Questions for Mormons..

[PaulDupre]

You said that God and Jesus were both resurrected which would indicate that they both died. How can the be that God died?

The LDS believe that God the Father was not always God. They believe that he was once a mortal man who lived on a planet similar to earth and progressed to godhood by obeying his god. They believe that he died and was resurrected and became a god. In the same way, they believe that they can progress to godhood and become gods like God the Father.

 

[dianaiad]

In his confession, Lee included a statement that Brigham Young taught that all those who had passed through the endowment were placed under a sacred obligation to avenge the blood of Joseph Smith.

The rumor of the Fancher party having participants in the murder of Joseph Smith was just that, a rumor, but this oath played a part in the decision to massacre over 140 people.

…and you read whose mind in order to come to this conclusion?

 

[twopekinguys]

(sigh)

Remember, I didn’t present the idea of ‘blood atonement’ as it actually is. I presented it as REbecca and the anti’s pretend it is. The two presentations are not the same. I presented theirs in order to show that even by THEIR measure of it, the MMM doesn’t qualify as 'blood atonement."

I believe that in order to avail oneself of Christ’s Atonement, one must repent, and accept it. Repentance involves acknowledging the sin, feeling remorse, providing restitution as far as it can be done, asking forgiveness from whoever you sinned against, and not repeating the sin. I believe that as a Catholic you might be more familiar with the idea of confession and penance than a few other Christians who have a sort of ‘instant purity’ sort of thing going on, or worse, a sort of ‘get out of hell free’ card.

There is no sin under the sun that one can commit that one cannot, somehow, make restitution for, at least partially, except—ending a life. How DO you repent of that? What restitution can you possibly make?

Oh, you can do great things…for other people. You can spend your life saving other lives. You can be the most perfect person that ever lived (short of Jesus Himself) and it doesn’t matter; you cannot provide restitution to the person you harmed…that person is out of your reach. You cannot ask him for forgiveness. You cannot, no matter how worthily you spend the rest of your life, make up for the life you ended. After all, you are SUPPOSED to live your life worthily anyway; you have just made it impossible for your victim to do so.

Now you know that you can (as a Catholic) confess and do penance all day and all night, but without Christ’s Atonement, it would not be enough. It is as impossible for us to be perfect here on earth as it is for an infant to dress himself, no matter how hard he tries.

So how IS a murderer to access that Atoning sacrifice? By offering up his own life. I don’t know if it is required that it actually be taken…but he has to be willing to offer it…and it has to be done according to law and judgment.

Dianiad,

I understood your response to Rebecca, that is why I wanted to start from the very beginning, and make sure I understood the concept correctly.

Going back to my earlier questions, which revolve around your answer here, concerning murder.

Let’s use the John Wayne Gacey situation as an example. It is/was obvious that he did it. It is/was obvious that he wasn’t repentent in any fashion. He didn’t give up his life freely.
I’m sure if he had,given it up freely, or was repentent, that would have made big headlines.

So, is it LDS teaching that there is no salvation for him (or someone similar).

Would he go to outer darkness? Would a proxy baptism help him out?

I’m just trying to understand. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so I will ask it straight forward. Is Blood Atonement a Doctrine of the LDS at this time?

By the way, I’m QUITE familiar with confession/reconcilliation. I avail myself of that sacrament quite freely. Go figure…lol

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t think that god will punish mormons or catholics or protestants for what they believe as long as they obey that great commandment to love god, love neighbor and love enemy.

As Pope JPII said (paraphrasing) “Love without Truth isn’t really love.”

Love without Truth is impotent. Read the very magnificentVeritatis Splendour, if you haven’t already.

 

[Religio71]

As Pope JPII said (paraphrasing) “Love without Truth isn’t really love.”

Love without Truth is impotent. Read the very magnificentVeritatis Splendour, if you haven’t already.

Thank you for that!!!

 

[dianaiad]

Dianiad,

I understood your response to Rebecca, that is why I wanted to start from the very beginning, and make sure I understood the concept correctly.

Going back to my earlier questions, which revolve around your answer here, concerning murder.

Let’s use the John Wayne Gacey situation as an example. It is/was obvious that he did it. It is/was obvious that he wasn’t repentent in any fashion. He didn’t give up his life freely.
I’m sure if he had,given it up freely, or was repentent, that would have made big headlines.

So, is it LDS teaching that there is no salvation for him (or someone similar).

