Tell me what you think of this chapter in the Book of Mormon

[tomarin]

Let’s imagine you are one of the millions of lapsed Catholics who never go to church, but you were baptized as a baby. A Mormon missionary comes along and presents you with the Book of Mormon and it changes your life so that you follow Christ’s teachings, something you never did as a Catholic. This is the real life experience of many cradle Catholics. Are you better off in God’s eyes as a Mormon or as a lapsed Catholic who is living la vida loca? And is it possible your path through Mormonism might be more likely to lead you back to being a faithful Catholic?

If that person (the hypothetical lapsed Catholic converting to LDS) were my friend I would try to share with them as tactfully as possible the feelings I have expressed in my above posts. Because I believe them to be true and based on reality.

I think in this life it’s important to take a stand for God but that doesn’t mean that the content of any given belief system is unimportant, or equivalent. Heresies are heresies. I don’t know which ones the Mormons are teaching but clearly the JW movement is a revival of arianism.

 

[BartBurk]

I agree it’s not their fault. But that doesn’t mean that they haven’t been led astray all the same.

I don’t have much experience with Mormons; I have more with Jehovahs Witnesses. But I think their situation is equivalent. They appear to be fine upstanding people to a point, but the fact of the matter is that the people behind the Watchtower Organization have led them astray from the truth. I feel a lot of compassion for them for that reason.

Saying that all religions are equally true is the same at bottom as claiming that they are all equally false. I don’t see how it’s different from agnosticism.

Since JWs deny the Holy Spirit exists I would say they are in a worse position. At least Mormons believe in the Holy Spirit even though a Trinitarian would insist that Mormon understanding of the Holy Spirit is flawed. The Book of Mormon is very clear that Mormons believe in the Holy Spirit as being a real person in the Godhead.

 

[flyonthewall]

I certainly am thinking about that. Both the chapter I have suggested as well as the one Zerinius pointed to seem to be very specific. They also seem to sound a little too much like a rehash of the New Testament. I don’t know why God would be so specific with Nephi when he wasn’t this specific with other Old Testament prophets. Of course being specific would have been the only way that people in the Americas would have been ready for the coming of Christ to them after his resurrection since they didn’t experience his ministry in Israel.

My two cents is that I believe the OT prophets had a lot of information about the savior, but it just wasn’t portrayed in the same way.
A piece here, and there, but when it is all compiled together, there is much the same information.

 

[Sunstone]

I want to get people’s reaction to the entire chapter. Does it sound “true.”

What Publisher says is true, and yet it isn’t the whole story if you believe that one needs the Sacraments for salvation.

The Book of Mormon does contain truth. The good things in the Book of Mormon have helped point me to Catholicism.

At the same time, though, it contains distortions peculiar to early 19th century religious disputes and presents arguments about Native Americans that were thought to be valid at the time, but which have not born out subsequent scrutiny. It also contains things peculiar to Joseph Smith’s family life, such as the archetypal vision of the tree of life, which Lucy Mack Smith (Joseph Smith Jr.'s mother) records was her husband’s dream.

Moreover, the Book of Mormon is not the historical and/or archaeological artifact that Latter-day Saints purport it to be. If they want to say it is historical and/or archaeological, then they invite the methods of historians and archaeologists as evidence. Faithful Mormon historians and archaeologists have aptly strained at gnats while swallowing camels, but the historical and archaeological evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the book was not produced according to its claims.

 

[tomarin]

Since JWs deny the Holy Spirit exists I would say they are in a worse position. At least Mormons believe in the Holy Spirit even though a Trinitarian would insist that Mormon understanding of the Holy Spirit is flawed. The Book of Mormon is very clear that Mormons believe in the Holy Spirit as being a real person in the Godhead.

They (the JW’s) also believe that Christ was a created being: an angel essentially not God. Do the Mormons believe Christ was a created being?

 

[Esdra]

They (the JW’s) also believe that Christ was a created being: an angel essentially not God. Do the Mormons believe Christ was a created being?

Hi

first of all I think it is important to know of which “Mormons” we are talking about.

But as I assume we are talking about the LDS Church, I can tell you that they indeed believe something like that - but not exactely!

They believe that there are three gods: Got the father, God the son (who created the world (cf. John 1:1) and God the Holy Spirit.



