the “old” mormon doctrine of how God use to be man in the king follet discourse. in the book, this mason said that God is really man. i’ve heard that joe smith was heavily influenced by masonry when he made up mormonism.

another blunder of joe smith’s BOM is in etymology, or the origin words. for instance, every name in the bible and english language means something, like issac meaning laughter. the word mormon supposedly comes from the english word “more” and the egyptian word “mon” for good!!??? what is the etymology of the BOM words such as moroni, kolob, lamanites, and jaredites and nephi? it’s obvious the guy made the words up or took them from the surrounding area -hilarious.
 
oat soda:
what is the etymology of the BOM words such as moroni, kolob, lamanites, and jaredites and nephi? it’s obvious the guy made the words up or took them from the surrounding area -hilarious.
Can’t explain all of these, but…

lamanites - decendents of Laman
jaredites - descendents of Jared
 
Asa:

Feel free to “stick your oar” in where ever you want. That’s what these forums are for. I’m not sure really what your post has to do with the discussion about Matthew 19 and priests being celibate. Maybe you could explain some more.
 
BJ Colbert:
God didn’t write the Catechism…did He? Why do you need it when you have God’s word? The Bible. As you say it is the one and only word you need and none other should be accepted or written, or added to it. Catholics do not change God’s word they just add whatever suits their purpose to God’s word, and call it God’s word
We’re not saying that the CCC was but neither was the Bible. God didn’t write the bible. It was written by men inspired by God. Do you accept the Bible as the word of God? Why can’t you accept the men who we’re inspired by God that put it together? Why can’t you accept the Church that they belonged to?
BJ Colbert:
Point out in your Bible where it says priests should be celibate, where does it say women should become nuns and be celibate?
The Bible does say to multiply and replenish the earth. Why is it a sin for a regular member of the Catholic Church to practice birth control, and not a sin for a priest and nun to deliberately choose not to follow God’s commandments to have children? It seems the priests should be the first to show the way to their parishners by having wives and children, and learning themselves what God wants them to learn. It seems to me they take the easy way out by not having the responsibility of families, and letting the church support them. That to me, seems like committing suicide, to just withdraw from normal life and hide behind the church.
👍 BJ
Don’t confuse discipline with doctrine. But if you want to know why our priest are celibate, they are just following in the footsteps of Jesus. Jesus was celibate. You wouldn’t deny that would you? How about Paul? Paul was celibate. Paul even exhorted celibacy for he thought of it as better. Are you’re wondering where I got this? In the Bible. Look up these passages: 1 Corithians 7:1,8,28,32-34
Matt 19 : 12

Birth control is something that is harmful to a womans body and also to the baby if she is pregnant. According to Dr. Bogomir Kuhar, in Infant Homicides Through Contraceptives, these forms of birth control take an estimated 8.1 to 12.75 million lives each year in the US alone(from omsoul.com). At any rate, does your church allow contraception? I do know that the LDS accepts abortion in some cases. Another LDS church teaching that was change in 1992.
 
Asa Ben Judah:
If I were to convert to the RCC please do not expect me to swallow some of the stuff that was thought up in the Dark Ages.
What stuff in the Dark Ages? Can you name them?
Asa Ben Judah:
Salvation is through believing that Jesus Christ is the Beloved Son of God and the promised Messiah of the Jewish Scriptures; who taught that we should love one another, even the least amongst us, and be ONE with each other as He is ONE with the Father
Can you find faith alone or scripture alone is what you need for salvation in the bible? I don’t think so.
 
40.png
tkdnick:
Asa:

Feel free to “stick your oar” in where ever you want. That’s what these forums are for. I’m not sure really what your post has to do with the discussion about Matthew 19 and priests being celibate. Maybe you could explain some more.
It is a beautiful thing to give one’s whole life to God and being able to draw closer to our Heavenly Father, however, it is also a beautiful thing to fulfil ones measure of creation and therefore priestly celibacy, and the scriptures used to justify it are overemphasised as a state of blessedness in the RCC. A priest can just as must exercise bodily discipline, service, and devotion as a married person. as Paul said “it is better to mary than to burn”. The priesthood should not be an elitist state denied to talented and spirtual men who are unable to meet the unatural discipline of celibacy.