Well, the whole idea is that the sinner has to BE repentant. Unless Gacy was so out of his mind that he wasn’t responsible for his actions, then I think he’s toast. Mind you, what I think doesn’t count for much…

Would he go to outer darkness?

We believe that “outer darkness” or “perdition” is reserved for those who commit the one unpardonable sin, which is not murder; that is the denial of the Holy Ghost…and that’s rather hard to do. One must, I think, in full understanding of Who God is, Who Christ is, and Who the Holy Ghost is, deliberately choose Satan. Not ‘doubt,’ but “KNOW,” and choose anyway.

Would a proxy baptism help him out?

More like ‘coals of fire,’ that one. After all, I don’t think it’s going to help Hitler out any. It’s more like fixing it so that they no longer have ANY excuse.

I’m just trying to understand. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so I will ask it straight forward. Is Blood Atonement a Doctrine of the LDS at this time?

By the way, I’m QUITE familiar with confession/reconcilliation. I avail myself of that sacrament quite freely. Go figure…lol

I figured that you were, which is why I used the example. “Blood Atonement” is doctrine. It’s just that the doctrine of “Blood atonement” isn’t what the antis think it is.

 

[twopekinguys]

Well, the whole idea is that the sinner has to BE repentant. Unless Gacy was so out of his mind that he wasn’t responsible for his actions, then I think he’s toast. Mind you, what I think doesn’t count for much…

We believe that “outer darkness” or “perdition” is reserved for those who commit the one unpardonable sin, which is not murder; that is the denial of the Holy Ghost…and that’s rather hard to do. One must, I think, in full understanding of Who God is, Who Christ is, and Who the Holy Ghost is, deliberately choose Satan. Not ‘doubt,’ but “KNOW,” and choose anyway.

More like ‘coals of fire,’ that one. After all, I don’t think it’s going to help Hitler out any. It’s more like fixing it so that they no longer have ANY excuse.

I figured that you were, which is why I used the example. “Blood Atonement” is doctrine. It’s just that the doctrine of “Blood atonement” isn’t what the antis think it is.

Thanks, but am I understanding correctly. That is, if they aren’t repentent, etc. that there is a “hell” as opposed to outer darkness?

 

[mjf001]

Thanks, but am I understanding correctly. That is, if they aren’t repentent, etc. that there is a “hell” as opposed to outer darkness?

I’ve read three of the gospels in their entirety since my conversion and about 75% of the gospel of John. When I’ve read Jesus speaking about hell, it sounds like there will be more than a few, and there are more ways to get there than one. And a person goes there forever, no second chances.

God desires all of us to get to heaven, but not all will make it there.

And I agree, one gets to hell by being unrepentant; it’s a choice on the part of the sinner.

In Christ,
Michael

 

[dianaiad]

Thanks, but am I understanding correctly. That is, if they aren’t repentent, etc. that there is a “hell” as opposed to outer darkness?

Kinda yes, kinda no…

We believe that there are levels to heaven–we believe that Paul refers to this in his letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15 (that chapter has gotten us into a lot of trouble, y’know?) and that Christ refers to it in John 14:2 when He speaks of “many mansions”

Anyway, the lowest one is reserved for the liars, the murderers…those sorts. It’s still better than here in a way, but; the company is pretty dismal. As well, those folks don’t get to be with God the Father or Jesus Christ, nor can they be full ‘hiers and joint-heirs’ with Christ. So…it’s hell.

But since it isn’t eternal physical torture, and is better than the life we have here, it’s not the ‘hell’ most people think of. It’s more like that old cliche:" Hell is when the man I am meets the man I was supposed to be."

But would you like to spend eternity with John Wayne Gacy…even if you WERE John Wayne Gacy?

 

[ParkerD]

Quote: Randy Carson
“Do Jesus and the Heavenly Father have the same nature?”

Quote: ParkerD
“Yes, as resurrected Beings with the “substance” of being God, They have the same nature. They both have perfect bodies with tangible presence. Man was created in the actual “image” of God the Father.”

Forgive me if you’ve already addressed this which is likely true, but I’m slightly confused.

You said that God and Jesus were both resurrected which would indicate that they both died. How can the be that God died?

Hi, “Gethsemane”,
I had missed your question until now. It’s a very good one, and your chosen moniker shows that you are probably more than a casual student of the Bible.

The LDS belief that Heavenly Father is a resurrected Being who, like Christ, was always perfect from all eternity to all eternity, comes from a direct and literal understanding of John 5:19 which says,
“Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.”

