Studying your way out of Mormonism

[truthsave]

And a growing number of mormons, myself included, interpret Lorenzo Snow that way as well, rather than following the theories of the Kentucky-Fried Doctrines.

And Gordon B. Hinckley certainly left that open with his statement, with reference to the KFD, that “we don’t know that.”

The nice thing about when you are ironic is that mormon doctrine is much more ironic than this last statement of yours.
I have myself witness even elders with melchisedk priesthood ordering angels to do something. They say, or he say since was in two occasion teo different people: “I order two angels (I thought why not only one) to come and…”
Yes they were commanding angels to do somthing for them since they had the power to do it. (If you think it is not true I tell you one of this guy was a mormon doctrine teacher (one of the professional one he was paid for theaching it it was his full time job, not to accomplish a so called “mormon call”, so I don’t think he was doing something not doctrinal)
If a mormon here tells me it is not true, I will be forced to say the name of this guy. And I was not the only one to have heard he commanding angels.
Another guy commanding angels was the husband of a family relative
What happened? Did the angels listen to their command? Go and guess…

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

The nice thing about when you are ironic is that mormon doctrine is much more ironic than this last statement of yours.
I have myself witness even elders with melchisedk priesthood ordering angels to do something. They say, or he say since was in two occasion teo different people: “I order two angels (I thought why not only one) to come and…”
Yes they were commanding angels to do somthing for them since they had the power to do it.

I’ve never heard them use the word “order,” but yes, the ministry of angels is part of the priesthood. Not what you call archangels, mind you; no mortal goes around ordering Gabriel and Michael. Only Jesus might have done that when he dwelt in mortal flesh.

Depending on the situation, God might send Angels to act in authority over His mortal servants, or to act under the authority of His mortal servants. Why would that be odd, if the priesthood is the authority to act in God’s name?

Are you sure that they used the word “order”?

 

[truthsave]

Cowboy Pete,

yes I am absolutely sure about they used the word “order”, if not I wouldn’t have been shocked. Do you think if they would have just prayed the Lord to have some angels to support they request I would have been shocked?
They said they ordered it by the authority of melkisedeck priesthood they were helding.
The same sentence in two different cases.

Now you make it sound as they were some isolate cases…
I tell you the guy was a professional mormon doctrine professor so I don’t think was doing something against doctrine.
So yes, mormon helding melkisedeck priesthood have the power to order angels.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Cowboy Pete,

yes I am absolutely sure about they used the word “order”, if not I wouldn’t have been shocked. Do you think if they would have just prayed the Lord to have some angels to support they request I would have been shocked?
They said they ordered by the authority of melkisedeck priesthood they were helding.
The same sentence in two different cases.

Sounds like they need to read section 121. While the Lord may place another person or an angel under one’s priesthood authority, one is not supposed to be an *** about it.

Do you think if they would have just prayed the Lord to have some angels to support they request I would have been shocked?

I think you’re a nice person, but despite having spent some time honestly trying to understand your point of view, I find it difficult to predict what will and will not shock and upset you. Some things you have said suggest that you find me equally enigmatic.

Now you make it sound as they were some isolate cases…

Well they are, if only in using the ministry of angels in the first place. I’m quite experienced in the LDS church; my father has been a Bishop or Branch President on four different continents, and I’ve seen more of the church in action than most LDS folks ever do in their lifetimes. But I’ve never even seen anyone try to use the ministry of angels. I have no idea how it’s done, so I can’t say authoritatively that they did it wrong. But normal mormons don’t use words like “order” when speaking to fellow mortals in the church, so it does seem bizarre to use such language with angels.

 

[truthsave]

Sounds like they need to read section 121. While the Lord may place another person or an angel under one’s priesthood authority, one is not supposed to be an *** about it.

Sorry I didn’t understand what do you mean to be an …about it.

All the time there is something you don’t like or make you sound strange you pute vagueness to your doctrine.
OK then I think then you are the only reliable source of LDS doctrine. State your name publicly here so we know with who are we dealing with since you suggest a professional mormon professor to read section 121.
If he did it it means: either is ignorant and mormon with all their inspiration they have choosen to pay somebody that haven’t done is homework correctly (strangely also the husband of a friend of my wife ordered an angel the same way the prof did…)

When you want to start saying names and places I am ready, whatever the consequences will be.

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Sorry I didn’t understand what do you mean to be an …about it.

Not “…”; I said **. *** is a mildly bad world which the server blanks out. I could have said “one should not be a jerk about it.” Instead of jerk, I could use a French bad word that you would understand, a 3-letter word which starts with a c and ends with an n, but I’d probably get suspended for circumventing the naughty-word editor, and cn is much more vulgar than ***.

