questions about Mormon beliefs

[AMDGtoo]

The apostle John was promised that he could stay on the earth because he wanted to still bring people to a knowledge of Christ instead of being subject to death at a normal age. That promise was to continue until the Second Coming of Christ, which hasn’t happened yet so “yes”, he goes among people in “hidden” places on the earth, among people who do not know that they are being visited by that beloved apostle, but only know that they have been visited by someone who shared a message with them about Christ.

Which always causes me to wonder. I mean you LDS say that the Church went into apostasy after the last apostle (John) died. Then you turn around and say that the Apostle John never died. Well if he never died, by the LDS own words, there wasn’t a total apostasy! (Little ones maybe, like the apostasy when Jesus said that He was real food and that we had to eat His body and drink His blood in the bread and wine and people walked away; the different heresies like Gnostism, Arianism, etc. or even the schisms; and maybe even the Mormons starting in the 1830s; or the Scientology one–but not a total one of the Catholic Church which is protected by the Holy Spirit!)

 

[Monica4316]

As opposed to the prefilled plastic shot cups of wine, with peel back lids, that I saw for sale in a church supply website?

No Catholic Churches use those… (probably it was Protestant)

we believe that the Eucharist is really Jesus that is why we use the gold chalices and vessels

I didn’t know that Mormons don’t believe in the Real Presence…

is there a reason why you use water instead of wine?

thanks for all the replies, God bless

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Hm, I guess no one can refute Jesus_123’s statements. Therefore, I assume they are correct.

Thank you, I better understand Mormon beliefs now.
~LFL

 

[ParkerD]

Hm, I guess no one can refute Jesus_123’s statements. Therefore, I assume they are correct.

Thank you, I better understand Mormon beliefs now.
~LFL

Lil_flower_luv,
Actually, I did refute several items, but did it obliquely since that seemed appropriate given the nature of the accusations and the apparent non-study of basic information that is available so readily.

It would seem important to go to primary sources (no need to fear doing that) to at least glimpse the real beliefs, rather than be told by someone with no real knowledge of the subject.

But, I suppose to each their own. If you have a sincere question after doing at least a bit of research (lds.org is a good basic source), then several of us participate from time to time who could answer with Biblically based explanations about the LDS.

Peace to all, and please never trust everything you read, no matter how good it makes you feel inside to share the bias of someone with an agenda.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

It would seem important to go to primary sources (no need to fear doing that) to at least glimpse the real beliefs, rather than be told by someone with no real knowledge of the subject.

Thank you, Parker, I will do just that! God Bless you.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Just remember that you’ll have to go to unbiased sources too (in order to get a more accurate picture (afterall, folks wouldn’t just rely on the used car dealer who is selling the car to form an accurate picture–a reputable, unbiased mechanic is necessary too unless the person doesn’t really want the facts, and nothin’ but the facts.)

 

[dianaiad]

Diana, I’ve been inside mormon temples, at two open houses. Sorry to say, they remind me of hotels. At any rate, I was talking about LDS churches, you know, what you call chapels.

In truth, our chapels/meeting houses ARE plain.

On the other hand, they are also all paid for. So are the Temples, and speaking of that, you go to very different hotels than I do if that’s what you think they look like.

As I said, no one knows what the cup of Christ looked like.

No, we certainly don’t.

If you want to speculate, you can recall that Mary Magdalene poured a fortunes worth of oil over Christ. Who knows what house they were in that had such things…He had disciples from all walks of life. One who paid the Romans no doubt a large sum in order to give His body a proper burial rather than the norm for crucifixion…leaving the body on the Cross.

Speculation is all well and good–as long as all know that it IS speculation.

 

[RebeccaJ]

In truth, our chapels/meeting houses ARE plain.

On the other hand, they are also all paid for. So are the Temples, and speaking of that, you go to very different hotels than I do if that’s what you think they look like.

Think? lol. Do you think I make a comparison out of an abstract idea I’ve never experienced? Of course I’ve been to the hotels I’m referring to. I have travelled quite a bit for business, and attended conferences in some pretty nice places. You can google what a five star hotel looks like.