I also beleive that the requirement for priestly celibacy was enforced much later than the time the Gospel according to Matthew was compiled and has always been a challenge rather than a blessing to the church.

I think some of the ideas around Marian theology are difficult to accept, She is not the Mother of God but is the Mother of the Son of God. Teaching regarding Mary’s sinlessness and assumption and perpetual virginity are distractions from the important truths regarding the gift of the Holy Messiah.

Honestly, I love the RCC in many aspect this church seems to offer me an opportunity to find a depth of spirituality that is often lacking elsewhere. I do not, therefore, wish to embark upon a pointless debate about secondary matters.

Finally the thread is about Mormons moving toward a closer affinity with mainstream Christianity which requires a little house keeping on some of the more specualtive doctrines they hold, all I am arguing for is a reciprocal gesture from the RCC. I am minded of Josiah’s reform here.

I Love You…
 
40.png
gryskull:
We’re not saying that the CCC was but neither was the Bible. God didn’t write the bible. It was written by men inspired by God. Do you accept the Bible as the word of God? Why can’t you accept the men who we’re inspired by God that put it together? Why can’t you accept the Church that they belonged to?
What??? I understand what you were trying to say, but your wording causes confusion. The Bible was written by God…in that, the Holy Spirit inspired the authors to write what they wrote. The Bible was “God-breathed”. The people who put the Bible together were totally inspired by God. The Holy Spirit guided them to the truth of which books belonged and which didn’t. If there were no inspiration then we could not be sure that what they chose to put in the Bible was true.
 
Asa Ben Judah:
It is a beautiful thing to give one’s whole life to God and being able to draw closer to our Heavenly Father, however, it is also a beautiful thing to fulfil ones measure of creation and therefore priestly celibacy, and the scriptures used to justify it are overemphasised as a state of blessedness in the RCC. A priest can just as must exercise bodily discipline, service, and devotion as a married person. as Paul said “it is better to mary than to burn”. The priesthood should not be an elitist state denied to talented and spirtual men who are unable to meet the unatural discipline of celibacy.

I also beleive that the requirement for priestly celibacy was enforced much later than the time the Gospel according to Matthew was compiled and has always been a challenge rather than a blessing to the church.
Ah. Got it now. I don’t know a great deal about the history of the priesthood. I do know that there have been various times of married priests and celibate priests. We are currently in a time of celibate priests. It is possible (possible, though likely not probable in my mind) that The Church could go back to married priests. And in fact, there are a couple of rare ways to become a priest and be married right now. I do not see a problem with celibate priests. In fact, I believe it takes an extremely holy, strong, special, man to give up “wordly” things in order to shepherd God’s flock. There are plenty of vocations for married people. The deaconate is a special one that I also hold in high esteem.
 
40.png
tkdnick:
I believe it takes an extremely holy, strong, special, man to give up “wordly” things in order to shepherd God’s flock. There are plenty of vocations for married people. The deaconate is a special one that I also hold in high esteem.
Yes it does and there have been some truly inspired and holy men who have been able to live a life of preistly celibacy but remember that what makes it so is the indwellng grace of the Holy Spirit and that charism is available to married men too. Otherwise God would be a respecter of persons.

On the other hand there have been priests who have broken their vows of celibacy and in their evil desires brought the unbelief, wrath and scorn of the world upon the church.

In the UK some married priests who were unable to accept the ordination of women into the Anglican priesthood were indeed received into the RCC and are serving just as well as those brethren who are not married.

Let me reassure others who are reading this thread that I do not believe as does some LDS do that those who live unmarried and celebate lives, sanctified by the Holy Spirit, clergy or laity, will not find full felicity in the Celestial Kingdom of our Heavenly Father.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ…”
 
40.png
gryskull:
Don’t confuse discipline with doctrine. But if you want to know why our priest are celibate, they are just following in the footsteps of Jesus. Jesus was celibate. You wouldn’t deny that would you? How about Paul? Paul was celibate. .
Amongst some very eminent theologians and exegecists there is doubt about the celibacy of Christ and his relationship to the Beloved Disciple who has been identified by some as Miriam of Magdala.

St.Paul confessed his celebacy so no reason to doubt that.