OK then I think then you are the only reliable source of LDS doctrine.

Gosh, no. 99% of our canonical doctrine is spelled out in the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. If I ever contradict any of the above, go with what the above scripture says. (But not necessarily what Catholic tradition tells you the NT means).

We also regard the OT as scripture but much of that is superseded by the New Testament.

since you suggest a professional mormon professor to read section 121

Every priesthood holder should read Section 121, at least weekly, lest the power go to our heads. Ask the “professional mormon professor” if he disagrees with that assessment.

Also ask him if he’s not embarrassed by your characterization of him as a “professional mormon professor.” :thumbsup: He’ll no doubt explain the joke.

 

[jw2lds2catholic]

I’m more trusting of mormons who studied their way into Catholicism, like BartBurk, than those who say they “studied their way out of Mormonism” and ended up Catholic. The latter seems almost disrespectful to Catholicism.

LOL. I came kicking and screaming into the Catholic Church and God didn’t make it easy for me either-- I had to want it.
My whole religious life I was taught that the Catholic Church is bad-- my atheist mom and her baptist family were/are anti-catholic. I was a Jehovah Wittness and Mormon, both who aren’t very soliticious with Catholicism. When I left the LDS church because I realize I no longer believed in Smith and the Book of Mormon, I knew I was a Christian and hopped from one Protestant denomination to another. I have a Masters degree in religious studies and was working on my MDiv degree looking for sound biblical answers to my theological delimeas. Finally, one day I woke up and said I’m going to be catholic. I called a deacon and signed up for RCIA. I studied and read and argued, but in the end I left up to God and surrendered to Him in faith and obedience. He made me wait over a year and half to get my annulment so I could join. God really wanted me to be sure. And we still fight, like Jonah and Isreal, I don’t always like the directions and answers He gives me, but I trust him and follow Him and spend lots of time in prayer of thanksgiving for the gift of confession. I am a delightful follower of Christ and at times a begrundgingly member of His church and I am so blessed to be here! The thought that finally led me to His church that no other Protestant can answer definitively (and I have looked) is why would Christ abandon His Bride and leave them to go astray when His Word and Nature declare He never would.

 

[Tony888]

I am certain that the various individual parish RCIA programs utilize the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The CCC covers theosis and since it takes months before baptism is even a question there is plenty of time to “ponder” the meaning and ask questions. No one at RCIA will ask you after 4 hours of instruction:

NO convert is ready for LDS baptism after 4 hrs… Since I have no knowledge of this happening, I can only speculate they wanted to set a date by which time all the required lessons would be completed. Being baptized before reading the BoM and completing the essential lessons should not be possible (not saying it has never happened though)

In my experience, In addition to reading the BoM, I had received and read the full Gospel Principles book, which explicitly discusses all major aspects LDS doctrine, including exaltation.

Now back to the Milk Before Meat criticism.

IT"S BIBLICAL ADVICE!!! The spiritually immature need ‘milk’ before they are ready for ‘meat’ Salvation is in the meat, but you start with milk

1 Cor. 3
Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3 You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?

Heb 5 (12-14)
12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

 

[zaffiroborant]

NO convert is ready for LDS baptism after 4 hrs.. Since I have no knowledge of this happening, I can only speculate they wanted to set a date by which time all the required lessons would be completed. Being baptized before reading the BoM and completing the essential lessons should not be possible (not saying it has never happened though)

Then why are LDS missionaries told to ask for a commitment for baptism after the second lesson?

As you teach, prepare your investigators to meet the qualifications for baptism taught in Doctrine
and Covenants 20:37 and in the baptismal interview questions. This is best accomplished by
inviting your investigators to make and keep the commitments listed below.
Baptismal Interview Questions
• Do you believe that God is our Eternal Father?
• Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Savior and Redeemer of the world?
• Are you willing to keep the Sabbath day holy, including partaking of the sacrament weekly
and rendering service to fellow members?
Commitments
• Will you pray to know that what we have taught is true?
• Will you repent of your sins?
• Will you attend church with us this Sunday?
• Will you follow the example of the Savior and be baptized on (date)?
• May we set a time for our next visit?

This is requested in the second lesson, I think 2 hours per lesson is a generous estimate for the time allotted to teach these lessons, so yes LDS missionaries are asking people to commit to baptism after 4 hours of instruction. I do agree two lessons is not enough but this is the approached mapped out by your church. I doubt the first presidency and quorum of 12 is unaware or disapproving the the strategy.

All of the lessons are here, I don’t see that any should take more than 2 hours but others can read them and decide for themselves.

