Mormons prefer to prey on which? - Catholics or Protestants?

[zaffiroborant]

Zaffiroborant,
As you had previously noted, such teaching would depend on the source, especially if it is described as “doctrine.” Twelve-year-olds are curious, naturally asking questions. I think it is a good thing if a teacher will try and understand beliefs different than their own, and answer questions honestly such as to say, “From what I have understood, their teaching on that particular question is as follows…” Then the student could decide if they wanted to seek more information from a primary source.

But it is a far different thing to teach or present information using biases and words that denigrate such as “brainwashed” or “cult” since they have negative connotations in the world today, generally. (I am not implying that you in particular would.) If a teacher thinks their own biases will strongly impact how they answer a question, they ought to at least acknowledge that to a group of students, or say the student should look it up from a primary source, not from a biased source.

I was not trying to imply I would ever attempt to “teach Trinitarian doctrine”–only to be able to answer a potential question with an honest and hopefully fair but somewhat brief answer that reflected an attempt to understand a religion. I think if students hear that a teacher has tried to understand another religion fairly, then they can feel less threatened by the world around them as they come to realize that people have different perspectives and that’s not only acceptable but is a good thing.

You know ParkerD I’m just tire of LDS coming here and telling us we have no business explaining LDS beliefs under any circumstance, and this has been a recurring theme among LDS posters. We are to either refer someone to official LDS info or refrain from explanation. On the other hand it seems allowances are made for you to explain our beliefs. Your wanting to understand and to spread that understanding (which I find commendable) really has no place in this discussion. Is it reasonable for you to explain the Trinity to your 12 year olds, in light if your inability to “get it” but not for me to explain your understanding of God to my 12 year olds. I find the “God was once a man” and we are all eternal intelligences very hard to understand, particularly in light of the many LDS who have written how comforting it is to know that God the Father has gone through the same things as I have and understands because he lived it, in my understanding that puts God the Father as a fallible (read sinful) human being at some point.

If you really want to understand the Trinity then look and read, don’t ask individuals what they think, I’ve seen some pretty out there explanations of LDS beliefs from believers themselves, I’ve also seen arguments between LDS over polygamy and blood atonement.

As Dianaid ( one of the most vocal about the inability, and the inappropriateness of our describing your beliefs) has pointed out some have described our beliefs as Arianism or Sabellianism neither of which is accurate. This could be lack of understanding or inability to articulate adequately either way you are not getting a true picture of our belief.

Like I said I’m just tired of the you can’t explain our beliefs, but it is ok for your apostles and ParkerD (sorry) to explain ours. Why is it ok for your apostles to explain and then refute Trinitarian belief but not ok for us to do the same, why is it ok for you to explain my beliefs but not for me to explain yours.

Quite frankly at 12 years old I think sticking to your “all religions have some truth” and the article of faith about the “freedom to worship” that those who don’t believe as you can still bo good people is really all you have to emphasis. Though you may have more trouble in this regard with the WOW and how many LDS regard it.

I do not equate LDS with cult or brainwashing and I don’t use those words in regard to other religions ( though the person with the tapestry in the brainwashed thread does connect those words in a Comedy Central kind of way) but I do want those I’m responsible for to understand that things like Jonestown and the recent close to home multiple home/church shootings do happen and to be on guard for them.

 

[dianaiad]

The two great commandments are that we love God and that we love our neighbor as we do ourselves (Matt. 22:35-40). If being in heaven meant that we could not love others, particularly those who were close to us in this life, then that would mean that we couldn’t fulfill the second great commandment.

Christians believe in the communion of saints, which is the union of all who live in Christ. Because of the communion of saints, we may be assured that we will know and love our family in heaven, even if the relationship with them is not exactly the same as it was on earth.

---

Catechism:

[1024](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/1024.htm’) This perfect life with the Most Holy Trinity - this communion of life and love with the Trinity, with the Virgin Mary, the angels and all the blessed - is called “heaven.” Heaven is the ultimate end and fulfillment of the deepest human longings, the state of supreme, definitive happiness.

I see.

So…here you have specifically stated that everybody will be happy, and everybody will love everybody else, and that our relationship with our families will not be 'exactly the same as it was on earth."

So…we believe that it CAN be exactly the same as it is on earth; our mothers remain our mothers, our fathers remain our fathers, our SPOUSES REMAIN OUR SPOUSES.

Even you, here, in defense of your own beliefs, have admitted that you do not believe that the relationships will be the same. You don’t quite know what they WILL be, and you hope, but you don’t know, and perhaps don’t even think that, they will remain the same. You will love the stranger you have never met exactly the same way you love the man you lived with, suffered with and bore children with.