In Christ,
Esdra

 

[SnakeMauler]

Let’s imagine you are one of the millions of lapsed Catholics who never go to church, but you were baptized as a baby. A Mormon missionary comes along and presents you with the Book of Mormon and it changes your life so that you follow Christ’s teachings, something you never did as a Catholic. This is the real life experience of many cradle Catholics. Are you better off in God’s eyes as a Mormon or as a lapsed Catholic who is living la vida loca? And is it possible your path through Mormonism might be more likely to lead you back to being a faithful Catholic?

It’s better to be a lapsed Catholic because Mormons are polytheists and believe that God the father is “Elohim”, one of billions of gods, who came down to the earth and had sex with the virgin Mary. And that’s just silly.

 

[Publisher]

What Publisher says is true, and yet it isn’t the whole story if you believe that one needs the Sacraments for salvation.

The Book of Mormon does contain truth. The good things in the Book of Mormon have helped point me to Catholicism.

At the same time, though, it contains distortions peculiar to early 19th century religious disputes and presents arguments about Native Americans that were thought to be valid at the time, but which have not born out subsequent scrutiny. It also contains things peculiar to Joseph Smith’s family life, such as the archetypal vision of the tree of life, which Lucy Mack Smith (Joseph Smith Jr.'s mother) records was her husband’s dream.

Moreover, the Book of Mormon is not the historical and/or archaeological artifact that Latter-day Saints purport it to be. If they want to say it is historical and/or archaeological, then they invite the methods of historians and archaeologists as evidence. Faithful Mormon historians and archaeologists have aptly strained at gnats while swallowing camels, but the historical and archaeological evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the book was not produced according to its claims.

I do not believe some of the biblical writing are factual either…but that does not prevent me from embracing the truths they seek to impart.

Is the Book of Jonah a historical document…or is it a parable…myth…written at a time in Jewish history when they were “purging” non Jews from the land after the Return from Exile…and the Book of Jonah is “prophetic” in that it speaks to the worth of persons in God’s eyes that the Jews of the day thought deserved destruction? Nineveh was a great city of the day…I seriously doubt they ever “repented” and turned to the Jewish God.

I do not believe the Book of Ruth is completely historical…written at the same time Jonah was written with a similar theme.

Book of Daniel, written well after “Daniel” lived is more akin to the Apocylypse than an “historical” book detailing fantastic stories of miracles and visions of the future.

Yet I find great insight into this time in Jewish history…the Jewish nation was shifting from a “tribal deity” to a “universal deity”…something I believe they learned of in Persia/Babylon during the Captivity.

 

[Publisher]

I agree it’s not their fault. But that doesn’t mean that they haven’t been led astray all the same.

I don’t have much experience with Mormons; I have more with Jehovahs Witnesses. But I think their situation is equivalent. They appear to be fine upstanding people to a point, but the fact of the matter is that the people behind the Watchtower Organization have led them astray from the truth. I feel a lot of compassion for them for that reason.

**Saying that all religions are equally true is the same at bottom as claiming that they are all equally false. I don’t see how it’s different from agnosticism./**QUOTE]

I don’t believe anyone said or implied that in this thread…do you?

 

[Sunstone]

I do not believe some of the biblical writing are factual either…but that does not prevent me from embracing the truths they seek to impart.

Is the Book of Jonah a historical document…or is it a parable…myth…written at a time in Jewish history when they were “purging” non Jews from the land after the Return from Exile…and the Book of Jonah is “prophetic” in that it speaks to the worth of persons in God’s eyes that the Jews of the day thought deserved destruction? Nineveh was a great city of the day…I seriously doubt they ever “repented” and turned to the Jewish God.

I do not believe the Book of Ruth is completely historical…written at the same time Jonah was written with a similar theme.

Book of Daniel, written well after “Daniel” lived is more akin to the Apocylypse than an “historical” book detailing fantastic stories of miracles and visions of the future.

Yet I find great insight into this time in Jewish history…the Jewish nation was shifting from a “tribal deity” to a “universal deity”…something I believe they learned of in Persia/Babylon during the Captivity.

I agree with your point (and have made it myself at different times), but it doesn’t speak to the issue at hand. The LDS want their cake and to eat it too. The Community of Christ will tolerate views that the Book of Mormon teaches truth but isn’t the historical artifact that it has been purported to be, but the LDS really squelch that idea. The LDS insist that the Book of Mormon is the historical/archaeological object that it is claimed to be and that it was translated exactly the way Joseph Smith said it was.