On second thought, the plainness is still there in your temples. There is a distinct lack of decoration, of even the religious sort. Some nice finish work, a pretty chandelier, and a few sticks of furniture.

Speculation is all well and good–as long as all know that it IS speculation.

I agree, but it is ok to use what facts are known while speculating.

 

[dianaiad]

Just remember that you’ll have to go to unbiased sources too (in order to get a more accurate picture (afterall, folks wouldn’t just rely on the used car dealer who is selling the car to form an accurate picture–a reputable, unbiased mechanic is necessary too unless the person doesn’t really want the facts, and nothin’ but the facts.)

There is no such thing as an unbiased source for religion.

I repeat.

There is no such thing as an unbiased source for religion. Would YOU trust any information about Catholicism given by an ex-Catholic or a non-Catholic…or would you take any information you got from those sources and confirm them with a reputable CATHOLIC source? If you confirm that information by the Catholic source, why did you go to the non-Catholic source in the first place? If for some reason (and this happens quite frequently…) you go to the Catholic source and that source disagrees with the non-Catholic source, which one will you accept as valid?

Since I imagine that you, a Catholic, would automatically go with the Catholic POV rather than the non-Catholic one, why would you go to a non-Catholic source in the first place?

Nobody in the world can be unbiased when it comes to religion. It can’t happen.

 

[dianaiad]

Think? lol. Do you think I make a comparison out of an abstract idea I’ve never experienced? Of course I’ve been to the hotels I’m referring to. I have travelled quite a bit for business, and attended conferences in some pretty nice places. You can google what a five star hotel looks like.

On second thought, the plainness is still there in your temples. There is a distinct lack of decoration, of even the religious sort. Some nice finish work, a pretty chandelier, and a few sticks of furniture.

I agree, but it is ok to use what facts are known while speculating.

Well, Rebecca, I happen to think that our Temples are quite fancy enough, and beautiful enough, and spiritual enough.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Well, Rebecca, I happen to think that our Temples are quite fancy enough, and beautiful enough, and spiritual enough.

I think the same of the mountains in my backyard.

 

[ParkerD]

Thank you, Parker, I will do just that! God Bless you.

lil_flower_luv,
I wanted to acknowledge your post here by wishing you God’s blessings also in your life. Thanks for your warmth and sincerity.
God bless you always, lil.

 

[Stephen168]

I did not know all of this. Thank you very much for your (name removed by moderator)ut!
ParkerD;6382783:

Lil,
Please be aware that several items in that post were incorrect. Thus, the writer of that post acts in a condition of being a “false teacher” which is an unfortunate position to be in, it would seem from the Bible.

well, lil_flower, I personally would take all of that with a couple of large salt licks. The man is incorrect about pretty much everything.

Hm, I guess no one can refute Jesus_123’s statements. Therefore, I assume they are correct.

Thank you, I better understand Mormon beliefs now.
~LFL

Sadly, your conversation with the Mormons, who come to this form, is not unusual. It is my understanding that the first three points made by Jesus123 are basically true. The fourth point, I don’t know.

 

[TheosisM]

Hm, I guess no one can refute Jesus_123’s statements. Therefore, I assume they are correct.

Thank you, I better understand Mormon beliefs now.
~LFL

Since no one directly addressed this, I’ll try to show you how Jesus_123’s statements are correct and incorrect (they aren’t fully incorrect, just not telling the whole story). I’m not Mormon, so I assume one of the LDS will correct me if I’m wrong about something.

Mormons do not believe in the Trinity . . . God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

This is correct. Mormons do not believe in the Trinity (which is defined as the belief in three distinct Persons that are one in being/essence/substance). Mormons do believe in something they term the “Godhead”, which is the belief in three distinct Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) that are one in purpose. Some other differences are that Mormons believe that the Father is corporeal, or is embodied (has a body of flesh and bones like the Son does now), while Trinitarians believe that the Father is incorporeal. Mormons believe that the Father is married to the Heavenly Mother, though she is not prayed to or worshipped.