To me, that means we either lose ourselves completely within a community and have no sense of self, or we are terminally happy—and terminally lonely. Now I am quite aware that this is not how you view it. I’m just giving you my reaction to a heaven where everybody is the same and everybody loves everybody else equally and precisely the same, and all relationships are identical.

We claim that family units can be eternal as specific family units; official ties as well as emotional ones. This does NOT take away the universal joy that everybody is supposed to find in heaven, but adds to it. I don’t think that our basic human need for specific family around us, a specific group of people, will disappear–it’s a very important part of what makes us human, and children of God.

If it were not, why does He couch it that way…we are His Children? Why did He make it so clear that He sent His SON? Why not send a total stranger, or refer to Christ in that manner? Why does God make such a big deal of family, if family is not important in the eternities?

So…we claim that families can be together forever. We do not say ‘we hope so,’ or “leave it to God,” We come out and say so, and show how. It is up to the listener to decide whether we have a point or not.

 

[rinnie]

I see.

So…here you have specifically stated that everybody will be happy, and everybody will love everybody else, and that our relationship with our families will not be 'exactly the same as it was on earth."

So…we believe that it CAN be exactly the same as it is on earth; our mothers remain our mothers, our fathers remain our fathers, our SPOUSES REMAIN OUR SPOUSES.

Even you, here, in defense of your own beliefs, have admitted that you do not believe that the relationships will be the same. You don’t quite know what they WILL be, and you hope, but you don’t know, and perhaps don’t even think that, they will remain the same. You will love the stranger you have never met exactly the same way you love the man you lived with, suffered with and bore children with.

To me, that means we either lose ourselves completely within a community and have no sense of self, or we are terminally happy—and terminally lonely. Now I am quite aware that this is not how you view it. I’m just giving you my reaction to a heaven where everybody is the same and everybody loves everybody else equally and precisely the same, and all relationships are identical.

We claim that family units can be eternal as specific family units; official ties as well as emotional ones. This does NOT take away the universal joy that everybody is supposed to find in heaven, but adds to it. I don’t think that our basic human need for specific family around us, a specific group of people, will disappear–it’s a very important part of what makes us human, and children of God.

If it were not, why does He couch it that way…we are His Children? Why did He make it so clear that He sent His SON? Why not send a total stranger, or refer to Christ in that manner? Why does God make such a big deal of family, if family is not important in the eternities?

So…we claim that families can be together forever. We do not say ‘we hope so,’ or “leave it to God,” We come out and say so, and show how. It is up to the listener to decide whether we have a point or not.

But see again thats the problem you say that you believe that relationships can be EXACTLY as they are on earth and the listener is to decide if you have a point or not.

Or Not. Thats the problem. Why Because again like many of your beliefs scripture contradicts it point blank, let me show you and then you can explain to me how you could be right. Here it is.

Luke 20:34 Jesus said to them the children of this age marry and remarry. But those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.

So see. How can it be exactly the same when Jesus says No. IT is actually the complete opposite. Could you answer me that?

 

[rinnie]

Good afternoon rinnie! I’m not sure if we’ve interacted before, but to be on the safe side, I just want to say that it is a pleasure to meet you.

I hope you don’t mind if I briefly interject in to your conversation with zerinus. I only wanted to comment on the quote below.

First, I wanted to acknowledge that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints agrees that a person can’t appoint themselves a prophet. Please, consider our 5th Article of Faith:

“We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.”

It is our claim that Joseph Smith was called of God to be a prophet and that the priesthood of God was restored to the prophet Joseph Smith by the laying on of hands by heavenly messengers. First, John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and restored the Aaronic priesthood. A bit later, we believe that Peter, James, and John, came down to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and restored the higher priesthood or the priesthood after the order of the Son of God (we call this the Melchizedek Priesthood). And, finally, the prophet Elijah appeared to Joseph and Oliver and restored the keys to bind in heaven, those ordinances performed on earth.

The question, of course, is that was a restoration such as what the Church of Jesus Christ asserts, necessary? Further, if it was necessary, did the events that Joseph Smith claims to have occurred, really occur? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints answers to the affirmative to both of these questions. Obviously, other religions do not. But, the point I wanted to make is that we recognize the need to be called of God and set apart by proper authority and we believe this is precisely the pattern of how the priesthood was restored to Joseph Smith.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Hi Finrock, Here is my problem. Okay I understand what you are saying, but according to the bible yes Men are called to God in the way God chooses. But when they are called to God they are to receive the gift of the Holy SPirit by the laying of hands from the apostles. Thats where we run into a problem. Jesus still gave the Apostles the authority and only his apostles authority to do this. Let me show you

