H
Holly3278
Guest
Hi everyone. I am just inviting you all to prove to me that Mormonism is wrong. Use whatever arguments you want to but no flaming.
- Status
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Check this website by an Ex-Mormon. Mormonism teaches beliefs contrary to what Jesus Christ taught His Apostles and His Church.
exmormon.org/fourteen.htm
There are 14 Article of Faith which all of them are all false.
H
Holly3278
Guest
Yes, both are beliefs of Mormons. I personally believe that both are true. Prove to me why either belief is wrong.Jesus and Satan are brothers, which is not true. I also think though I’m not certain, that Mormons themselves think they will become like gods…
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Because it is not what Jesus Christ taught. The other factors, are there are no historical evidence to prove the civilians that Mormon claim existed in Latin America exist. Scientist don’t think the Book of Mormon itself is reliable compared to that of the Bible…
H
Holly3278
Guest
Christ also did not teach that the Trinity is 3 personages in 1 but yet you believe that.
Also, the Book of Mormon is very reliable. See mormonevidence.com
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
The Trinity came about the Council of Constantinople in the defense of the Arianism Heresy. The Church Leaders bishops gather and gave an orthodox view of the nature of God.
The Trinity professes that God is One, but Three Persons. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Even the Baptism Formula make this very clear. “Baptize them in the Name of the Father, And of the Son, and Of the Holy Spirit.” Note Jesus didn’t say Names as if God were individuals. He specifically said In the Name of.
Jesus also said, the Father, and I are One. He even went as far as, Before Abraham was, I AM.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
The other reason why Mormonism is that their Holy Book, the Book of Mormons contains errors.
In these “latter days,” there are few people who haven’t been visited at least once by Mormon missionaries. At some point in your doorstep dialogue, these earnest young men will ask you to accept a copy of the Book of Mormon, read it, and pray about it, asking the Lord to “send the Holy Ghost to witness that it is true.” Then, very solemnly, they’ll “testify” to you that they know the Book of Mormon is true, that it’s God’s inspired word, and that it contains the “fullness of the everlasting gospel.”
They’ll assure you that if you read their text in a spirit of prayerful inquiry, you, too, will receive the testimony of the Holy Ghost. That testimony supposedly will convince you beyond doubt that the Book of Mormon is exactly what they claim it to be.
Keep in mind that the missionaries want you to have a feeling about the Book of Mormon after reading it. They’ll tell you that you’ll receive the witness of the Holy Ghost in the form of a “burning in the bosom”—a warm, fuzzy feeling—after reading and praying about it. This feeling is the clincher for them. It’s the real “proof” that the Book of Mormon is inspired Scripture, and everything else follows from that conclusion.
But think about it. How often have you felt strongly about something or someone, only to learn your feelings were misguided? Feelings, although a part of our human makeup, can’t be a yardstick in matters like this.
After all, some people might get a good feeling after reading anything from the Communist Manifesto or the Yellow Pages. They could pray about such a feeling, and they could take the lingering of the feeling as some kind of divine approbation, but no such sensation will prove the inspiration of Marx’s or Ma Bell’s writings.
When you tell the missionaries you don’t need to pray about the Book of Mormon, they’ll think you’re copping out, that you’re afraid to learn the truth. Admittedly, you’ll seem like a cad if you simply refuse and leave it at that. You need to provide them with an explanation for refusing.
The devout Mormon believes this text is inspired because Joseph Smith said it is. He believes Smith had the authority to claim divine inspiration for the Book of Mormon because the book itself says Smith was a prophet and had such authority.
((continue))
In these “latter days,” there are few people who haven’t been visited at least once by Mormon missionaries. At some point in your doorstep dialogue, these earnest young men will ask you to accept a copy of the Book of Mormon, read it, and pray about it, asking the Lord to “send the Holy Ghost to witness that it is true.” Then, very solemnly, they’ll “testify” to you that they know the Book of Mormon is true, that it’s God’s inspired word, and that it contains the “fullness of the everlasting gospel.”
They’ll assure you that if you read their text in a spirit of prayerful inquiry, you, too, will receive the testimony of the Holy Ghost. That testimony supposedly will convince you beyond doubt that the Book of Mormon is exactly what they claim it to be.
Keep in mind that the missionaries want you to have a feeling about the Book of Mormon after reading it. They’ll tell you that you’ll receive the witness of the Holy Ghost in the form of a “burning in the bosom”—a warm, fuzzy feeling—after reading and praying about it. This feeling is the clincher for them. It’s the real “proof” that the Book of Mormon is inspired Scripture, and everything else follows from that conclusion.
But think about it. How often have you felt strongly about something or someone, only to learn your feelings were misguided? Feelings, although a part of our human makeup, can’t be a yardstick in matters like this.
After all, some people might get a good feeling after reading anything from the Communist Manifesto or the Yellow Pages. They could pray about such a feeling, and they could take the lingering of the feeling as some kind of divine approbation, but no such sensation will prove the inspiration of Marx’s or Ma Bell’s writings.