Nevertheless, what is IMPORTANT is not the issue of celibacy or virginity or anything other than whether or not Jesus of Nazareth is indeed the Messiah promised and prophesied in the Jewish scriptures. Our Jewish Brethren and Sisters, may Our Lord Bless them, have been unable to accept this joyful truth as proclaimed by the Apostles and therefore are as at the present moment without the saving grace of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Although I beleive John Paull II has stated that they do not need to confess Christ as it is required for Gentile believers.
 
Asa Ben Judah:
Amongst some very eminent theologians and exegecists there is doubt about the celibacy of Christ and his relationship to the Beloved Disciple who has been identified by some as Miriam of Magdala.
The only place I have ever heard this is in the DaVinci Code. Everything else I have ever seen states that John was the beloved disciple.
 
Asa Ben Judah:
Yes it does and there have been some truly inspired and holy men who have been able to live a life of preistly celibacy but remember that what makes it so is the indwellng grace of the Holy Spirit and that charism is available to married men too. Otherwise God would be a respecter of persons.

On the other hand there have been priests who have broken their vows of celibacy and in their evil desires brought the unbelief, wrath and scorn of the world upon the church.

In the UK some married priests who were unable to accept the ordination of women into the Anglican priesthood were indeed received into the RCC and are serving just as well as those brethren who are not married.
I agree with everything you said. Yes, there are priests who have broken their vows and caused disgrace. I have no doubt that that problem would go away just because we let them get married. There would still be priests who would break their vows and disgrace The Church in those instances either. Sadly, I think the problem will always exist no matter what way The Churc goes. It is a part of man’s fallen nature.
 
40.png
tkdnick:
I agree with everything you said. Yes, there are priests who have broken their vows and caused disgrace. I have no doubt that that problem would go away just because we let them get married…

…It is a part of man’s fallen nature.
It is the business of the RC Church to determine, not mine, the qualifications of those who take up Holy Orders, it is just my humble opinion that a man can be just as holy and consecrated within the married state; the issue relating to celibacy is a historical/traditional one in which it is hard for the church to let go.

This is probably the root of the question or should I say myth about Mormons shifting toward a more traditional Christian position, they are not. There are certain fundamental teachings within the LDS community that are non-negotiable, therefore, it is unlikely that the shift will be anything more that perhaps a token gesture. The truth of the matter is that the LDS church is NOT a Christian church if its teaching on God and Jesus Christ are to be stood up against the ‘traditional’ paradigm for Christ and God within the mainstream. And of course this is why I am struggling over which side of the fence I should stand.

When I first began my association with Mormons everything was simple, over the years I have discvered that things are not simple, on the contrary things are weighty.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind as to the priority of the R.C.C. over the Protestant melange, this is why the encylical Ecclesia de Eucharistia and the Declaration “DOMINUS IESUS” on the unicity and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church have had such a profound effect upon my thinking in recent years.

It might well be impossible for me to escape from this state of Limbo. We must have faith - pray for me!
 
Does THIS sound Christian to you?

carm.org/lds/lds_doctrines.htm

MOTHER GODDESS? GOD WAS A HUMAN FROM ANOTHER PLANET? GOD HAD A FATHER??? GOD HAD INTERCOURSE WITH MARY? (shed die from that. man cannot look upon the face of Yahweh and live neverless have sexual relations with him, UGHHH) MORMONS CAN BECOME GODS?

What blashphemy is this?
 
40.png
Chazemataz:
MOTHER GODDESS? GOD WAS A HUMAN FROM ANOTHER PLANET? GOD HAD A FATHER??? GOD HAD INTERCOURSE WITH MARY? (shed die from that. man cannot look upon the face of Yahweh and live neverless have sexual relations with him, UGHHH) MORMONS CAN BECOME GODS?

What blashphemy is this?
My dear friend, or should I say antagonist, I don’t know where you picked up this claptrap but I would like to air a few thoughts that arise from it.

The way of The Worldly is to treat those who are perceived as a threat unfairly, and often with aggression and hostility. Whatever the LDS doctrine/hypothesis might be regarding the nature of God, the Heavens that He rules, and the processes that are used to bring to pass His divine will deserve to be examined in a climate of informed intelligence and mutual respect.