A literal understanding of this verse indicates that Jesus’ resurrection was something that He learned from the Father, which He was able to do since He had a perfect knowledge of the pre-mortal past and could “see” both into the past and into the future.

Since Christ was perfect on earth and in His pre-mortal life, that verse shows that the Father was also perfect when He lived on an earth and before His own mortal life eons of time in the eternal past, and that He knew how to resurrect Himself just as the Savior knew the principles and had the power to resurrect Himself. He had the power to lay down His life, and take it up again, and the Father had that same power.

Our power to be resurrected will come only by virtue of the Savior, which is why His suffering in Gethsemane and on the cross of Calvary are the pivotal events in time and eternity.

 

[Charlotte408]

Hi, “Gethsemane”,
I had missed your question until now. It’s a very good one, and your chosen moniker shows that you are probably more than a casual student of the Bible.

The LDS belief that Heavenly Father is a resurrected Being who, like Christ, was always perfect from all eternity to all eternity, comes from a direct and literal understanding of John 5:19 which says,
“Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.”

A literal understanding of this verse indicates that Jesus’ resurrection was something that He learned from the Father, which He was able to do since He had a perfect knowledge of the pre-mortal past and could “see” both into the past and into the future.

Since Christ was perfect on earth and in His pre-mortal life, that verse shows that the Father was also perfect when He lived on an earth and before His own mortal life eons of time in the eternal past, and that He knew how to resurrect Himself just as the Savior knew the principles and had the power to resurrect Himself. He had the power to lay down His life, and take it up again, and the Father had that same power.

Our power to be resurrected will come only by virtue of the Savior, which is why His suffering in Gethsemane and on the cross of Calvary are the pivotal events in time and eternity.

ok so…im just thinking outloud here…and this may be a dumb question…but …the Father was perfect in his premortal life…lived on an earth, was perfect…was resurrected…

then jesus the son, was perfect in his premortal life… lived on an earth…was perfect…was resurrected…

jesus did it because the father did…and it was something he knew he could do…just like his grandfather did…and so on and so forth…

so why? then is this a pivotal event in time and eternity??? i mean, if it was a one time thing, i’d say ‘wow- thats a pivotal event in time and eternity…GOD, sent his ONE and ONLY SON to DIE for OUR sins…’ but…if this happens every…idk, i guess couple of years, however long it takes for someone to become a new God and be issued their own earth…then…idk…maybe im missing something…its getting late i could be trippin…

 

[RebeccaJ]

After his attack on me/us, I have nothing further to say to him either.

We can pray for him.

 

[twopekinguys]

Kinda yes, kinda no…

We believe that there are levels to heaven–we believe that Paul refers to this in his letter to the Corinthians, chapter 15 (that chapter has gotten us into a lot of trouble, y’know?) and that Christ refers to it in John 14:2 when He speaks of “many mansions”

Anyway, the lowest one is reserved for the liars, the murderers…those sorts. It’s still better than here in a way, but; the company is pretty dismal. As well, those folks don’t get to be with God the Father or Jesus Christ, nor can they be full ‘hiers and joint-heirs’ with Christ. So…it’s hell.

But since it isn’t eternal physical torture, and is better than the life we have here, it’s not the ‘hell’ most people think of. It’s more like that old cliche:" Hell is when the man I am meets the man I was supposed to be."

But would you like to spend eternity with John Wayne Gacy…even if you WERE John Wayne Gacy?

Got it, Thanks,

Although, to me, it doesn’t seem like a fitting punishment for someone like that.(assuming they haven’t repented) Doesn’t seem painful enough.

Of course, from the Catholic point of view, we believe salvation through Christ is available to anyone and everyone. Because we can’t judge what is in their hearts, and we don’t know if they have truly repented, prior to dying.

As far as the lowest level of heaven as you describe it, it just kind of seems like a prison hear on Earth to me. Many of them sit around and talk about their exploits, and “conquests”. (first hand knowledge, as I volunteer at both a State prison, and a Federal prison in our area)

One thing I like about the Catholic Church. The Church doesn’t teach that any specific person is in Hell. We do teach that specific people are in Heaven i.e. Saints.

Thanks for the answers. I think I understand it a little better. Don’t agree with it, but Hey, I learned something. And that ain’t all bad.

