OK, I Am Confused. Do Mormons Believe In The Trinity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter deb1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Stephen168 said:
Focus…the subject is **‘the true Church of Christ’ **not whether God exists

Focus……The Catholic Church has science, history, and reason. Mormonisn has none of it.
Click to expand...
Focus; in order to be the ‘True Church of Christ,’ there must BE a “Christ” to be the ‘true church of.’

If it turns out that, in spite of history–and you have to admit that the Eastern, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have every inch as much history as you do-- (and you still haven’t shown me that science proves that Catholicism is the true Church of anything…) that your beliefs about Him are not as accurate as those of someone else, then no matter how long you’ve been around, you are not the “True” church of Christ, are you?

Truth is about truth, not longevity. Argumentum ad antiquitatem is a fallacy.
 
Stephen168 said:
It is a book that Joseph Smith claimed to be “a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.” Science has shown this claim to be false, so it is a tall tale.
Click to expand...
Do you have a reference?
 
dianaiad said:
hurch of.’

If it turns out that, in spite of history–and you have to admit that the Eastern, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have every inch as much history as you do-- (and you still haven’t shown me that science proves that Catholicism is the true Church of anything…)
Click to expand...
The Easter, Greek and Russian Orthodox are catholic, a part of the universal church.
  1. “The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honoured by the name of Christian, but who do not however profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter”(72). Among the non-Catholic Churches and Christian communities, there are indeed to be found many elements of the Church of Christ, which allow us, amid joy and hope, to acknowledge the existence of a certain communion, albeit imperfect(73).
This communion exists especially with the Eastern orthodox Churches, which, though separated from the See of Peter, remain united to the Catholic Church by means of very close bonds, such as the apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, and therefore merit the title of particular Churches(74). Indeed, “through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches, the Church of God is built up and grows in stature”(75), for in every valid celebration of the Eucharist the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church becomes truly present(76).(LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON SOME ASPECTS OF THE CHURCH UNDERSTOOD AS COMMUNION)
 
dianaiad said:
If it turns out that, in spite of history–and you have to admit that the Eastern, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have every inch as much history as you do–
Click to expand...
Yes, they do; and Mormonisn does not. Sharing our history does not take away our history. They have everything we have except the Bishop of Rome.
dianaiad said:
Truth is about truth, not longevity.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is and we have the history, science, and reason to support it.
 
mormonboy said:
Let’s play jeopardy… What is… The Book of Mormon. That is plenty of history. Our church is the only faith that is based on the same organization as Jesus Christ established it. Based on prophets and apostles. The church was uniform in the middle east as so it was in the Americas. You saying the LDS has no history makes no sense, we have the Bible and BOM…

Ephesians 11:11-13

11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Click to expand...
No, I don’t think that’s true. Because the Catholic Church is the only Church that was passed on DIRECTLY from Jesus to Peter, not Jesus to Joseph Smith!!! 👍

“If Joseph Smith was right, then the Gates of Hell really did prevail against the Church.” :nope: Patrick Madrid
 
mormonboy said:
Let’s play jeopardy… What is… The Book of Mormon. That is plenty of history. Our church is the only faith that is based on the same organization as Jesus Christ established it. Based on prophets and apostles. The church was uniform in the middle east as so it was in the Americas. You saying the LDS has no history makes no sense, we have the Bible and BOM…

Ephesians 11:11-13

11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Click to expand...
Yes the LDS Church claims to continue the same organization as the early Church, and yet many of these similarities end with the name. There are currently 15 Apostles, not 12. Was Peter known as the “President”? Is this a restoration of ancient Church organization? Were prophets above the apostles in the ancient Church? Did prophets have successors in the Old and New Testaments? Is there evidence that James and John were set apart as part of the “First Presidency”? Are the apostles, prophets, the Melchizedek and Aaronic Priesthoods, etc. as described in the Bible really analagous or “restored” in the LDS Church?

Also, is the worship style of Latter-day Saints equivalent to that of the ancient Church?
 
Irish_Kathy said:
No, I don’t think that’s true. Because the Catholic Church is the only Church that was passed on DIRECTLY from Jesus to Peter, not Jesus to Joseph Smith!!! 👍

“If Joseph Smith was right, then the Gates of Hell really did prevail against the Church.” :nope: Patrick Madrid
Click to expand...
Yes but who succeeded Peter and where is the record of that? What is the last book of the Bible?
 
mormonboy said:
Let’s play jeopardy… What is… The Book of Mormon. That is plenty of history. Our church is the only faith that is based on the same organization as Jesus Christ established it. Based on prophets and apostles. The church was uniform in the middle east as so it was in the Americas. You saying the LDS has no history makes no sense, we have the Bible and BOM…

Ephesians 11:11-13

11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Click to expand...
There are other historical documents that substantiate what is in the Bible. These documents validate people and events from a non-religious standpoint. Are there similar historical documents that do so for the BOM–this is not an attack just a question. I would be somewhat interested in the source for future reading.
 
mormonboy said:
Stephen168;5068153:
Focus…the subject is ‘**the true Church of Christ’ **
Click to expand...
not whether God exists or the basis by one lives their life.

Note to Stephen: I have come to see how unorganized the Catholic religion is. Most Catholics I have talked to have said there is not true church of Christ and that the church is inside your heart… Explain that please.