Acts 6:6 they layed hands and sent them off

Now God said to his apostles To do this. Now he instructed them to hold fast ot traditions I handed on to you. Now JS did not receive the Power of the HS like God said. It says to shun those acting not according to tradition. Mal 2:7 says seek instruction from a priest he is Gods messenger. Not a self-proclaimed prophet. THe bible says shun them. Is that not correct. Could you show me where the bible says to accept a self-proclaimed prophet and go against Tradition. I showed you 2 places where it says to not do this. Now you must show me where you again are not contradicting scripture. Thank you finrock. I believe we have spoken before and remember you nothing but kind. And hope you can understand I mean no disprespect to you or your faith, I just seems to contradict scripture after scripture to me. BUt I am open for you to show me the scripture and where I am misled if you believe I am. Again thanks.

 

[rinnie]

Here us another interesting point. Familys together forever?

Mormons believe that there are plural heavens, They teach that practically no one is forever damned to hell. But not the same heaven either. you have the lowest heaven, the middle heaven and the top heaven.

Now family’s forever the LDS slogan. Figure this one out. The only way you can have your family with you is if you each lived a sterling mormon life. Otherwise a spouse, parent husband goe to the lower heaven (guess the cellar). Indeed the faithful Mormon wife with the lukewarm mormon man will leave him behind in an inferior place and go with a more devout morman women.
Then they get a new family

Blows the family forever right out of the park don’t it!

 

[dianaiad]

But see again thats the problem you say that you believe that relationships can be EXACTLY as they are on earth and the listener is to decide if you have a point or not.

And the problem is…what?

Or Not. Thats the problem. Why Because again like many of your beliefs scripture contradicts it point blank, let me show you and then you can explain to me how you could be right. Here it is.

Luke 20:34 Jesus said to them the children of this age marry and remarry. But those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.

So see. How can it be exactly the same when Jesus says No. IT is actually the complete opposite. Could you answer me that?

Hey. We don’t believe you can ‘marry or be given in marriage’ in heaven, either. We have to do it HERE, but once done here, we remain that way there if that marriage is sealed in both places.

 

[dianaiad]

Here us another interesting point. Familys together forever?

Mormons believe that there are plural heavens, They teach that practically no one is forever damned to hell. But not the same heaven either. you have the lowest heaven, the middle heaven and the top heaven.

Now family’s forever the LDS slogan. Figure this one out. The only way you can have your family with you is if you each lived a sterling mormon life. Otherwise a spouse, parent husband goe to the lower heaven (guess the cellar). Indeed the faithful Mormon wife with the lukewarm mormon man will leave him behind in an inferior place and go with a more devout morman women.
Then they get a new family

Blows the family forever right out of the park don’t it!

One question:

Does not your own heaven involve most of the people you left behind on earth going to a far nastier hell than we believe in?

 

[rinnie]

And the problem is…what?

Hey. We don’t believe you can ‘marry or be given in marriage’ in heaven, either. We have to do it HERE, but once done here, we remain that way there if that marriage is sealed in both places.

But how can you miss the problem with that. How can that marriage be sealed in Heaven if GOD SAID NO.

In the sacrament of marriage it say until death do us part. Do you know what do us part means. Its means you are no longer marrried in this world. When a spouse dies he or she who is left is free to marry again in this world.

Now if when a person dies they are no longer married how can you say that the marriage is sealed in heaven? Jesus tells you point blank there is no marriage in heaven to seal!

Or of course again did Jesus lie when he said the children of this age marry and remarry but not in heaven, or are you not making common sense again. Because do you agree or disagree that when a spouse dies death has parted them, and the marriage is no more the way God said, or there could be only one other explanation in your words. We are still married when a spouse dies and indeed are breaking a commandment and committing adultery. Whats it gonna be?

 

[rinnie]

One question:

Does not your own heaven involve most of the people you left behind on earth going to a far nastier hell than we believe in?

If you are asking me if our the word of Gods idea of hell and yours is different heck yes. Correct me if I am wrong but level 3 I believe for you is total happiness as you can see it.

For us hell is total separation from God. Without God happiness is impossible to achieve,

IS that what you are asking?

 

[rinnie]

And the problem is…what?

Hey. We don’t believe you can ‘marry or be given in marriage’ in heaven, either. We have to do it HERE, but once done here, we remain that way there if that marriage is sealed in both places.

By the way can you show me scripture to prove this. I showed you scripture to dis-prove it. Fair’s fair

 

[dianaiad]

If you are asking me if our the word of Gods idea of hell and yours is different heck yes. Correct me if I am wrong but level 3 I believe for you is total happiness as you can see it.