When you tell the missionaries you don’t need to pray about the Book of Mormon, they’ll think you’re copping out, that you’re afraid to learn the truth. Admittedly, you’ll seem like a cad if you simply refuse and leave it at that. You need to provide them with an explanation for refusing.
The devout Mormon believes this text is inspired because Joseph Smith said it is. He believes Smith had the authority to claim divine inspiration for the Book of Mormon because the book itself says Smith was a prophet and had such authority.
((continue))
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Let’s take a closer look at the text the missionaries offer. At first glance the Book of Mormon appears to be biblical in heft and style. It’s couched in tedious “King James” English, and it features color renderings of Mormon scenes made to look like Bible illustrations.
The introduction tells you that the “Book of Mormon is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible. It is a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fullness of the everlasting gospel.” There it is again—the “fullness of the everlasting gospel.” Naturally, you ask yourself just what that phrase means.
According to the Mormon church, authentic Christianity can’t be found in any of the so-called Christian churches—only, of course, in the Mormon church.
Mormons teach that, after Jesus ascended into heaven, the apostles taught the true doctrines of Christ and administered his sacred ordinances (roughly the equivalent of Catholic sacraments). After the death of the apostles, their successors continued the work of the gospel, but with rapidly declining success. Within a few generations, the great apostasy foretold in the Bible had destroyed Christ’s Church (contrary to Jesus’ own promise in Matthew 16:18).
The Mormon church asserts that the Church Christ founded became increasingly corrupted by pagan ideas introduced by nefarious members. (Sound familiar?) Over a period of years, the Church lost all relationship with the Church Christ established. Consequently, the keys of authority of the holy priesthood were withdrawn from the earth, and no man any longer had authorization to act in God’s name.
From that time onward there were no valid baptisms, no laying on of hands for the receipt of the Holy Ghost, no blessings of any kind, and no administration of sacred ordinances. Confusions and heretical doctrines increased and led to the plethora of Christian sects seen today.
Mormons claim that to restore the true Church and true gospel to the earth, in 1820 God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith in a grove of trees near his home. They told him that all professing Christians on the face of the earth were abominable and corrupt and that the true Church, having died out completely shortly after it began, was to be restored by Smith.
Mormons run into no small difficulty in reconciling the great apostasy theory with Christ’s promise in Matthew 16:18: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”
How could it be that Christ, who should have known better, would promise that his Church wouldn’t be overcome if he knew full well a great apostasy would make short shrift of it in a matter of decades? Was Christ lying? Obviously not. Was he mistaken? No. Did he miscalculate things? No, again. Christ’s divinity precluded such things.
What are we left with then? Could it be that Mormons are mistaken in their interpretation of such a crucial passage? This is the only tenable conclusion. If there were no great apostasy, then there could have been no need for a restoration of religious authority on the earth. There would be no “restored gospel,” and the entire premise of the Mormon church would be undercut.
The fact is that the only church with an unbroken historical line to apostolic days is the Catholic Church. Even many Protestants acknowledge this, though they argue that there was a need for the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century.
As non-Catholic historians admit, it can be demonstrated easily that early Church writers, such as Ignatius of Antioch, Eusebius, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, had no conception of Mormon doctrine, and they knew nothing of a “great apostasy.”
Nowhere in their writings can one find references to Christians embracing any of the peculiarly Mormon doctrines, such as polytheism, polygamy, celestial marriage, and temple ceremonies. If the Church of the apostolic age was the prototype of today’s Mormon church, it must have had all these beliefs and practices. But why is there no evidence of them in the early centuries, before the alleged apostasy began?
The introduction tells you that the “Book of Mormon is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible. It is a record of God’s dealings with the ancient inhabitants of the Americas and contains, as does the Bible, the fullness of the everlasting gospel.” There it is again—the “fullness of the everlasting gospel.” Naturally, you ask yourself just what that phrase means.
According to the Mormon church, authentic Christianity can’t be found in any of the so-called Christian churches—only, of course, in the Mormon church.
Mormons teach that, after Jesus ascended into heaven, the apostles taught the true doctrines of Christ and administered his sacred ordinances (roughly the equivalent of Catholic sacraments). After the death of the apostles, their successors continued the work of the gospel, but with rapidly declining success. Within a few generations, the great apostasy foretold in the Bible had destroyed Christ’s Church (contrary to Jesus’ own promise in Matthew 16:18).
The Mormon church asserts that the Church Christ founded became increasingly corrupted by pagan ideas introduced by nefarious members. (Sound familiar?) Over a period of years, the Church lost all relationship with the Church Christ established. Consequently, the keys of authority of the holy priesthood were withdrawn from the earth, and no man any longer had authorization to act in God’s name.
