Mormon straw men

[teancum79]

actually examples abound of the BoM contradicting LDS practices and teachings as well as the D&C. they include but are not limited to the nature of God (trinity, plurality of Gods), polygamy, role of the temple, addressing prayers to jesus, etc.

Well I’ve yet to find one. And yes I’ve done a fair bit of looking. If one where to look through the Bible looking for two verses that can be made to contradict each other it hardly takes any time at all. The same can be done with almost any large document. Ever look at some common creeds? Now I’m sure many here would argue and quite rightly that if one understands the whole the small parts which others might want to call a contradiction are in fact in agreement. The same is true of LDS doctrine it is not self contradictory. Yes it differs a great deal from many more traditional views and we understand many parts of the Bible differently thats fine, but that does not mean that we changed our doctrine or that our beliefs and scriptures contradict each other.

 

[zerinus]

I understand. I was not aware that Mormons had an understanding of sacraments. Which ones do you acknowledge?

All, and a whole bunch more!

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

All, and a whole bunch more!

zerinus

Can you list them or point me to them?

 

[Jerusha]

Can you list them or point me to them?

----and describe what happens in terms of ritual when they take place?

 

[teancum79]

----and describe what happens in terms of ritual when they take place?

D&C 20:
72 Baptism is to be administered in the following manner unto all those who repent—
73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
74 Then shall he immerse him or her in the water, and come forth again out of the water.
75 It is expedient that the church meet together often to partake of bread and wine in the remembrance of the Lord Jesus;
76 And the elder or priest shall administer it; and after this manner shall he administer it—he shall kneel with the church and call upon the Father in solemn prayer, saying:
77 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him and keep his commandments which he has given them; that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.
78 The manner of administering the wine—he shall take the cup also, and say:
79 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

(Note a latter revelation authorized the use of water instead of wine )

Currently in most places I’ve been there are baptism founts (more or less a large bath tub) which are used for baptisms. These save the trouble of finding a river or lake and are much more convenient in the winter.

There is also the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. These would be the most common sacraments (though we don’t often call them that I’m not really sure why).

I think that covers the bulk of it. We also have ordinances done in temples, but I do not discuss that pearl unless I’m assured of a swine free environment which discussion boards are not.

 

[ralphinal]

D&C 20:
72 Baptism is to be administered in the following manner unto all those who repent—
73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
74 Then shall he immerse him or her in the water, and come forth again out of the water.
75 It is expedient that the church meet together often to partake of bread and wine in the remembrance of the Lord Jesus;
76 And the elder or priest shall administer it; and after this manner shall he administer it—he shall kneel with the church and call upon the Father in solemn prayer, saying:
77 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him and keep his commandments which he has given them; that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.
78 The manner of administering the wine—he shall take the cup also, and say:
79 O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them; that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen.

(Note a latter revelation authorized the use of water instead of wine )

Currently in most places I’ve been there are baptism founts (more or less a large bath tub) which are used for baptisms. These save the trouble of finding a river or lake and are much more convenient in the winter.

There is also the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. These would be the most common sacraments (though we don’t often call them that I’m not really sure why).

I think that covers the bulk of it. We also have ordinances done in temples, but I do not discuss that pearl unless I’m assured of a swine free environment which discussion boards are not.

Thank you. I choose to think that I am not swine, but to each his own.

So, wine was called for at first and a later revelation says that water can be used instead. Isn’t this contradicting itself?

 

[majick275]

Well I’ve yet to find one. And yes I’ve done a fair bit of looking. If one where to look through the Bible looking for two verses that can be made to contradict each other it hardly takes any time at all. The same can be done with almost any large document. Ever look at some common creeds? Now I’m sure many here would argue and quite rightly that if one understands the whole the small parts which others might want to call a contradiction are in fact in agreement. The same is true of LDS doctrine it is not self contradictory. Yes it differs a great deal from many more traditional views and we understand many parts of the Bible differently thats fine, but that does not mean that we changed our doctrine or that our beliefs and scriptures contradict each other.

well some of the most obvious ones have been taken care of by simply changing the scriptures but I think if one reads the BoM as a whole you will find a definite context of their being only one God anywhere, ever. further, the God of the BoM appears very orthodox trinitarian in nature. shoot even the testimony of the witnesses invokes the glory be on this pretty much word for word. the BoM places no importance on temple ordinances. (where is baptism for the dead?, endowments?, marriage for time and eternity?) the absence of eternal marriage is very telling in my mind for something claiming to be a restoration as opposed to whole new religion. the BoM has people praying directly to Jesus and if you go through the D&C you will see a completely different church than that of the nephites. there is no need for quote mining just take the two books as a whole. the BoM is the “milk” (looks pretty mainstream protestant) and the D&C is the “meat” (whole new religion bearing little resemblance to anything in the past) of course there is the promise of “stronger” meat in the temple but you won’t find that in any of the LDS scriptures.

