Mormons... Seriously.... Why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrZetterlund
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ParkerD said:
Mr Zetterlund,
Peace to you. Joseph Smith was, in terms you may be able to understand, a teacher/prophet/leader. He taught how to connect with and have a relationship with God on a personal basis–not by merely relying on the Bible or historical evidence or what remote teachers have taught–but by having a direct and completely personal relationship with Him through the Holy Spirit and through coming to know Christ by following Him. That is what Abraham did. It is what Joseph, the great-grandson of Abraham, did. Read Hebrews 11, and you find a description of people who sought a relationship with God through faith and through revealed knowledge. Having that kind of knowledge, the history books that discount the story of Joseph in Egypt and the famine the brought his father and brothers there only to find that his life had been preserved miraculously, go by the wayside and one knows without a doubt that that experience was a true account from the Bible. Revealed knowledge becomes personal knowledge. Joseph Smith is then out of the picture, as far as needing to rely on the kinds of proofs you seem to wish for.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, Parker, Christians did not and do not need Joseph Smith to learn how to have a personal relationship with God. We were given that relationship by Jesus, Himself in the Holy Eucharist. We receive Him, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. It doesn’t get any more personal than that. He gave us His Holy Spirit to guide the Church and to fulfill what He revealed to us. The contemporaries of the Apostles affirm that the Apostles and early Christians celebrated the Mass, including receiving the Eucharist. Joseph Smith is the one changing that and taking that very personal relationship away to make it only “symbolic” (along with many other Protestants). 😦
 
Jay53 said:
With all due respect, Parker, Christians did not and do not need Joseph Smith to learn how to have a personal relationship with God. We were given that relationship by Jesus, Himself in the Holy Eucharist. We receive Him, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity. It doesn’t get any more personal than that. He gave us His Holy Spirit to guide the Church and to fulfill what He revealed to us. The contemporaries of the Apostles affirm that the Apostles and early Christians celebrated the Mass, including receiving the Eucharist. Joseph Smith is the one changing that and taking that very personal relationship away to make it only “symbolic” (along with many other Protestants). 😦
Click to expand...
Hi, Jay53,
That’s all well and good for you.

What makes a difference for me in my life is the knowledge of being guided in everyday events of life–the kinds of events such as when Abraham was guided to move his family several times, the kinds of events where the Holy Spirit “whispers” guidance through the still small voice–a voice of peace, joy, discernment, compassion, love, assurance, and faith that God does indeed speak to His children and that the loss of His presence that resulted from the fall of Adam is no longer a loss of His presence today nor a loss of His communication and guidance in a very real and personal way. That Holy Spirit’s guidance is promised through faithfully partaking of communion–it is true that that is very necessary and important.

Thanks, and Merry Christmas with much peace and joy to you and yours.
 
ParkerD said:
Hi, Jay53,
That’s all well and good for you.

What makes a difference for me in my life is the knowledge of being guided in everyday events of life–the kinds of events such as when Abraham was guided to move his family several times, the kinds of events where the Holy Spirit “whispers” guidance through the still small voice–a voice of peace, joy, discernment, compassion, love, assurance, and faith that God does indeed speak to His children and that the loss of His presence that resulted from the fall of Adam is no longer a loss of His presence today nor a loss of His communication and guidance in a very real and personal way. That Holy Spirit’s guidance is promised through faithfully partaking of communion–it is true that that is very necessary and important.

Thanks, and Merry Christmas with much peace and joy to you and yours.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I am talking about that Catholics have that we didn’t and don’t need Joseph Smith for! :confused: I’m not sure why you would think we don’t - other than the fact that Joseph Smith may have led you to believe otherwise.

I “feel”/“witness”/“experience” the Holy Spirit in my life all the time - God guides me and other Catholics in many different ways every single day. Jesus has answered my prayers - too many to count. He has given me immeasurable peace, particularly at difficult times in my life. And I most certainly didn’t need Joseph Smith or any of his teachings for that to happen. And I have no doubt that God answers your prayers and leads you in life as well, but IMO that is in spite of Joseph Smith and his teachings, not because of them. (As I mentioned in another thread, some Muslims feel that God has led them to Islam and the belief that Jesus is only a prophet and was not crucified. Are their “feelings” about their own “witness” then correct as well? Or have they possibly misinterpreted this “feeling” or “whisper” that they experienced?)

I’m not sure what you mean by the “Holy Spirit’s guidance is promised through faithfully partaking of communion” because while that is true when we receive the Body and Blood of Christ, I thought Mormons didn’t believe in that. I thought zerinus told me that Mormons don’t believe in transsubstantiation in the way that Jesus taught us and the Apostles practiced and taught us. Perhaps I misunderstood him. :confused: Please correct me if I got the wrong impression. I thought he told me that it was just a symbol similar to what some Protestants believe.

