Seeking a balanced description of Mormoninsm

[zerinus]

See post # 33 on mormons confessing their sins to the bishop thread. Your name came up on that thread.

Yes, I had a look. The answer is that I have no regrets for what I have posted here, and I have no apologies to make to anyone.

zerinus

 

[truthsilence]

You can post my summary with these conditions.

1. 
   *]As you said, you do not use my screen name.
   *]You include a copy of my OP.
   *]You identify the writer as a Catholic.
   *]You identify the writer as a Catholic who is interested in learning about Mormonism out of intellectual curiosity and there is no chance of him ever leaving the Catholic Church or adopting LDS beliefs that conflict with Catholic teachings.
   *]You provide a link to this thread in the post.
   *]You provide a link to the thread on the mormonapologetics site.

1. 
   If whyme does as you asked, your screen name will be obvious.

 

[zerinus]

You can post my summary with these conditions.

1. 
   *]As you said, you do not use my screen name.
   *]You include a copy of my OP.
   *]You identify the writer as a Catholic.
   *]You identify the writer as a Catholic who is interested in learning about Mormonism out of intellectual curiosity and there is no chance of him ever leaving the Catholic Church or adopting LDS beliefs that conflict with Catholic teachings.
   *]You provide a link to this thread in the post.
   *]You provide a link to the thread on the mormonapologetics site.

1. 
   This is the Internet, not a bookstore! Internet is a place of sharing. No “permission” is required for quoting or sharing ideas on the Internet, provided that the correct attribution is given, and no plagiarism is practiced. Internet etiquette permits that. I have quoted from many sources on the Internet in my Blog posts. I didn’t need to ask their “permissions” to do that. But I have made sure to give the source of the quotes so that people know where they came from. That is what makes the Internet such a great place for sharing ideas and learning. If you don’t want your ideas to be shared on the Internet, you should not post them.
   
   If I had wanted to quote your summary on the Mormon Apologetics board to see what their response to it would be, I wouldn’t have asked your “permission” for it! I would have gone right ahead and quoted it, and asked them what their response to it is. But I would have made sure to inform them where it came from, so that I wouldn’t be guilty of plagiarizing your work, or giving a false impression of its source. That is the name of the game on the Internet.
   
   zerinus

 

[rpp]

If whyme does as you asked, your screen name will be obvious.

But only if they come here and look. And THAT is the point. They will be able to see the other posts, and, if they join, make corrections and amplifications.

 

[truthsilence]

This is the Internet, not a bookstore! Internet is a place of sharing. No “permission” is required for quoting or sharing ideas on the Internet, provided that the correct attribution is given, and no plagiarism is practiced. Internet etiquette permits that. I have quoted from many sources on the Internet in my Blog posts. I didn’t need to ask their “permissions” to do that. But I have made sure to give the source of the quotes so that people know where they came from. That is what makes the Internet such a great place for sharing ideas and learning. If you don’t want your ideas to be shared on the Internet, you should not post them.

If I had wanted to quote your summary on the Mormon Apologetics board to see what their response to it would be, I wouldn’t have asked your “permission” for it! I would have gone right ahead and quoted it, and asked them what their response to it is. But I would have made sure to inform them where it came from, so that I wouldn’t be guilty of plagiarizing your work, or giving a false impression of its source. That is the name of the game on the Internet.

zerinus

Nevertheless, there is certainly nothing wrong with asking permission to post someones words on another discussion board. After all, we do become somewhat of a community on these boards, whether we agree with one another, or even like one another. Practicing a little etiquette is a good thing.

 

[rpp]

This is the Internet, not a bookstore! Internet is a place of sharing. No “permission” is required for quoting or sharing ideas on the Internet, provided that the correct attribution is given, and no plagiarism is practiced. Internet etiquette permits that. I have quoted from many sources on the Internet in my Blog posts. I didn’t need to ask their “permissions” to do that. But I have made sure to give the source of the quotes so that people know where they came from. That is what makes the Internet such a great place for sharing ideas and learning. If you don’t want your ideas to be shared on the Internet, you should not post them.

If I had wanted to quote your summary on the Mormon Apologetics board to see what their response to it would be, I wouldn’t have asked your “permission” for it! I would have gone right ahead and quoted it, and asked them what their response to it is. But I would have made sure to inform them where it came from, so that I wouldn’t be guilty of plagiarizing your work, or giving a false impression of its source. That is the name of the game on the Internet.

zerinus

Of course what is written here on the forums immedicately goes into the public domain, or is protected by copyright under the Catholic Answers. However, since WhyMe was polite enough to ask, I thought is reasonable to say how I would like ti presented. It is always possible that someone may, unintentionally or otherwise alter what I have written changing the meaning. I have seen and experienced that.

 

[zerinus]

Nevertheless, there is certainly nothing wrong with asking permission to post someones words on another discussion board. After all, we do become somewhat of a community on these boards, whether we agree with one another, or even like one another. Practicing a little etiquette is a good thing.