 

[zerinus]

Can you list them or point me to them?

We accept all the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church—except that we are more strict abut them than the Catholic Church is. For example, the CC allows baptisms to be performed by a non-priest in an emergency. Even a non-Catholic can perform a Catholic baptism in an emergency. In the LDS Church that is an impossibility. A sacrament can only be performed by an appropriate priesthood holder and there are no possible exceptions. In addition to the seven Catholic sacraments, we recognize other sacraments that the catholic Church des not have. For example, in our Church we have something that is called a “patriarchal blessing”. That is a proper sacrament that can only be performed by an ordained patriarch, which is a specially appointed priesthood office. Another LDS sacrament that you may not have heard of is dedicating a house. Another is dedicating a grave! These are all true sacraments that require priesthood authority to be performed. There may be a few more that I cannot think of right now. In addition to these there are a whole bunch of sacraments that can only be performed in the temples. They include marriage for eternity and baptism for the dead. So we have a whole lot more sacraments than the Catholic Church does.

zerinus

 

[teancum79]

well some of the most obvious ones have been taken care of by simply changing the scriptures but I think if one reads the BoM as a whole you will find a definite context of their being only one God anywhere, ever. further, the God of the BoM appears very orthodox trinitarian in nature. shoot even the testimony of the witnesses invokes the glory be on this pretty much word for word. the BoM places no importance on temple ordinances. (where is baptism for the dead?, endowments?, marriage for time and eternity?) the absence of eternal marriage is very telling in my mind for something claiming to be a restoration as opposed to whole new religion. the BoM has people praying directly to Jesus and if you go through the D&C you will see a completely different church than that of the nephites. there is no need for quote mining just take the two books as a whole. the BoM is the “milk” (looks pretty mainstream protestant) and the D&C is the “meat” (whole new religion bearing little resemblance to anything in the past) of course there is the promise of “stronger” meat in the temple but you won’t find that in any of the LDS scriptures.

The BoM made no specific mention of baptisms for the dead, but as I’ve pointed out the founding concepts that support it are clearly there. Bapistms for the dead only started after Christ’s resurrection you may note that aside from one really long run down on the new law similar to the sermon on the mount the doctrine in the latter parts in rather sparse. Christ visits shows clearly that the trinity is not an accurate idea. concepts of many of the more untraditional doctrines are found in the Bible not the Book of Mormon. We claim both as scripture so thats not really an issue. Regardless of what book the idea is most clear in, there is the idea of revelation God speaking to his chosen prophet. That is the rock that we are not going to removed from and that the gates of hell can not prevail against.

 

[teancum79]

Thank you. I choose to think that I am not swine, but to each his own.

So, wine was called for at first and a later revelation says that water can be used instead. Isn’t this contradicting itself?

I don’t assume swinehood or not, but my experience has taught me that many people on discussion boards have little to no respect for things others consider sacred.

There is not contradiction. At Christ times the drinking of wine was very common in latter times water is much more common drink. I’ve heard, but have not confirmed, that for awhile in Europe when there was no bread available (late WWII era) that potato peals where used instead of bread. There is a big difference between a change in a practice and a contradiction of doctrine.

Catholics used to baptize by immersion. I’ve heard many differing ideas as to why, but now sprinkling in the common method. Such a change does not alter idea behind baptism being impotent just the way it is done. What changes are okay and which ones are not is probably the only real issues separating all Christian denominations.

 

[ibkc]

Catholics used to baptize by immersion. I’ve heard many differing ideas as to why, but now sprinkling in the common method.

Catholics do not “sprinkle.” Baptism is by either pouring or by immersion, which is still common. I know of several parishes in my city with immersion pools.

 

[J_C]

immersion baptism is still practiced in the Cathokic Church.

Either method is acceptable.

I have personally witnessed immersion baptisms in Catholic Church.

 

[teancum79]

okay I had thought the practice had all but vanished (see I’m learning too). I did meet a family once from a particular catholic denomination they made a big deal about immersion baptism (sorry I can’t remember what they called themselves)

 

[ibkc]

okay I had thought the practice had all but vanished (see I’m learning too). I did meet a family once from a particular catholic denomination they made a big deal about immersion baptism (sorry I can’t remember what they called themselves)

There are no “denominations” in the Catholic Church.