Partaking of “communion” as a symbol with just bread and wine (or water), does not give one the same grace and fullness as receiving the actual Body and Blood of Christ. Jesus’ Body and Blood in the Eucharist is the one thing that Satan cannot duplicate or falsify in any way. Therefore he has to try and lead people away from it by leading them to believe that God is not really present, that Jesus didn’t mean it the 6 or 7 times He said it to His disciples, that one can be just as satisfied with bread and water if they think/pretend/have been led to believe that they are partaking in remembrance of Jesus, etc.

Although with all of this discussion, I fear I have led the discussion off course, since this is supposed to be about that documentary and the Book of Abraham. 😦

Merry Christmas to you and your family, Parker. And thank you for your well wishes! 🙂
 
MelanieAnne said:
I agree, many Mormons are very nice people. That makes the fact that they have been deluded into a fraud even more of a travesty.
Click to expand...
Kind of a conundrum, ain’t it? when you figure that the biggest reason those nice Mormons ARE nice Mormons is because, well…they’re Mormons.
 
dianaiad said:
Kind of a conundrum, ain’t it? when you figure that the biggest reason those nice Mormons ARE nice Mormons is because, well…they’re Mormons.
Click to expand...
And the reason nice Christians ARE nice Christians is because, well… they’re Christians.
 
Marie5890 said:
I’m not sure if this link has been posted and not sure if it helps non-mormons understand the latest on the BoA…

This may be the latest stand on the BoA since this is part of LDSNews…

ldschurchnews.com/articles/57738/The-Book-of-Abraham-The-larger-issue.html
Click to expand...
My favorite part:
Brother Gee gave these summary points (and he is the expert on the BoA):
"First, the arguments about the Book of Abraham have become so complex that even the best and brightest of critics end up arguing unwittingly in favor of the LDS position. “The Document of Breathings made by Isis is not the Book of Abraham, and most Latter-day Saints have never claimed it was,” he said. "Can we agree on that issue and move on?
Hmm… The best and the brightest critics favor it? I’d like to hear from these critics.
"Second, the critics do not deal with the issues arising from the Book of Abraham that Latter-day Saints care about. In that sense, their approach is legerdemain and bait-and-switch.
And why would critics need to? If something is false, you don’t need to discuss the nature of the falsity.
"Third, how the Book of Abraham was translated is unimportant. The Church does not stand or fall on the Book of Abraham.
These two sentences say it all. IT IS IMPORTANT HOW IS WAS TRANSLATED. IF JOSEPH SMITH DID NOT TRANSLATE IT AS HE SAID, AND THE TEXT IS WRONG THEN JOSEPH SMITH IS A LIAR. AND THE CHURCH DOES FALL ON THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM. IF IT IS A SHAM, THEN THE WHOLE THING IS EXPOSED AS A SHAM.
“And fourth, regardless of how the Book of Abraham was translated, it is a remarkable document that tells us more about Abraham’s day than Joseph Smith could have known.”
I especially like this one because, it is as if they are trying to emphasize “it doesn’t matter” if is translated wrong, what we have is pretty good.
 
Xavierlives said:
And the reason nice Christians ARE nice Christians is because, well… they’re Christians.
Click to expand...
That would be true…if all Christians were nice the way Mormons are being described as being nice.

Perhaps it’s simply that Mormons are nice because they pay more attention to being Christians than other Christians do?
 
dianaiad said:
That would be true…if all Christians were nice the way Mormons are being described as being nice.

Perhaps it’s simply that Mormons are nice because they pay more attention to being Christians than other Christians do?
Click to expand...
Of course, then there are the exceptions that prove the rule. For instance, while I think I’m nice, I’m nice in the curmudgeonly-don’t-take-prisoners-can’t-abide-fools sort of way.
 
I agree that the fact that Joseph Smith ripped off the head and hands of the figure on the papyri is suspicious. I also agree with the museum’s conclusions… that being that it is very hard to trust Joseph Smith.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again… Joseph Smith is a fraud!!!
 
Holly3278 said:
I agree that the fact that Joseph Smith ripped off the head and hands of the figure on the papyri is suspicious. I also agree with the museum’s conclusions… that being that it is very hard to trust Joseph Smith.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again… Joseph Smith is a fraud!!!
Click to expand...
Joseph Smith is dead.
So he is not a fraud.

…and I don’t happen to believe that he WAS a fraud, either. Tenses are important.