Mormon’s do not believe that Jesus is God . . . as well as not believing that He is God Incarnate

This is partially correct. Mormons do believe that Jesus is God and He incarnated on the earth. However there is a difference in understanding what it means that “Jesus is God”. It may be more correct to say that they believe that Jesus is “a God”. When a Trinitarian says that Jesus is God, they mean that Jesus is of the same substance/being as the Father, which makes Him God (but not the Father). This is a somewhat philosophized notion (if you are aware of the Arian controversy/homoousios you may understand where this specific understanding came from). Mormons simply say that Jesus is divine, and never was not-divine.

Now, another difference is that Mormons believe that Jesus is literally the firstborn child of the Father. Trinitarians believe that Jesus is co-eternal with the Father, and He has eternally existed as the Son (i.e. that is His eternal role).

When Mormon’s use the word “Christian” it does not relate in any way to Jesus Christ known as God Incarnate - Second Person of our Triune God . . . that Catholics and Protestant Christians mean when they use the same term

Mormons use the word “Christian” to mean someone that has faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior. They do believe that Jesus is God incarnate (again noting the difference in understanding of what that means re: Trinity vs. Godhead), and that He is the second Person of the Godhead.

Traditional Christians tend to use the word “Christian” as not only someone that has faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior, but someone that also believes in the Apostles’, Nicene, and perhaps also the Athanasian Creeds. So, if someone does not believe in the Trinity concept of God, they are not seen as Christian, hence why Mormons are seen by much of traditional Christianity as non-Christian. Note that many Evangelicals tend to have a more restrictive understanding of who is a Christian, namely someone that subscribes to Evangelical Christianity, and therefore many see Catholicism as non-Christian. So, there really isn’t a universal definition of what is a Christian, and even if we say that it’s a believer in Jesus as one’s Savior, there are still differences in understanding who Jesus is (including within Traditional Christianity).

When they use the word “church” . . . they are not referring to the "Bride-of-Christ/Body-of-Christ (God-Incarnate/God-the-Son)

This is an odd statement. Mormons do believe that “the church” is the Body of Christ and the kingdom of God on earth.

 

[ParkerD]

To the general reader:

Mormons believe that Jesus is Immanuel, God the Son, Alpha and Omega, the Word who was the Creator of this earth and Who came to earth and dwelt among us as God with us, the Anointed One who had been promised as the Messiah and Redeemer of mankind. He is Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.

But Mormons do not believe that God the Son and God the Father are the same Person, nor that They will ever be the Same Person, but are distinct Beings each of Whom love us with perfect love. These Two and the Holy Spirit love all of humankind, and earnestly hope that we can learn to love each other with forgiveness in our hearts and seeking to build peace and feelings of brotherhood among humankind. They do not force belief by fear tactics; They invite belief by love.

Have a peaceful day.

Stephen or whomever might care,

The quote above was posted immediately following the post by the person who used a pseudonym that I will not repeat out of reverence to our Lord. (I am being sincere about that–that was part of the reason my post did not quote that person nor repeat their quoted items.) So my response to lil_flower_luv was that I had already refuted what had been posted. That was why I did so indirectly–because it would have been repeating things I did not care to repeat.

Theosis M,
Thank you kindly for your explanation. I hope that it can be understood that LDS belief is that Jesus has since the beginning of this “eternity”–meaning the time of creation of this universe–been God the Son and been the Word who is the Creator. Therefore, to say He is “a God” is a lessening of His supremely unique role. Just because He enables others to reach a capacity to dwell with the Father in a glorified position of being “like the Savior” in their omnipotence and perfect love and joy, does not lessen the uniqueness of the role of God the Son, Who was Jehovah in the Old Testament and is Jesus Christ who will always be God the Son and will sit in authority with infinite love and compassion on the right hand of the Father, on the throne He offers to share because of His love, His grace, His infinite suffering, and His divine blessing of mercy.