From that time onward there were no valid baptisms, no laying on of hands for the receipt of the Holy Ghost, no blessings of any kind, and no administration of sacred ordinances. Confusions and heretical doctrines increased and led to the plethora of Christian sects seen today.
Mormons claim that to restore the true Church and true gospel to the earth, in 1820 God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith in a grove of trees near his home. They told him that all professing Christians on the face of the earth were abominable and corrupt and that the true Church, having died out completely shortly after it began, was to be restored by Smith.
Mormons run into no small difficulty in reconciling the great apostasy theory with Christ’s promise in Matthew 16:18: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”
How could it be that Christ, who should have known better, would promise that his Church wouldn’t be overcome if he knew full well a great apostasy would make short shrift of it in a matter of decades? Was Christ lying? Obviously not. Was he mistaken? No. Did he miscalculate things? No, again. Christ’s divinity precluded such things.
What are we left with then? Could it be that Mormons are mistaken in their interpretation of such a crucial passage? This is the only tenable conclusion. If there were no great apostasy, then there could have been no need for a restoration of religious authority on the earth. There would be no “restored gospel,” and the entire premise of the Mormon church would be undercut.
The fact is that the only church with an unbroken historical line to apostolic days is the Catholic Church. Even many Protestants acknowledge this, though they argue that there was a need for the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century.
As non-Catholic historians admit, it can be demonstrated easily that early Church writers, such as Ignatius of Antioch, Eusebius, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, had no conception of Mormon doctrine, and they knew nothing of a “great apostasy.”
Nowhere in their writings can one find references to Christians embracing any of the peculiarly Mormon doctrines, such as polytheism, polygamy, celestial marriage, and temple ceremonies. If the Church of the apostolic age was the prototype of today’s Mormon church, it must have had all these beliefs and practices. But why is there no evidence of them in the early centuries, before the alleged apostasy began?
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
The article which I cited is found on the Catholic Answers Tract on Mormonism.
catholic.com/library/Problems_with_the_Book_of_Mormon.asp
catholic.com/library/Problems_with_the_Book_of_Mormon.asp
H
Holly3278
Guest
Yes, they are one in purpose.
P
pigtown
Guest
Christ had 12 Apostles, so does the LDS Church. Is there any other Church that follows so closely the way Christ began His Church?
H
Holly3278
Guest
Excellent observation! And the answer is “Nope!”.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
But according to Mormonism they aren’t. Correct me if I’m wrong. Don’t you believe in many gods? Mainstream Christian maintains there is only One God.
This is strongly affirm in. Hear, O’ Hear, Israel, the Lord our God is One.
T
The_Confused_1
Guest
You should really read the article that Manny refferst to. Here is the link again:
catholic.com/library/Problems_with_the_Book_of_Mormon.asp
H
Holly3278
Guest
Actually according to Mormonism, they are one in purpose. And I don’t really know if we believe in many gods or not. We do believe that mankind can become gods though so I suppose we do.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
The only problem is there is no connection between the Apostles handing down the Mormon directly from the Apostles themselves. In your belief. Joseph Smith re-established Christ’ Church.Excellent observation! And the answer is “Nope!”.
There is no historical evidence to prove Mormon dates back to the Apostles. In fact, St. Clement of Rome in the mid 1st Century was ordained priest by St. Paul, and ordain bishop by St. Peter. St. Polycarp and St. Ignatius of Antioch were disciples of St. John.
The Churches in Antioch still exist today in the Antiochean Churches.
These Churches include:
Antiochian (Antiochene or West-Syrian) liturgical tradition:
Maronite Church (patriarchate): Lebanon, Cyprus, Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Argentina, Brazil, United States, Australia, Canada, Mexico (union re-affirmed 1182)
There others as well. The Church in Rome is one of the Five Patriarchiates of the Early Church:
- Rome (St. Peter and St. Paul)
- Antioch (St. Peter).
- Jerusalem (St. James).
- Alexandria (St. Mark)
- Constantinople (St. Andrew).
H
Holly3278
Guest
No I can’t. But that doesn’t matter to me because I do not believe that the apostles successors had the priesthood authority. Therefore, the Great Apostasy happened. Then, in the 1800s Prophet Joseph Smith restored the church.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Well, these doctrines of your faith keep on changing. God however doesn’t change. He is immutable. The Deposit of Faith which he handed down also cannot change because he has revealed to His disciples, and his Apostles handed down the faith throughout all generation.
The belief that you become gods is unheard of even by OT Jews and the doctrines you profess are not even supported by historical Christianity…
H
Holly3278
Guest
Well, I’m outta this thread. I have no use for it any longer.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
That is a false dichotomy. Jesus promised Peter that gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church. By your premise, Jesus lied to his Apostles. He also promise that he will be with us until the end of times.
Jesus doesn’t lie. He is the Truth. The way, the Truth and the Life. What historical evidence can you provide that your faith is real? So far it hasn’t because none of the civilians in the Book of Mormons have been proven to exist.
- Status