 

[ParkerD]

ok so…im just thinking outloud here…and this may be a dumb question…but …the Father was perfect in his premortal life…lived on an earth, was perfect…was resurrected…

then jesus the son, was perfect in his premortal life… lived on an earth…was perfect…was resurrected…

jesus did it because the father did…and it was something he knew he could do…just like his grandfather did…and so on and so forth…

so why? then is this a pivotal event in time and eternity??? i mean, if it was a one time thing, i’d say ‘wow- thats a pivotal event in time and eternity…GOD, sent his ONE and ONLY SON to DIE for OUR sins…’ but…if this happens every…idk, i guess couple of years, however long it takes for someone to become a new God and be issued their own earth…then…idk…maybe im missing something…its getting late i could be trippin…

Charlotte408,
Those are good, logical questions. I myself think of Heavenly Father as the First Father, but I have heard of some LDS who think it makes sense that Heavenly Father had been a Savior eons of time ago. I think of our present “eternity” as having started so far into the past and extending so far into the future, that it is far more than I could comprehend even if I wanted to, nor do I think it makes an iota of difference whether my mind has a different concept than another person’s about eternities past. The eternity that I have to deal with and try and comprehend what my part in it is, extends backward to the pre-mortal life when we all decided to follow the Savior and the Father and rejoiced in that decision, and also rejoiced as spirits when the Savior completed His infinite atonement to really give us the grace and power to become something otherwise completely unattainable for us, while we were spirits observing what happened (in a limited sense of being able to realize what was taking place on earth) in the Meridian of time with His life and suffering and resurrection. That event was completely pivotal for all of the eternal time that I need to know about or be concerned about.

 

[zaffiroborant]

(sigh)

Remember, I didn’t present the idea of ‘blood atonement’ as it actually is. I presented it as REbecca and the anti’s pretend it is. The two presentations are not the same. I presented theirs in order to show that even by THEIR measure of it, the MMM doesn’t qualify as 'blood atonement."

I believe that in order to avail oneself of Christ’s Atonement, one must repent, and accept it. Repentance involves acknowledging the sin, feeling remorse, providing restitution as far as it can be done, asking forgiveness from whoever you sinned against, and not repeating the sin. I believe that as a Catholic you might be more familiar with the idea of confession and penance than a few other Christians who have a sort of ‘instant purity’ sort of thing going on, or worse, a sort of ‘get out of hell free’ card.

There is no sin under the sun that one can commit that one cannot, somehow, make restitution for, at least partially, except—ending a life. How DO you repent of that? What restitution can you possibly make?

Oh, you can do great things…for other people. You can spend your life saving other lives. You can be the most perfect person that ever lived (short of Jesus Himself) and it doesn’t matter; you cannot provide restitution to the person you harmed…that person is out of your reach. You cannot ask him for forgiveness. You cannot, no matter how worthily you spend the rest of your life, make up for the life you ended. After all, you are SUPPOSED to live your life worthily anyway; you have just made it impossible for your victim to do so.

Now you know that you can (as a Catholic) confess and do penance all day and all night, but without Christ’s Atonement, it would not be enough. It is as impossible for us to be perfect here on earth as it is for an infant to dress himself, no matter how hard he tries.

So how IS a murderer to access that Atoning sacrifice? By offering up his own life. I don’t know if it is required that it actually be taken…but he has to be willing to offer it…and it has to be done according to law and judgment.

Why not through prayer?

 

[imkingdad]

Now, Charlotte…do you see a difference between having a thief caught, arrested, tried and convicted of the crime, then sentenced to jail by a duly appointed court of law—and having a bunch of vigilantes show up and chop the thief’s hand off?

Do you see a difference between a murderer being tried, convicted and sentenced to execution by a duly authorized court of law—and having that same murderer committing suicide, or being hung by a group of vigilantes?

We do.

By the way, I would ask Rebecca to actually cite those ‘documented instances’ she talks about. Then, go look at them. Make very certain that they are documented by people who do NOT have a major problem with the church (like, for instance, J, Michael Quinn,…).

Then ask yourself if any of them are as well documented, and are the same as, say…the mob of men who stormed Carthage jail and murdered Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum.

It seems to me that people who talk about 'blood atonement" but leave all such judgment to duly elected/authorized courts–and who (as Brigham Young did) preach more often about forgiveness and ‘leave them alone’ than "go kill 'em,) are in better shape with the Lord than people who preach love, peace and forgiveness—and then send mobs to murder unarmed men.

But hey, that’s just me. What do I know?

You didn’t answer her Question. But thats nothing new for you D, you slick change the subject & weasel word your way around a Point that you refuse to acknowledge
simply because Mormonism lets you arbatrarily discount, deny, or dismiss any Fact or criticism that doesn’t vibe with Mormon Orthodoxy as being from Satan & unworthy of an honest response, Heck any type of response.