 

[Stephen168]

“The case against baptism for the dead is also made by the Mormon scriptures themselves. The current Mormon doctrine on baptism for the dead is quite unlike what Joseph Smith first taught. As in other cases, the Book of Mormon becomes an important tool for the Christian apologist. It contradicts much Mormon theology, and baptism for the dead is no exception.”

As I have been posting this is utterly false. Such a conclusion could only be reached out of ignorance or an attempt to discredit a religious view.

Do you know what the straw man fallacy is?

 

[ralphinal]

We accept all the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church—except that we are more strict abut them than the Catholic Church is. For example, the CC allows baptisms to be performed by a non-priest in an emergency. Even a non-Catholic can perform a Catholic baptism in an emergency. In the LDS Church that is an impossibility. A sacrament can only be performed by an appropriate priesthood holder and there are no possible exceptions. In addition to the seven Catholic sacraments, we recognize other sacraments that the catholic Church des not have. For example, in our Church we have something that is called a “patriarchal blessing”. That is a proper sacrament that can only be performed by an ordained patriarch, which is a specially appointed priesthood office. Another LDS sacrament that you may not have heard of is dedicating a house. Another is dedicating a grave! These are all true sacraments that require priesthood authority to be performed. There may be a few more that I cannot think of right now. In addition to these there are a whole bunch of sacraments that can only be performed in the temples. They include marriage for eternity and baptism for the dead. So we have a whole lot more sacraments than the Catholic Church does.

zerinus

Very cool. I knew that you guys had a priesthood, but I did not know that it went this far. Can you point me to a website where I can learn more?

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t assume swinehood or not, but my experience has taught me that many people on discussion boards have little to no respect for things others consider sacred.

There is not contradiction. At Christ times the drinking of wine was very common in latter times water is much more common drink. I’ve heard, but have not confirmed, that for awhile in Europe when there was no bread available (late WWII era) that potato peals where used instead of bread. There is a big difference between a change in a practice and a contradiction of doctrine.

Catholics used to baptize by immersion. I’ve heard many differing ideas as to why, but now sprinkling in the common method. Such a change does not alter idea behind baptism being impotent just the way it is done. What changes are okay and which ones are not is probably the only real issues separating all Christian denominations.

Decent dodge, but ineffective. Does this mean that 7-up might be allowed one day?

If wine was stated, then water allowed when wine was banned, it is a change in the doctrine. If it is not, please show me why.

Immersion baptism is still accepted and the norm. Sprinkling is not enough, the water must flow freely over the head, so a drop or two won’t work.

 

[twopekinguys]

We accept all the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church—except that we are more strict abut them than the Catholic Church is. For example, the CC allows baptisms to be performed by a non-priest in an emergency. Even a non-Catholic can perform a Catholic baptism in an emergency. In the LDS Church that is an impossibility. A sacrament can only be performed by an appropriate priesthood holder and there are no possible exceptions. In addition to the seven Catholic sacraments, we recognize other sacraments that the catholic Church des not have. For example, in our Church we have something that is called a “patriarchal blessing”. That is a proper sacrament that can only be performed by an ordained patriarch, which is a specially appointed priesthood office. Another LDS sacrament that you may not have heard of is dedicating a house. Another is dedicating a grave! These are all true sacraments that require priesthood authority to be performed. There may be a few more that I cannot think of right now. In addition to these there are a whole bunch of sacraments that can only be performed in the temples. They include marriage for eternity and baptism for the dead. So we have a whole lot more sacraments than the Catholic Church does.

zerinus

You realize that within the Catholic church, we “bless” graves, and houses.

Sacraments within the Catholic church are not conferred on inanimate objects.

 

[zerinus]

Very cool. I knew that you guys had a priesthood, but I did not know that it went this far. Can you point me to a website where I can learn more?

Another LDS sacrament that I just remembered is “blessing and naming of babies”. I guess that is roughly equivalent to your “christening”. I don’t know what the exact procedure is for Christening in the Catholic Church. I know in the Anglican Church baptism and christening are one and the same thing. Maybe in the Catholic Church they are two different things. In the LDS Church, however, they are completely different things, and it is a proper sacrament that can only be performed by a priesthood holder–usually the father of the child, or a close relative.

I haven’t found an official place on the Internet where all of the LDS sacraments are listed.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

You realize that within the Catholic church, we “bless” graves, and houses.

Sacraments within the Catholic church are not conferred on inanimate objects.

To us a sacrament (we call them ordinances, but they mean the same things) is not something that is “conferred” on somebody or something. We call any rite that requires the authority of the Priesthood to be performed a sacrament.

When you administer the sacrament of the Eucharist, the bread and wine that you bless or consacrate are inanimate objects, arn’t they?

zerinus