 

[Tony888]

Zaff,
What is wrong with setting a goal date?
The requirements are much more extensive than you imply, including adnerence to the words of wisdom. Also, the person would need to pass several interviews, including with the Bishop.

Net, you are mad because the missionaries are encouraging people to read scripture, live a moral life, repent and focus their life on Christ.?

 

[blueadept]

Zaff,
What is wrong with setting a goal date?
The requirements are much more extensive than you imply, including adnerence to the words of wisdom. Also, the person would need to pass several interviews, including with the Bishop.

Net, you are mad because the missionaries are encouraging people to read scripture, live a moral life, repent and focus their life on Christ.?

There’s nothing wrong with the LDS approach. I believe the larger issue then becomes in the form of convert retention. For most of those joining the LDS faith, the discerning process is just over a month with some baptisms occuring a lot quicker and some being a lot longer. But a month seems like a reasonable observation. For the RCIA process for Catholics, the process is significantly longer. From my observations of the new converts for my wife’s church versus my own parish, the LDS church has a bigger retention issue than Catholics who have completed the RCIA program.

My 2 cents

 

[Tony888]

There’s nothing wrong with the LDS approach. I believe the larger issue then becomes in the form of convert retention. For most of those joining the LDS faith, the discerning process is just over a month with some baptisms occuring a lot quicker and some being a lot longer. But a month seems like a reasonable observation. For the RCIA process for Catholics, the process is significantly longer. From my observations of the new converts for my wife’s church versus my own parish, the LDS church has a bigger retention issue than Catholics who have completed the RCIA program.

My 2 cents

I’ve never seen stats but strongly suspect you are right; retention post LDS baptism is lower than retention post RCIA.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Zaff,
What is wrong with setting a goal date?
The requirements are much more extensive than you imply, including adnerence to the words of wisdom. Also, the person would need to pass several interviews, including with the Bishop.

Net, you are mad because the missionaries are encouraging people to read scripture, live a moral life, repent and focus their life on Christ.?

It is not a goal, they are specifically asked to make a commitment, we have two different words because they are two different things. Car salesmen use this commitment strategy, it’s pushy.

 

[Telstar]

Zaff,
What is wrong with setting a goal date?
The requirements are much more extensive than you imply, including adnerence to the words of wisdom. Also, the person would need to pass several interviews, including with the Bishop.

Net, you are mad because the missionaries are encouraging people to read scripture, live a moral life, repent and focus their life on Christ.?

Because it implies that you’ve already made your final decision to actually become Mormon and accept everything that the church teaches. What if you make the decision to be Baptized, then after finding out more of the real ‘meat’ that you never knew, or weren’t told about before, you decide that you can’t really believe in it, after all?

In RCIA, there’s never any pressure to make any decisions, at all, before you’re ready to fully commit yourself to the Church. You can stay in the RCIA program well beyond the time that others are Baptized, etc., if you don’t feel that you’re ready yet. Some people might stay in the program for several years, sometimes because they have doubts about certain beliefs and need time to sort through those doubts before going through with it.

The Catholic Church doesn’t want anyone to make a commitment that they can’t keep, especially if it’s because they learn about something that they don’t/can’t believe in after making that commitment. She would rather answer all of their questions and concerns, and be sure that they have time to fully understand the most important Doctrines, before making any rash decisions. There’s no revolving door in the Catholic Church like there is in many other churches, where people come and go on a weekly basis. Usually, when they find out that they can’t accept a certain teaching of the church. Baptism in the Catholic Church is just the beginning of a lifelong commitment to follow Jesus. You can’t make that choice until you know what you’re getting into and what’s expected of you as a Catholic.

 

[blueadept]

The Catholic Church doesn’t want anyone to make a commitment that they can’t keep, especially if it’s because they learn about something that they don’t/can’t believe in after making that commitment. She would rather answer all of their questions and concerns, and be sure that they have time to fully understand the most important Doctrines, before making any rash decisions.

While I believe this is the case for most convert baptisms, you can take off the rose-colored glasses that your statement works for all convert baptisms this way. When I applied these standards to the baptisms that Mother Teresa did in regards to the Hindus that were one step from death, I’m not convinced those ideals reflected the reality. JMHO.

 

[Telstar]

While I believe this is the case for most convert baptisms, you can take off the rose-colored glasses that your statement works for all convert baptisms this way. When I applied these standards to the baptisms that Mother Teresa did in regards to the Hindus that were one step from death, I’m not convinced those ideals reflected the reality. JMHO.