So why are you still here? It is clear from Mormon Teachings today that you are under no compunction to acknowledge anything that isn’t Mormon. An Honest comparative discussion including Facts, documents, Testimony, history etc. can not be had with you or others of your ilk.

All you are doing is Pontificating your Beliefs which by the admission of Mormons current & separated allow you to lie, misrepresent or ignore anything that hasn’t previously been accepted & approved by the Mormon Prophets & church Officers.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Charlotte408,
Those are good, logical questions. I myself think of Heavenly Father as the First Father, but I have heard of some LDS who think it makes sense that Heavenly Father had been a Savior eons of time ago. I think of our present “eternity” as having started so far into the past and extending so far into the future, that it is far more than I could comprehend even if I wanted to, nor do I think it makes an iota of difference whether my mind has a different concept than another person’s about eternities past. The eternity that I have to deal with and try and comprehend what my part in it is, extends backward to the pre-mortal life when we all decided to follow the Savior and the Father and rejoiced in that decision, and also rejoiced as spirits when the Savior completed His infinite atonement to really give us the grace and power to become something otherwise completely unattainable for us, while we were spirits observing what happened (in a limited sense of being able to realize what was taking place on earth) in the Meridian of time with His life and suffering and resurrection. That event was completely pivotal for all of the eternal time that I need to know about or be concerned about.

You know that a bunch of “eternities” makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

[ParkerD]

You know that a bunch of “eternities” makes absolutely no sense to me.

Hi, Zaffiroborant,
I think we have such a small frame of reference including our understanding of the measurement of time itself, on this earth as we look out into the vastness of space or as scientists do that with their best instruments, that we just don’t and couldn’t comprehend the reality of the “eternity” past. I don’t understand string theory of “universes”, so I don’t know enough to make an informed judgment about it, but I was trying to express that something similar to string theory can exist within the dimension we call “time” itself. We just don’t and wouldn’t comprehend it, but we have plenty to think about and try and “get right” in our lives as we are now, so I’m satisfied to keep my thinking within the confines of what I am expected to be able to understand in this life.

 

[why_me]

Why me’s response to the Mountain Meadows Massacre as an example of blood atonement is:

“Mormons are not perfect then and now”. Also “Many Mormon settlers vividly remembered the hardships of being forcibly (and violently) expelled from Missouri and Illinois, and were resolved not to be driven from their homes again. The mood in the territory was grim and determined.”

WAY to avoid whether Mountain Meadows was an example of blood atonement.

Mountain Meadows is an historical event. And as such, it needs to be interpreted through cause and effect. It happened but why it happened is up to interpretation. We can not exclude the ‘Utah War’ and its effects on the mormon settlers. We need to remember that many families sacrificed a lot to get to Utah, including the deaths of relatives. Then, when we figure in the persecution suffered by mormon families in Nauvoo and in Missouri we can see perhaps a certain mindset developing.

Mountain Meadows had very little to do with blood atonement but much to do with the past. And if we use blood atonement, then it needs to be used in context to what happened to the lds in Nauvoo and in Missouri and how it was misused if that were the case.

How to explain past events without looking at the circumstances that existed at the time? It would be impossible. This is why I tend to give a little more understanding as to why things happen when they do. No event stands alone isolated from other events.

 

[why_me]

As Pope JPII said (paraphrasing) “Love without Truth isn’t really love.”

Love without Truth is impotent. Read the very magnificentVeritatis Splendour, if you haven’t already.

And when truth is used to mock, bash, blame, harm and hurt, it is not really love either. Bu to give truth with love shows respect and dignity to those who we are in dialogue with. I have never heard any pope say that we need to hurt others with truth.

Here is a case in point from your link:

1. The Church’s Pastors, in communion with the Successor of Peter, are close to the faithful in this effort; they guide and accompany them by their authoritative teaching, finding ever new ways of speaking with love and mercy not only to believers but to all people of good will. The Second Vatican Council remains an extraordinary witness of this attitude on the part of the Church which, as an “expert in humanity”,5 places herself at the service of every individual and of the whole world.

How often have I said that we need to post with love and mercy? Quite often. And how often have I spoken about humanity on this forum? Quite often when I address the catholic posters about their bashing.

And who is following the understanding of what is in blue? And show where catholics have responded with love and mercy on the mormon threads? Very few and inbetween.