So, Kolob and Jewish Native Americans

[jane_doe]

A different good resource which addresses a lot of FAQ stuff is this book:

amazon.com/How-Wide-Divide-Evangelical-Conversation/dp/0830819916

If you’re on a budget (like me) most libraries will also have access to a copy or you can buy a used one for super-cheap.

 

[Hatikvah]

I was legit trying to express how the average person living outside of the Book of Mormon Belt gets their first impression, and I was saying I know that cannot be right, because the first impression is so ridiculous, that many smart Mormons cannot really believe it, so I wanted to hear your side of it.

Clay, if you’d allow me to call you as such, not to be a minimod, but I just want to warn you. One of the stickies on this forum states: It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs.

It’s the one by Eric Hillbert, “A reminder on inter-faith dialogue”. So you better watch yourself!

 

[Stephen168]

And everything about prehistoric America, and I mean, the stuff which I do know for sure that Smith said is really tough to square with what I learned from my studies. Any articles on that, like, that maybe Smith was being symbolic with everything?

He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.

Smith said the Book of Mormon is a book about all the American Indians and I don’t think there are any references of Smith being symbolic because Smith’s teaching was Mormon teaching until very recently.

 

[Horton]

**Just as crazy as the idea that some guy living thousands of years ago somehow fixes all the bad stuff you do today?

Just as crazy as the idea that some all powerful divine unity has nothing better to do than use flaming foliage as some divine walky-talky?

Just as crazy as the idea that a cracker turns into human flesh- and then you’re supposed to eat it?**

Relevant fact: Mormons believe that there’s only been ONE perfect person on this Earth, and that’s Jesus Christ. Joseph Smith (and all the other billions of people in the world) are openly acknowledged to have made mistakes. Men of God are still MEN.

Good apologetics site on this: jefflindsay.com/fallible.shtml

Couple of revenant facts–

• The Book of Mormon describes events of only a small portion of the American people, mostly centered around a few villages.
• The Book of Mormon is NOT a history book, rather it’s primary focus is religious in nature, specifically to lead people to Christ. The authors openly state that the history they describe is simplified because that’s not it’s focus.
• Some parts are symbolic, yes. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask.

Another apologetic website: jefflindsay.com/BOMIntro.shtml
jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMEvidence.shtml

Bolding mine - This is downright offensive to Catholics. The idea that Jesus went sent to absolve us from our sins is a core belief of Christianity.

That God revels himself to us in many different ways is a core belief of Christianity.

That the bread & wine DOES become the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ at the consecration is a core belief of Catholicism.

You making light of these biblically sound, theological true shows your true purpose here.

 

[Stephen168]

Just as crazy as the idea that some guy living thousands of years ago somehow fixes all the bad stuff you do today?

Just as crazy as the idea that some all powerful divine unity has nothing better to do than use flaming foliage as some divine walky-talky?

Just as crazy as the idea that a cracker turns into human flesh- and then you’re supposed to eat it?

In other words, you can’t answer the question, so you resort to this.:nope:

 

[Stephen168]

That the bread & wine DOES become the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ at the consecration is a core belief of Catholicism.

It is a core believe of Christianity until rejected during the reformation and of course Mormonism came out of Protestantism. If Joseph Smith had actually ‘restored’ the Church of Christ, Mormons would also have this core belief.

 

[Hatikvah]

It is a core believe of Christianity until rejected during the reformation and of course Mormonism came out of Protestantism. If Joseph Smith had actually ‘restored’ the Church of Christ, Mormons would also have this core belief.

The Real Presence wasn’t entirely rejected during the Reformation. Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation, but Calvin himself said that it was spiritual. Luther developed the doctrine of the sacramental union. Zwingli went so far as to say that it was “merely a symbol,” and explicitly denied any meaning.

Anglicans believe in transubstantiation (generally), Methodists admit a “holy mystery” in which Christ is physically present only to those who are participants in the Eucharist, and many Reformed and Presbyterians accept a “spiritual presence” (the definition of this is very vague). Unfortunately, the most common view among American Protestants is that the Body and Blood are “symbolic.”

 

[jane_doe]

Bolding mine - This is downright offensive to Catholics. The idea that Jesus went sent to absolve us from our sins is a core belief of Christianity.