Yes, as a general rule I would go along with that—provided that that etiquette is reciprocated. But if I knew that he would be laying down such stringent “rules,” I don’t think I would want to ask his “permission” at all!

zerinus

 

[majick275]

I guess I finally got an answer to my question:

This may be not that uncommon. When I read the book of mormon and prayed about it, I did receive a confirmation that it was true. But that doesn’t happen to everyone.

A witness to the book can be had in many ways. It can come from the life that one is leading as a mormon by putting the precepts into practice. Also, it can come in ways that are often not recognizable. On the other hand, like Mother Teresa, I do think that quite often God may not give us a direct spiritual experience or he may withdraw his pressence for a while.

Also, I wasn’t searching for a testimony. I read the book, prayed about it and received it. But I was not searching for it.

That being said, I am an inactive mormon with a good catholic background for which I am grateful.

so then…let’s quit with the charade of being an active catholic who just likes mormonism.

 

[truthsilence]

I guess I finally got an answer to my question:

so then…let’s quit with the charade of being an active catholic who just likes mormonism. Amen

Everyone on earth is at their own place on their journey to God, and I can “appreciate” being in a state of flux. I’m a Catholic convert who spent many years in Mormonism and I vividly remember trying to reconcile what I was hearing at church, and reading in LDS church publications, with what I knew about the bible; (which was very little, by the way) and what the Holy Spirit was trying to tell me. I used to feel like the rug was being pulled out from under my feet almost constantly. In God’s time, after years of prayer and when I was ready, he led me to his Church, and his truth. It is a truth that is consistent. I needed that desperately.

But there are people who seem to be able to allow in their minds the possibility that two (or more) completely different theologies can be Gods truth. And they might even be quite comfortable with the idea. They might believe its truly wonderful to be so open minded.

I’m trying to be understanding of where “whyme” is at. I get the part about not wanting to see anyone beat upon. I get the part about seeing the good that being involved in Mormonism can do for some people. I guess coming here to C/A, he might see an underdog in someone like Zerinus. He might see it as rude for people who are convicted in their Catholic faith to defend it, and at times when necessary, vehemently. But when it comes right down to it, that is what we are supposed to do as Christians. If someone is preaching things that are completely contrary to what we know, how can we possibly sit back and say nothing? I think people here have tried very hard to be charitable. Us ex-Mormons get frustrated, because we see things with new eyes. We’re weary of the confusion. We see it for what it is, and where it comes from.

The thing is, God has already determined what truth is, not us. It doesn’t matter where we feel most comfortable or how open minded we want to be. There is an ultimate truth and it can’t be both Mormonism and Catholicism. Of course we agree on some things. But there are too many huge issues where we differ far too much, to be able to embrace both theologies as belonging to God, or from God.

God cannot possibly be happy with double-mindedness. A true religion can’t just be what “works for you”. If that is where we’re at, we are right back to Adam and Eve deciding what they wanted to do, instead of what God told them to do. You can be a kind person, and you can acknowledge the ultimate good that certain activities can bring about in any religion, the same as in any charitable organization or social club. But you simply can’t have your own religion based upon two conflicting theologies and expect God to be happy about it. As a good friend has said, that is a form of self worship. It is self-centered, not God centered - even if you wish with all your heart for it to be otherwise.

 

[Mom_of_5]

Everyone on earth is at their own place on their journey to God, and I can “appreciate” being in a state of flux. I’m a Catholic convert who spent many years in Mormonism and I vividly remember trying to reconcile what I was hearing at church, and reading in LDS church publications, with what I knew about the bible; (which was very little, by the way) and what the Holy Spirit was trying to tell me. I used to feel like the rug was being pulled out from under my feet almost constantly. In God’s time, after years of prayer and when I was ready, he led me to his Church, and his truth. It is a truth that is consistent. I needed that desperately.

But there are people who seem to be able to allow in their minds the possibility that two (or more) completely different theologies can be Gods truth. And they might even be quite comfortable with the idea. They might believe its truly wonderful to be so open minded.

I’m trying to be understanding of where “whyme” is at. I get the part about not wanting to see anyone beat upon. I get the part about seeing the good that being involved in Mormonism can do for some people. I guess coming here to C/A, he might see an underdog in someone like Zerinus. He might see it as rude for people who are convicted in their Catholic faith to defend it, and at times when necessary, vehemently. But when it comes right down to it, that is what we are supposed to do as Christians. If someone is preaching things that are completely contrary to what we know, how can we possibly sit back and say nothing? I think people here have tried very hard to be charitable. Us ex-Mormons get frustrated, because we see things with new eyes. We’re weary of the confusion. We see it for what it is, and where it comes from.

The thing is, God has already determined what truth is, not us. It doesn’t matter where we feel most comfortable or how open minded we want to be. There is an ultimate truth and it can’t be both Mormonism and Catholicism. Of course we agree on some things. But there are too many huge issues where we differ far too much, to be able to embrace both theologies as belonging to God, or from God.