New Age mumbo jumbo that is running amuck among many religious denominations not just Catholic and encouraged by the UN.
Click to expand...
 
Irish_Kathy said:
Hi Cothrige 👋 – For us, the Trinity is what’s refered to as a Mystery. We may not ever be able to fully understand it or unpack it in this lifetime. But it’s still the truth. Jesus proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit is the love shared between them.

In searching for some material that would be good resoures, I happened upon some terrific interviews, etc with Dr. Scott Hahn. One of his best books, and according to Dr. Hahn his most important, is FIRST COMES LOVE. He is one of the most recent, best people I know of who can help anyone better understand the Trinity as Catholic’s (and most other Christians for that matter) understand the Father, Son and Holy Spirt.

excerptsofinri.com/scotthahn-ewtn.html#First_Comes_Love
Click to expand...
I’m once again carrying this forward because I think Dr. Hahn always seems to hit the nail on the head. I CHALLENGE ANY MORMON to listen to what he has to say. Also, one book I’d especially like to challenge any LDS to read is A FATHER WHO KEEPS HIS PROMISES. It shows the succession of faith from Adam all the way to the Catholic Chruch. It’s truely a book that’s hard to refute by ANYONE!!!
 
if Jesus was/is Jehovah, then why can we no longer worship Him, and why are there other gods (as in the Father and Holy Spirit) when the Old Testament says that God/Jehovah was the only God, and we should worship no one else? It’s interesting that people could pray and worship Jesus, and now they can’t.
 
Stephen168 said:
Yes, they do; and Mormonisn does not. Sharing our history does not take away our history. They have everything we have except the Bishop of Rome.
Yes, it is and we have the history, science, and reason to support it.
Click to expand...
That’s the third time (at least) that you have made this claim.

However, making the claim is not proving the claim. Yes, Catholicism has history. As I mentioned before, however, the Egyption religion also had history—and a lot more of it. Yet even though the Egyptians and their beliefs were around over twice as long as Catholicism has been, Ra is not the sun god, Isis is not the goddess of fertility, and Horus, son of Isis, did not battle Seth for the protection of Egypt.

Science has not proven that Catholicism is ‘true.’

Reason does not prove that Catholicism is ‘true.’

This is not to say that the Holy Ghost does not whisper confirmation of religious truth to you as Catholics, because I truly believe that He does.

But as to “history, science and reason?”

Not so much, no. All history proves is that you’ve been around awhile. You guys have been battling science far more than science has been supporting you…especially since science does NOT support you; the most it does is ignore religion. As to 'reason?"

You have GOT to be kidding.

Before you can use ‘reason,’ you have to establish a few things to use reason on; like the idea that God Is, that Jesus is the Christ, that everything in the Old and New Testaments is precisely correct and written by who you think wrote them, and are translated correctly, and…

You get the picture, I hope.
 
mormonboy said:
Who succeeded Peter and where is record of it? How is that weak?
Click to expand...
Mormonboy makes an excellent point. The weakness in the history of the Catholic Church is not middle or the end of the Popes, but the very beginning–right after Peter.

I am not trying to be critical or even judgmental. I just think there are some good questions to ask.
  1. Why did the leader of the church change from being an apostle to a bishop?
  2. Why didn’t John or Paul, who were apostles, become the next “Head of the Church” rather than a relatively obscure bishop named Linus or Clement?
  3. Why was it the Bishop of Rome who was given the right of succesion? Was it not Rome that executed the Lord Jesus, Peter himself, and even Paul the apostle? What made that area special? Why not the bishop of some other city?
  4. Wasn’t it Jerusalem or Judea that was the center place for the church until they were driven out in 70 AD by–of course-- the Romans?
  5. Why doesn’t John, who wrote his epistles, gospel, and revelation well after Peter’s death ever mention the leadership of any other “Pope”?
  6. Why doesn’t Paul mention Linus or Clement more than a passing verse at best?
  7. I do not doubt in the least that Linus was, in fact, the second (or even first) bishop of Rome, but how do we know that the Bishop of Rome was ever supposed to be the leader of the church at all? That fact is conspicuously absent from scripture, whether it be the words of Jesus or the letters from the apostles.
  8. How do we know that Peter was ever a bishop? Who would have ordained him as such?
To mormonboy’s point, how do you know that the line of Popes during this period was unbroken? If I am not mistaken Catholics are not even sure of Peter’s first successor (Is it Linus or Clement I?), how can we be sure of his 200th?
 
Religio71 said:
if Jesus was/is Jehovah, then why can we no longer worship Him, and why are there other gods (as in the Father and Holy Spirit) when the Old Testament says that God/Jehovah was the only God, and we should worship no one else? It’s interesting that people could pray and worship Jesus, and now they can’t.
Click to expand...
We do worship Jesus. In addition to the direct worship of Jesus Christ we perform during the sacrament (with the emblems of his body and blood), we center every ordinance and principle around Jesus Christ. We do all that we do in the name of Jesus Christ and we close every prayer in his name. Our whole purpose in this life is to find ourselves on Judgment Day to be called by the name of Christ and be numbered with “his sheep.”

In fact the Book of Mormon affirms our beliefs that our religion is centered on Jesus Christ:
26 And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (2 Nephi 25:26)
Click to expand...
If, as a former member of the Church of Jesus Christ, you did not realize that we worship the Savior Jesus Christ, you could not having been paying close attention at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top