That God revels himself to us in many different ways is a core belief of Christianity.

That the bread & wine DOES become the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ at the consecration is a core belief of Catholicism.

Horton my post was not to mock at all, in fact earlier in the threaded I scorned those who do mock these ideas. Rather, my point was/is that these ideas at first sound very strange to those not accustomed to hearing them.

 

[gazelam]

That the bread & wine DOES become the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ at the consecration is a core belief of Catholicism.

You making light of these biblically sound, theological true shows your true purpose here.

Biblically sounds?!?!

J.G. Davies explains how the Hebrew mind would have assimilated such statements:

“The Hebrew, unlike the Greek, was not interested in things in themselves but only in things as they are called to be. He was not concerned with an object as such but with what it becomes in relation to its final reference according to the divine purpose. The meaning of an object therefore does not lie in its analytical and empirical reality but in the will that is expressed by it. Hence Jesus could say of a piece of bread: ‘This is my body.’ The bread does not cease to be bread, but it becomes what it is not, namely the instrument and organ of his presence, because through his sovereign word he has given it a new dimension.” (Davies, J.G., The Early Christian Church, (New York: Anchor Books, 1965,) p. 54.)

Edwin Hatch asserts that “it is among the Gnostics that there appears for the first time an attempt to realize the change of the elements to the material body and blood of Christ.” (Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church, p. 308.)

 

[Stephen168]

The Real Presence wasn’t entirely rejected during the Reformation. Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli all rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation, but Calvin himself said that it was spiritual. Luther developed the doctrine of the sacramental union. Zwingli went so far as to say that it was “merely a symbol,” and explicitly denied any meaning.

Anglicans believe in transubstantiation (generally), Methodists admit a “holy mystery” in which Christ is physically present only to those who are participants in the Eucharist, and many Reformed and Presbyterians accept a “spiritual presence” (the definition of this is very vague). Unfortunately, the most common view among American Protestants is that the Body and Blood are “symbolic.”

I understand.
My point was:
-Ancient Christian teaching (Catholic, Orthodox) on the Eucharist is not Protestant teaching on the Eucharist.
-If Mormonism was a restoration, Joseph Smith would have restored the ancient teaching.
-Therefore, this is another example of why Mormonism is not a restoration.

 

[Stephen168]

Biblically sounds?!?!

Yes, and Christian literature since then to this day.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Biblically sounds?!?!

J.G. Davies explains how the Hebrew mind would have assimilated such statements:

“The Hebrew, unlike the Greek, was not interested in things in themselves but only in things as they are called to be. He was not concerned with an object as such but with what it becomes in relation to its final reference according to the divine purpose. The meaning of an object therefore does not lie in its analytical and empirical reality but in the will that is expressed by it. Hence Jesus could say of a piece of bread: ‘This is my body.’ The bread does not cease to be bread, but it becomes what it is not, namely the instrument and organ of his presence, because through his sovereign word he has given it a new dimension.” (Davies, J.G., The Early Christian Church, (New York: Anchor Books, 1965,) p. 54.)

Edwin Hatch asserts that “it is among the Gnostics that there appears for the first time an attempt to realize the change of the elements to the material body and blood of Christ.” (Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church, p. 308.)

Read John 6. People who were disciples of Jesus left, because Jesus taught very specifically that his Body is true food and his Blood is true drink.

The latter assertion of a Gnostics idea is just plain false. Gnostics, like Mormons, reject what Jesus taught, as found in John 6.

 

[LivingWaters7]

The latter assertion of a Gnostics idea is just plain false. Gnostics, like Mormons, reject what Jesus taught, as found in John 6.

Indeed. And when one goes to Justin Martyr (who Hatch references in support of this claim), in his First Apology Chapter 66, we see he says absolutely nothing of the sort.

But I am always amused when gazelam trots out this statement. Clearly he hasn’t actually gone to the source.

 

[Stephen168]

Bolding mine - This is downright offensive to Catholics. The idea that Jesus went sent to absolve us from our sins is a core belief of Christianity.
That God revels himself to us in many different ways is a core belief of Christianity.
That the bread & wine DOES become the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus Christ at the consecration is a core belief of Catholicism.
You making light of these biblically sound, theological true shows your true purpose here.