God cannot possibly be happy with double-mindedness. A true religion can’t just be what “works for you”. If that is where we’re at, we are right back to Adam and Eve deciding what they wanted to do, instead of what God told them to do. You can be a kind person, and you can acknowledge the ultimate good that certain activities can bring about in any religion, the same as in any charitable organization or social club. But you simply can’t have your own religion based upon two conflicting theologies and expect God to be happy about it. As a good friend has said, that is a form of self worship. It is self-centered, not God centered - even if you wish with all your heart for it to be otherwise.

Thank you, great post.

Mom of 5

 

[why_me]

I’m trying to be understanding of where “whyme” is at. I get the part about not wanting to see anyone beat upon. I get the part about seeing the good that being involved in Mormonism can do for some people. I guess coming here to C/A, he might see an underdog in someone like Zerinus. He might see it as rude for people who are convicted in their Catholic faith to defend it, and at times when necessary, vehemently.

You see truthsilence it is all very simple. It goes to the principle: treat others as you yourself wish to be treated. I refer to ‘you’ in the general and not you, specifically.

I see no good in bashing faiths. I see it as being very destructive. And I try not to do it. If I were to go to a forum that bashed catholicism, I would defend catholicism to the extent that I could. And yes, it is rude for people who are convinced in their catholic faith to bash other faiths. But I don’t think that it is rude to defend their faith.

I don’t see catholics defending their faith from mormon trolls. Most mormons on this forum do not bash the catholic faith without reason and usually that reason is: the hardlined catholics bash the mormon faith. Most what is said about mormonism is more than negative, What is said is usually rudely negative.

Now I don’t see having a dialogue as being destructive where language is respectful. No need to call JS a liar, a fraud, a charleton etc. That is not dialogue.

The work of a true christian is to educate, to be a teacher, and to live what is taught by christ.

 

[why_me]

The thing is, God has already determined what truth is, not us. It doesn’t matter where we feel most comfortable or how open minded we want to be. There is an ultimate truth and it can’t be both Mormonism and Catholicism. Of course we agree on some things. But there are too many huge issues where we differ far too much, to be able to embrace both theologies as belonging to God, or from God.

Perhaps god had already determined what truth is but the human mind disagrees with just what is god’s truth. And here we have the problem. The point: work on what is agreed upon and go from there respectfully. Now that would be a great dialogue.But at all times keep respect in the heart. Why? because people are human beings.

 

[why_me]

God cannot possibly be happy with double-mindedness. A true religion can’t just be what “works for you”.

Considering the state of the world, god, I think, would be happy with anyone who is attempting to become closer with Him in mind, spirit, body and soul. How they do it would be secondary.

 

[truthsilence]

Perhaps god had already determined what truth is but the human mind disagrees with just what is god’s truth. And here we have the problem. The point: work on what is agreed upon and go from there respectfully

The work of a true christian is to educate, to be a teacher, and to live what is taught by christ.

Now I don’t see having a dialogue as being destructive where language is respectful. No need to call JS a liar, a fraud, a charleton etc. That is not dialogue.

Someone wasn’t telling the truth, nor were they living and teaching what was taught by Christ. Was it the writers of the Bible? The early Fathers of the Church? St Catherine of Sienna? Pope JP2? Did any one of them ever teach that there was a time when God was not God? No they never did. Not one of those teachers ever taught that God was once a man who lived on an earth and progressed to Godhood. The exact opposite is true. So when someone comes along 19th century A.D. and teaches the exact opposite of what we’ve been taught about God and his gospel, I think pointing out that they’re lying, or at least sincerely misled, is warranted. Christ spoke of liars as well. Was he being disrespectful?

I think all of us agree we should treat each other the way we want to be treated. At times we all fail, every single one of us. But the point of what I wrote earlier was that, I believe God* does *care whether or not what we preach is the truth. Especially if we are preaching it in His name.

Also, would it be wise or prudent for us to just sit here and say nothing when a person comes on this Catholic board calling us “members of an Apostate Church”? I think that irks me as much as anything. You say you see no good in people “bashing faiths” whyme, but I don’t believe you’ve ever called Zerinus out for his treatment of our Catholic Faith.

Considering the state of the world, god, I think, would be happy with anyone who is attempting to become closer with Him in mind, spirit, body and soul. How they do it would be secondary

Think of this in a more personal way, if that’ll make a difference for you. What if someone began saying things about your daughter, that you knew, (because you know her well), were lies. Things that could change the way the whole world sees her. Things that would even make her appear “less than” what she really is. What if those lies were spread all over the place and a number of people believed them. Would that be okay with you? Would it be okay with you if someone who claimed to know her as well as you do, began supporting the one who came up with the lies in the first place? Do you think you could at any point begin to believe the lie, as well as the truth?

Yes, I believe it does matter to God what we preach in His name.

Peace,
Tami

 

[truthsilence]

Thank you, great post.

Mom of 5

Thank you, Mom of 5.

God bless you.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

A balanced description of mormonism?

“It is what it is when it wants to be, unless being so isn’t what it wants to be seen as.”

Sounds good to me

Robert