For us hell is total separation from God. Without God happiness is impossible to achieve,

IS that what you are asking?

Rinnie, you are begging the question.

For one thing, if you knew anything about the LDS idea of ‘hell’, or ‘outerdarkness’ or 'Perdition," you would know that this is precisely what we think hell is–a total and complete absence of the light of God; complete separation.

For another thing, you didn’t answer the question I posed.

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie, you are begging the question.

For one thing, if you knew anything about the LDS idea of ‘hell’, or ‘outerdarkness’ or 'Perdition," you would know that this is precisely what we think hell is–a total and complete absence of the light of God; complete separation.

For another thing, you didn’t answer the question I posed.

Okay then I don’t understand what you are asking me. Could you ask it another way that I can respond better and understand what you are asking. Thanks! will be back in few hours. Sorry gotta work now. got a perm and 3 cuts probally about 2 hours or so.

 

[guanophore]

 What is there in the above to indicate that marriage continues on after death, in Catholic theology?

Jesus said that in heaven, they are neither male or female, but are like the angels. They do not marry, nor are they given in marriage. They are members of the communion of saints, joined as members one of another to His Body. I agree with what you are asserting about the limits of marriage vows. Marriage is for this life. Communion with God and one another in a glorified (non-sexual) body is for the next life.

We say 'there was an apostasy. QUOTE]

Yes, that is the problem. The blog to which I was referred in this thread cannot identify when, where, and why this happened. It was “gradual”, and instead of using the Apostolic definition of “apostasy” a new definition is invented by Mormons. It is very misleading. The apostasy was supposed to have happened “gradually” and did not affect all believers, but resulted in loss of authority to the priesthood. Even though the Jews had apostasized, Jesus still affirmed the authority of the priesthood!

Besides that, we can specifically identify the reasons Rome fell, and the elements/factors in the fall, however gradual. Apparently this cannot be done for the “fall” of the Catholic Church.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Even you, here, in defense of your own beliefs, have admitted that you do not believe that the relationships will be the same. You don’t quite know what they WILL be, and you hope, but you don’t know, and perhaps don’t even think that, they will remain the same. You will love the stranger you have never met exactly the same way you love the man you lived with, suffered with and bore children with.

First, this is not a “defense”, it is an answer to your question.

Second, you assume “different relationship” = “worse relationship”, which, is not anything any Christian believes.

To me, that means we either lose ourselves completely within a community and have no sense of self, or we are terminally happy—and terminally lonely. Now I am quite aware that this is not how you view it. I’m just giving you my reaction to a heaven where everybody is the same and everybody loves everybody else equally and precisely the same, and all relationships are identical.

It has already been explained to you that the Sacrament of marriage is based on love, for each other. And as a union of two people, marriage unites also to God. We do not believe love for each other, and for God, ends at death. We believe, quite firmly and resolutely, that the love we experience in marriage, for each other and for God, is perfected by Him and through Him, and to Him.

We have no belief or teaching that individualism is lost. It is an unfounded fear.

We claim that family units can be eternal as specific family units; official ties as well as emotional ones. This does NOT take away the universal joy that everybody is supposed to find in heaven, but adds to it. I don’t think that our basic human need for specific family around us, a specific group of people, will disappear–it’s a very important part of what makes us human, and children of God.

I see no problem in holding this belief. I just don’t see the necessity of it.

If it were not, why does He couch it that way…we are His Children? Why did He make it so clear that He sent His SON? Why not send a total stranger, or refer to Christ in that manner? Why does God make such a big deal of family, if family is not important in the eternities?

We are all sons and daughters. All baptized are united to Christ and are in the family of God. We understand this in a very literal, and mystical, sense.

So…we claim that families can be together forever. We do not say ‘we hope so,’ or “leave it to God,” We come out and say so, and show how. It is up to the listener to decide whether we have a point or not.

Scripture speaks of our blessed communion with God in images: life, light, peace, wedding feast, wine of the kingdom, the Father’s house, the heavenly Jerusalem, paradise: “no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him.”

We trust completely that God knows our every need and so, there is no need for us to worry. He cares for us, His children. It is an act of faith, yes, but also we see what God has done for us, in the Sacrifice of His Son Jesus Christ. If God does this, for us, His children who sin and fail, why is there any reason to believe that Heaven is nothing less than God’s perfect love fulfilled? What is the desire to be with family and friends but love, and why would we believe that God does not fulfill a desire of love? Why do you want us to believe such negative things about heaven and God?