There is another Mormon that pops in once in a while to mock and degrade the Catholic Church while at the same time presenting the Mormon Church in a glowing yet false light, just like jane does. In fact they do it in the same way. “Same say the Catholic Church is [fill in the blank] but I don’t think that.”

I’m sure you’ve seen similar toilet troll websites on Catholicism, which will happily tell you that Catholics are cannibal Mary-worshippers and all priests are corrupt child molesters (hence why I call these types of sites “toilets”).

Just as crazy as the idea that some guy living thousands of years ago somehow fixes all the bad stuff you do today?

Just as crazy as the idea that some all powerful divine unity has nothing better to do than use flaming foliage as some divine walky-talky?
Just as crazy as the idea that a cracker turns into human flesh- and then you’re supposed to eat it?

See what I mean?
When you got nothing you have to resort to this, which are the roots of Mormonism.

 

[Horton]

Horton my post was not to mock at all, in fact earlier in the threaded I scorned those who do mock these ideas. Rather, my point was/is that these ideas at first sound very strange to those not accustomed to hearing them.

Jane - that might work if this was either a non religious forum or a forum for non believers but it’s not, it’s Catholic Answers, the key word being Catholic. A forum predominantly composed of Catholics and Christians. You know this and yet chose to mock our beliefs.

I get you may become frustrated with what you perceive as a lack of understanding with LDS beliefs. It’s not a lack of understanding, we understand, we just know it’s not truth. Once you get that you can’t convince us to believe in LDS theology then maybe there can be a mature honest conversation about what the LDS believe.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Indeed. And when one goes to Justin Martyr (who Hatch references in support of this claim), in his First Apology Chapter 66, we see he says absolutely nothing of the sort.

But I am always amused when gazelam trots out this statement. Clearly he hasn’t actually gone to the source.

He just keeps going back to FAIR, which is just awful.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Horton my post was not to mock at all, in fact earlier in the threaded I scorned those who do mock these ideas. Rather, my point was/is that these ideas at first sound very strange to those not accustomed to hearing them.

Perhaps that is how you see it, but it would be like me making a point using LDS temple ceremonies in a mocking manner, just to make a point. In bad taste and disrespectful, no?

Just because our rites are not secret, doesn’t mean we don’t hold them as sacred. Communion is as sacred to us as your temple ceremonies are to you.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Couple of revenant facts–

• The Book of Mormon describes events of only a small portion of the American people, mostly centered around a few villages.
• The Book of Mormon is NOT a history book, rather it’s primary focus is religious in nature, specifically to lead people to Christ. The authors openly state that the history they describe is simplified because that’s not it’s focus.
• Some parts are symbolic, yes. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask.

Another apologetic website: jefflindsay.com/BOMIntro.shtml
jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMEvidence.shtml

This is just wow! I remember those songs from primary. “All about the Lamanites and ancient history”. Is this no longer taught to LDS children?

As for Jeff Lindsay, his stuff just makes me cringe, with the GIANT leaps of logic and sophistry. There’s gotta be better than this.

 

[thephilosopher6]

Just as crazy as the idea that some guy living thousands of years ago somehow fixes all the bad stuff you do today?

Just as crazy as the idea that some all powerful divine unity has nothing better to do than use flaming foliage as some divine walky-talky?

Just as crazy as the idea that a cracker turns into human flesh- and then you’re supposed to eat it?

Nope, actually it’s not crazy. It has fallen in line with orthodoxy for the past 2000 years. And we actually have evidence for our beliefs unlike Mormonism. And we have nothing going against our beliefs unlike Mormonism which has been proven false multiple times. But you Mormons seem to rationalize everything in your way in order to keep moving along in your blind faith.

And how dare you insult the Eucharist in such a manner. You insult the Eucharist and therefore insult Christ himself!

"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God… They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes. — Ignatius of Antioch, disciple of John the Apostle, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 6 [110 A.D) (80 years after the death and resurrection of our Lord, and only 10 years after the death of the last apostle)

 

[jane_doe]

Perhaps that is how you see it

RebeccaJ, if my point was to mock, why would majority of the examples I gave be beliefs that I hold? To mock myself?