I believe that the rules of this forum are to not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda; your agenda is to say the least crude and facile and totally unbecoming a Catholic Christian who is comfortable with their faith.

For those who are interested in knowing the TRUTH about Mormon teaching I suggest they look elsewhere perhaps www.lds.org. There is plenty of misinformation, invective and abusive diatribe about Mormons and Roman Catholics on the WWW do we really want it here.

“I and the Father are one.”

The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.

Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?”

The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out {to be} God.”

Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I SAID, YOU ARE GODS’?

"If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),

do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

"If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;

but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father." (John 10:30-38)
 
Asa Ben Judah:
“I and the Father are one.”

The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.

Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?”

The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out {to be} God.”

Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I SAID, YOU ARE GODS’?

"If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),

do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

"If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;

but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father." (John 10:30-38)

After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god, (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pages 345-347, 354.)

Read Exodus 20:2-3 : I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. YOU SHALL NOT HAVE ANY GODS BEFORE ME.

I swear on my heart that I would treat it with respect if it did not claim to be based on the Christian religion and beleive in the Bible, and the title of this were not “Mormon shift toward more traditional Chrsitianity?”

And, you quoted that wrong. It says Is it not written in your law, 'I have said, you are God’s" . Notice that it has an ’ on it, signifying possession. Why would God contradict His own word? It is written numerous times that Yahweh is the ONLY God. He tells no lies. He is Truth. He never lies to His followers.

God, mother goddess
There is a mother god, (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443.)
God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children, (Mormon Doctrine p. 516.)

It is a common Mormon beleif that Mother Goddess was not included in His word because God loved her so much that He could not stand to see her blasphemied. Where is there proof of that? You may as well say, too, that God had a magical pet hampster named Greg whom had 10000 eyes that He loved so much that He couldnt include him in the bible for fear of him being blashpemied. Again, Exodus 22:2-3

God the Father had a Father, (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 476; Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 19; Milton Hunter, First Council of the Seventy, Gospel through the Ages, p. 104-105.)
Yet another anti-christian Mormon beleif is the thought that God had a father. The Father had a Father? Revelation 2:17:

When I caught sight of him I fell down at his feet as though dead. He touched me with his right hand and said: “There is nothing to fear. I AM THE FIRST AND THE LAST.” There was nobody before Him, and there shall be nobody after Him.

Also read yet again Exodus 22:2-3.
God used to be a man on another planet, Mormon Doctrine, p. 321. Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, Vol 5, pp. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol 2, p. 345, Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333.)
“The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s…” (D&C 130:22).
God is in the form of a man, (Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 3.)
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345
God resides near a star called Kolob, (Pearl of Great Price, pages 34-35; Mormon Doctrine, p. 428.)

What? A man from another planet? Ill run out of room trying to rebuke this one. On to more Mormon teachings in the next post.
 
The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man.” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35.)
“Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God [anyhow]–three in one and one in three. . .It is curious organization… All are crammed into one God according to sectarianism (Christian faith). It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God–he would be a giant or a monster.” (Joseph Smith, Teachings, 372).

Guess where I will refer you to? Yes, Exodus 22:2-3. There is only ONE,1,UNO,SINGLE,ONLY God.
That last statement is almost laughable. We cannot understand God. What, does this Joseph Smith think that God is attached and is huge and gigantic? Wherever does it say that God is 10000 feet tall? How do we know that He is not only a fraction of a millimeter long? And second, God IS 3 different beings: The Holy Spirit, The Father, and the Son, 3 different bodies possesed by 1 God.
There, does that help clear things up about this “claptrap” and where I got it? Read your doctrines more carefully next time. And trust the:bible1: more than the BoM.
The book of Mormon is more correct than the Bible, (History of the Church, 4:461.) Didnt Joeseph Smith base his book on the Bible? That would be just like saying the magaziene article about George Bush is more accurate than just asking him things about his life.

Tell me if I got something wrong or misunderstood please. Thank you, sorry if I hurt you or anyone else’s feelings. 🙂
 
Item # 460 of the Catechism adopted at the Vatican II council reads:

The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature:” “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”

This sounds pretty close to the LDS doctrine to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top