Diana…musing…I wonder what would happen to me if I went into the Catholic apologetics forum and declared that St. Bernadette was a liar? Not that I would ever DO that, of course…I’m just wondering.
 
MelanieAnne said:
There is no validity to many of the claims of Mormonism. This is not a matter of FAITH, it is a matter of FACT. Many of the “facts” contained in the Mormon “scriptures” have been proven to be utterly false. Only someone willing to set aside ALL OF THE OPPOSING FACTS can even BRING UP Mormonism.

Mormonism will either have to abandon many of its historical roots or face the unhappy situation of exposing the faith as a total fraud. I suspect that the leaders of the faith will continue to abandon the tenets originally expounded by the founders, a bit at a time, as they have been over the last several decades, until they arrive at something that vaguely resembles Protestantism.

Mormonism co-opted many of the words/terms of Christianity and gave them a whole new meaning. In so doing, they seduced many people into believing that those words and terms meant the same thing as other Christian faiths. Mormonism uses the words and terms of Christianity but denies the meaning of those same words and terms. As such, they are not Christian in the commonly understood meaning of the term. As Mormons continue to abandon their heretical roots, their definitions will also have to evolve. Perhaps, at some point, they will be considered Christian by the rest of the Christian world. At present, they can only be considered to have some exposure to the concepts of Christian faith.
Click to expand...
I do not agree.

We may have differences with others doctrinally with their beliefs — to state arrogantly that Catholicism is what you profess certainly turns me away.

Respecting one’s faith for what it is to them, in terms of how it draws them closer to God or whatever higher being is the course I follow. I state on my beliefs with the recognition that someone else may not choose God at all.
 
courtiswa said:
I do not agree.

We may have differences with others doctrinally with their beliefs — to state arrogantly that Catholicism is what you profess certainly turns me away.

Respecting one’s faith for what it is to them, in terms of how it draws them closer to God or whatever higher being is the course I follow. I state on my beliefs with the recognition that someone else may not choose God at all.
Click to expand...
Are you the same person that used to post under the name “thecourt”?
 
dianaiad said:
That would be true…if all Christians were nice the way Mormons are being described as being nice.

Perhaps it’s simply that Mormons are nice because they pay more attention to being Christians than other Christians do?
Click to expand...
Maybe you aren’t around the right Christians. Every Christian I know is nice. (or maybe the “mean” Christians are just mean non-Christians. Not everyone who says, Lord, Lord, will… be called Christian.)
 
dianaiad said:
Of course, then there are the exceptions that prove the rule. For instance, while I think I’m nice, I’m nice in the curmudgeonly-don’t-take-prisoners-can’t-abide-fools sort of way.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
dianaiad said:
Joseph Smith is dead.
So he is not a fraud.

…and I don’t happen to believe that he WAS a fraud, either. Tenses are important.

Diana…musing…I wonder what would happen to me if I went into the Catholic apologetics forum and declared that St. Bernadette was a liar? Not that I would ever DO that, of course…I’m just wondering.
Click to expand...
Diana, this is an example of things that are really not important to your argument. Because, technically, isn’t there an argument to be made that JS exists not on earth, but elsewhere? He is an exposed fraud, there.
 
dianaiad said:
Kind of a conundrum, ain’t it? when you figure that the biggest reason those nice Mormons ARE nice Mormons is because, well…they’re Mormons.
Click to expand...
Are you nice because of Joseph Smith, or are you nice because of Jesus Christ?
dianaiad said:
Joseph Smith is dead.
So he is not a fraud.

…and I don’t happen to believe that he WAS a fraud, either. Tenses are important.

Diana…musing…I wonder what would happen to me if I went into the Catholic apologetics forum and declared that St. Bernadette was a liar? Not that I would ever DO that, of course…I’m just wondering.
Click to expand...
Well he died leaving people (and himself I believe) believing he was a prophet. I bet you can’t get anything against St. Bernette (whoever that is) like we have mounds against Joseph Smith. Alot of accusations against him aren’t even debatable because they’re solid facts.
 
Xavierlives said:
Maybe you aren’t around the right Christians. Every Christian I know is nice. (or maybe the “mean” Christians are just mean non-Christians. Not everyone who says, Lord, Lord, will… be called Christian.)
Click to expand...
You are quite right, Xavier. I HAVE met some not-so-nice Christians. I actually have scars. 🤷

By the way, that’s not how the quote goes. It does NOT say that 'not everyone who says Lord, Lord will be called Christian." In fact, almost everyone who DOES say Lord,Lord can be called Christian—but can they be called Christ’s?

there is, you need to understand, a very big difference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top