I don’t think it a bad thing at all that you desire to be with those who you love. I hold no belief that God will not fulfill this desire. If it comforts you to think that a special “seal” is required, fine. But this is nothing that God has taught us. All He has taught us is to love one another, as He loves us. I don’t need an extra “seal” in order to validate what God has freely given us.

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie, you are begging the question.

For one thing, if you knew anything about the LDS idea of ‘hell’, or ‘outerdarkness’ or 'Perdition," you would know that this is precisely what we think hell is–a total and complete absence of the light of God; complete separation.

For another thing, you didn’t answer the question I posed.

tell me this you lowest heaven is for adulters, murders, thieves liars and other evil doers. You claim their sins have been forgven and they enjoy the eternal presence of the holy Ghost. Is this not true?

Now explain to be AGAIN how, this contradicts scripture. Now how can that be possible. Only the righteous will have eternal life. Are you saying these People are righteous? And that they have the gift of the Holy SPirit with them. Sorry scripture says they will never see God. But your imput would be great on this teaching of yours.

 

[dianaiad]

tell me this you lowest heaven is for adulters, murders, thieves liars and other evil doers. You claim their sins have been forgven and they enjoy the eternal presence of the holy Ghost. Is this not true?

Now explain to be AGAIN how, this contradicts scripture. Now how can that be possible. Only the righteous will have eternal life. Are you saying these People are righteous? And that they have the gift of the Holy SPirit with them. Sorry scripture says they will never see God. But your imput would be great on this teaching of yours.

You are asking questions that really dig into some of the meat of what we believe. There is nothing WRONG with that, but it means…

Well, first it means that we need to discuss the Trinity. Since we believe that the God head is composed of three entirely separate Individuals (though one in purpose) we believe that it is quite possible to live in a Kingdom overseen by the Holy Ghost–and NOT have a whole lot of contact with Jesus Christ or His Father.

…and “living forever” is not quite the same as 'eternal life." I think (I could be wrong) but as a CAtholic you can understand that one…those in hell are certainly living forever, right? That is not, however, ‘eternal life.’

 

[guanophore]

It’s a very big part of it. If you are not family to your spouse, then where does it say anywhere that you will be ‘family’ and stay together with anybody else (in Catholic theology?)

Where, ANYWHERE, is there an assurance, or even a hint, that families will be together in Catholic theology?

Serious question, that.

Mark 3:34-35

34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”

All who are in Christ are together with Him, and one another, as family. The spiritual joining we have to one another in Him transcends even the human experience of family bonding.

 

[guanophore]

Well the vows don’t say anything about losing ones family after death which is what Dianaid claims we believe. And do you believe that family only consists of people you are married to, I have a somewhat wider group I define as family:shrug:

I agree. In spite of the amazing transcendance they claim for humanity in the next life, there is a deficient understanding of the communion of saints.

It’s a bit annoying to hear repeatedly that the LDS do not tear up other religions they just say what they believe. When they start out with tearing down other religions.

The whole notion of apostasy seems to preposterous to me that I just can’t take it seriously, I guess. I don’t get annoyed because it is clear their whole faith rests upon a vain imagination.

 

[rinnie]

You are asking questions that really dig into some of the meat of what we believe. There is nothing WRONG with that, but it means…

Well, first it means that we need to discuss the Trinity. Since we believe that the God head is composed of three entirely separate Individuals (though one in purpose) we believe that it is quite possible to live in a Kingdom overseen by the Holy Ghost–and NOT have a whole lot of contact with Jesus Christ or His Father.

…and “living forever” is not quite the same as 'eternal life." I think (I could be wrong) but as a CAtholic you can understand that one…those in hell are certainly living forever, right? That is not, however, ‘eternal life.’

Sure it is its eternal damnation. But it separation from God is hell. Now If I insult or hurt you please forgive me, I never mean to do that. But lets move into the Trinity. How can you deny the Father, the SOn and the Holy Spirit. I mean there is only one God. They are all equal. How can you possibly cut one out. Its like saying you have a whole body but no arms or legs. How can that be possible. Who do you believe the Holy Sprirt is if not God?

 

[dianaiad]

Sure it is its eternal damnation. But it separation from God is hell. Now If I insult or hurt you please forgive me, I never mean to do that. But lets move into the Trinity. How can you deny the Father, the SOn and the Holy Spirit. I mean there is only one God. They are all equal. How can you possibly cut one out. Its like saying you have a whole body but no arms or legs. How can that be possible. Who do you believe the Holy Sprirt is if not God?

Our different understanding of the Trinity does not mean we are 'cutting one out," Rinnie. It simply means that we understand the Trinity differently.

…and if you want to call even a partial separation from God’s glory ‘hell,’ then I guess that we are talking about hell.

It’s still better than here, though.