That may be true in that particular case, but it was also a very different circumstance. Since they were at death’s door, her intention was to save their souls, even though they may not have fully understood what it meant at the time. I was referring to the RCIA process, where the candidates have come to learn about the faith because they feel drawn to become Catholics, as opposed to the LDS practice of rushing people through the process as quickly as possible, before they have time to learn the basics or really think about it. That’s another significant difference in Catholicism. Most people usually come to the Church on their own, to convert.

 

[Tony888]

Ohh the hyprocricy, LOL
Yes, people are baptized when they join the LDS Church
Later, some of the leave the Church, of their own free will

Now for your hyprocricy - what about all those Catholic babies that are baptized before they understand one IOTA of doctrine? Apples to apples is comparing requirements for baptism, and Catholics certainly don’t require RCIA before baptism.

Like the Catholics, LDS have more sacraments beyond baptism (but leave that for another thread)

Because it implies that you’ve already made your final decision to actually become Mormon and accept everything that the church teaches. What if you make the decision to be Baptized, then after finding out more of the real ‘meat’ that you never knew, or weren’t told about before, you decide that you can’t really believe in it, after all?

In RCIA, there’s never any pressure to make any decisions, at all, before you’re ready to fully commit yourself to the Church. You can stay in the RCIA program well beyond the time that others are Baptized, etc., if you don’t feel that you’re ready yet. Some people might stay in the program for several years, sometimes because they have doubts about certain beliefs and need time to sort through those doubts before going through with it.

The Catholic Church doesn’t want anyone to make a commitment that they can’t keep, especially if it’s because they learn about something that they don’t/can’t believe in after making that commitment. She would rather answer all of their questions and concerns, and be sure that they have time to fully understand the most important Doctrines, before making any rash decisions. There’s no revolving door in the Catholic Church like there is in many other churches, where people come and go on a weekly basis. Usually, when they find out that they can’t accept a certain teaching of the church. Baptism in the Catholic Church is just the beginning of a lifelong commitment to follow Jesus. You can’t make that choice until you know what you’re getting into and what’s expected of you as a Catholic.

 

[blueadept]

I was referring to the RCIA process, where the candidates have come to learn about the faith because they feel drawn to become Catholics, as opposed to the LDS practice of rushing people through the process as quickly as possible, before they have time to learn the basics or really think about it. That’s another significant difference in Catholicism. Most people usually come to the Church on their own, to convert.

I’m rather familiar with what you’re referring to and I guess I just disagree with your analysis especially the bolded part. Most individuals that are in RCIA usually are just going through the motions for somebody else and not necessarily for themselves. Most in the class tend not to challenge very much what is said even if the wrong message is being understood. For many converts to the LDS church, I’ve seen many who are going through a crisis of some sort when the LDS missionaries happen to be knocking on their door. So even though they may not have gone on their own accord, their welcoming the missionaries none the less. This isn’t to say that the RCC doesn’t interact with people when they are experiencing crisis. I have too many experiences as a LoM member to believe that.

 

[blueadept]

Ohh the hyprocricy, LOL
Yes, people are baptized when they join the LDS Church
Later, some of the leave the Church, of their own free will

Now for your hyprocricy - what about all those Catholic babies that are baptized before they understand one IOTA of doctrine? Apples to apples is comparing requirements for baptism, and Catholics certainly don’t require RCIA before baptism.

Like the Catholics, LDS have more sacraments beyond baptism (but leave that for another thread)

I’ve always thought a better apples to apples comparison would be to compare the RCC baptism to LDS baby blessings as to the purpose they do and compare LDS baptisms to RCC Confirmation. The similarities are much better in regards to the purpose of each church in performing RCC sacraments/LDS ordinances.

My 2 cents

 

[Stephen168]

I’m rather familiar with what you’re referring to and I guess I just disagree with your analysis especially the bolded part. Most individuals that are in RCIA usually are just going through the motions for somebody else and not necessarily for themselves. Most in the class tend not to challenge very much what is said even if the wrong message is being understood. For many converts to the LDS church, I’ve seen many who are going through a crisis of some sort when the LDS missionaries happen to be knocking on their door. So even though they may not have gone on their own accord, their welcoming the missionaries none the less. This isn’t to say that the RCC doesn’t interact with people when they are experiencing crisis. I have too many experiences as a LoM member to believe that.

I’ve seen it in equal numbers. For every spouse in RCIA, there was someone who was drawn to the Catholic Church on their own. The only person I know who converted to Mormonism drug his wife into it, too. By the time required and the results I’ve seen at the end of the process, it seems there is much more discernment required and much more education given to Catholic converts. Your exception (post #134) proves the rule.