 

[zerinus]

Since no one directly addressed this, I’ll try to show you how Jesus_123’s statements are correct and incorrect (they aren’t fully incorrect, just not telling the whole story). I’m not Mormon, so I assume one of the LDS will correct me if I’m wrong about something.

Thank you Theosis. You have made a good effort, so allow me to rectify some of the comments you have made.

This is correct. Mormons do not believe in the Trinity (which is defined as the belief in three distinct Persons that are one in being/essence/substance). …

That tends to be misleading, because those who say that Mormons do not believe in the Trinity, what they try to do is to create the false impression that Mormons do not believe in the “Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost” (as Jesus_123 is clearly doing), which is of course false. Mormons certainly believe in the Trinity of the Bible, which refers to the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. What they do not believe in is the post-Nicene Trinitarian theology of present day Christianity which is far removed from the biblical one.

This is partially correct. Mormons do believe that Jesus is God and He incarnated on the earth. However there is a difference in understanding what it means that “Jesus is God”. It may be more correct to say that they believe that Jesus is “a God”.

Not quite right. Mormons believe that Jesus is God, period; but not identical with God the Father. They are two separate beings.

When a Trinitarian says that Jesus is God, they mean that Jesus is of the same substance/being as the Father, which makes Him God (but not the Father). …

That depends on what you mean by “of the same substance”. If you mean that they are made of the same “stuff” (for want of a better word), that is what Mormons believe, and so did the early Christians for that matter. Those who formulated this clause in the Nicene Creed had this understanding of it. They did not mean that they were one and the same beings. If however by that expression you mean that they are somehow conglomerated into one being, then that is of course false. It is not only theologically false, but also historically false. It is not what the early Christians, or even the Nicene Christians or Chalcedonians Christians believed.

Now, another difference is that Mormons believe that Jesus is literally the firstborn child of the Father. Trinitarians believe that Jesus is co-eternal with the Father, and He has eternally existed as the Son (i.e. that is His eternal role).

Which you might have observed is an incomprehensible and meaningless notion.

Mormons use the word “Christian” to mean someone that has faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior. They do believe that Jesus is God incarnate …

We certainly do believe that Jesus is God incarnate … just not identical with God the Father.

Traditional Christians tend to use the word “Christian” as not only someone that has faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior, but someone that also believes in the Apostles’, Nicene, and perhaps also the Athanasian Creeds. So, if someone does not believe in the Trinity concept of God, they are not seen as Christian, hence why Mormons are seen by much of traditional Christianity as non-Christian.

That is not historically true actually. Before the days of Mormonism, Christians defined the word “Christian” in the same way that Mormons do today. Nobody ever claimed that Arians were not Christians for example. They considered them to be Christians, but perhaps misguided or heretical Christens. This new “definition” is a relatively recent invention which has been made (by those who have made it) with the specific intention of excluding those whom they disagreed with (or had a quarrel with) from their own category of what they call a Christian. It is basically an “attack” strategy. It is nothing more.

Note that many Evangelicals tend to have a more restrictive understanding of who is a Christian, namely someone that subscribes to Evangelical Christianity, and therefore many see Catholicism as non-Christian. So, there really isn’t a universal definition of what is a Christian, and even if we say that it’s a believer in Jesus as one’s Savior, there are still differences in understanding who Jesus is (including within Traditional Christianity).

That is a valid observation.

This is an odd statement. Mormons do believe that “the church” is the Body of Christ and the kingdom of God on earth.

Thank you, that is also correct.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Not quite right. Mormons believe that Jesus is God, period; but not identical with God the Father. They are two separate beings.

Did you forget that the LDS seem to think Jesus is not to be prayed to?

 

[PaulDupre]

Did you forget that the LDS seem to think Jesus is not to be prayed to?

The Mormons believe that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are our spirit brothers. In Mormonism, you don’t pray to your brother, you only pray to your father.

Paul (a former Mormon, now happily Catholic)