They have poured it in a storm. When they make absolute historical claims, they open themselves up to historical evidence in a very direct way. This is altogether different from seeing certain Bible stories as less than historical, or of tolerating a range of approaches to “literalness.” The LDS Church itself tolearates less literalness when it comes to Bible stories.

Teaching anything other than that the Book of Mormon is the historical object it is claimed to be is unorthodox in the LDS Church. You won’t be kicked out of the Church if you hold a non-historical view circumspectly, but if you go about trying to persuade others to it, you’ll find that you will be officially discouraged from doing so. You might even be the subject of Church discipline.

 

[BartBurk]

They (the JW’s) also believe that Christ was a created being: an angel essentially not God. Do the Mormons believe Christ was a created being?

They don’t believe you are a created being. All of us have existed eternally. The question is whether or not they believe Christ was always God. In my experience most LDS do believe that Christ was always God. That is the teaching of the Book of Mormon anyway.

 

[tomarin]

I don’t believe anyone said or implied that in this thread…do you?

I’d say you came close when you said that the Light or Spirit uses whatever religious tool is at hand to speak to believers. It sounded very much like an “all paths lead to God” type of sentiment.

Which is fine – you have the right to believe whatever you like – but it’s a mindview I have a hard time accepting because it disregards the differences in content in the various religions and I do think it’s a form of agnosticism. Just my take. I hope we can have a friendly conversation about our differences of opinion without it getting personal.

May God bless you abundantly!

 

[GaryTaylor]

Hi

first of all I think it is important to know of which “Mormons” we are talking about.

But as I assume we are talking about the LDS Church, I can tell you that they indeed believe something like that - but not exactely!

They believe that there are three gods: Got the father, God the son (who created the world (cf. John 1:1) and God the Holy Spirit.



In Christ,
Esdra

How did God the Son create the world? Is that in text?

 

[tomarin]

They believe that there are three gods: Got the father, God the son (who created the world (cf. John 1:1) and God the Holy Spirit.

So is it fair to say that they are polytheists? If so I’m not even sure which historical heresy that would fall under.

 

[tomarin]

It’s better to be a lapsed Catholic because Mormons are polytheists and believe that God the father is “Elohim”, one of billions of gods, who came down to the earth and had sex with the virgin Mary. And that’s just silly.

“Elohim” is Hebrew for “angelic being” isn’t it?

 

[Sunstone]

So is it fair to say that they are polytheists? If so I’m not even sure which historical heresy that would fall under.

This will help you makes sense of LDS thinking on this topic:

home.earthlink.net/~vanehale/resourcelibrary/id18.html

 

[tomarin]

They don’t believe you are a created being. All of us have existed eternally. The question is whether or not they believe Christ was always God. In my experience most LDS do believe that Christ was always God. That is the teaching of the Book of Mormon anyway.

I would say that if what Esdra wrote about the LDS – that they believe each person of the Trinity is a separate God – is true then the Mormons have departed farther from traditional Christianity than the JW’s. Because the JW’s are radical monotheists whereas it appears the Mormons are polytheists.

 

[Sunstone]

I would say that if what Esdra wrote about the LDS – that they believe each person of the Trinity is a separate God – is true then the Mormons have departed farther from traditional Christianity than the JW’s. Because the JW’s are radical monotheists whereas it appears the Mormons are polytheists.

Today, Mormons are homoiousion, tritheistic henotheists.

And yes, I deserve scorn for tossing out that much jargon.

 

[Publisher]

I’d say you came close when you said that the Light or Spirit uses whatever religious tool is at hand to speak to believers. It sounded very much like an “all paths lead to God” type of sentiment.

Which is fine – you have the right to believe whatever you like – but it’s a mindview I have a hard time accepting because it disregards the differences in content in the various religions and I do think it’s a form of agnosticism. Just my take. I hope we can have a friendly conversation about our differences of opinion without it getting personal.

May God bless you abundantly!

And may He bless you as well.

To quote a sage philospher…“You have the right to believe whatever you like…” I disagree with you…it is not a form of agnosticism…“Just my take”

 

[tomarin]

Today, Mormons are homoiousion, tritheistic henotheists.

Why today? Were they something different before?

And yes, I deserve scorn for tossing out that much jargon.

That’s okay; sometimes jargon serves a purpose.