Views on Mormonism?

[Heuchler]

It is hard to answer a charge that is so general. Let me know what you believe using the Bible and I will try to explain what we believe on the same subject also using the Bible.

Matthew 1

Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together,** she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.**

and Young said

“Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever,** that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost**,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 51).

Luke 1

34 And Mary said to the angel: **How shall this be done, because I know not man?**35 And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon you and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you.

Joseph Smith said,

“The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended with any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit,” (Religious Truths Defined, p. 44, as cited in the book, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality, by Gerald and Sandra Tanner, Utah Lighthouse Ministry, P.O. Box 1884, Salt Lake City, Utah 84110, bookstore at 1358 South West Temple, 1982, p. 260).

Colossians 1:16‑17

For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities;** all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.**

Joseph Smith said,

“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).

John 1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.** He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without it him nothing was made that has been made**

The first spirit to be born in heaven was Jesus, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 129)

.(This implies that there was a time when Christ wasn’t around, a long time if you take into account that God the father was also a creation, where the first says that Christ was around since the beginning and nothing at all was created without Christ.)

 

[mwok]

mwok,

I understand that there exists the belief that God cannot do what He said He could do and would do, but that is part of the territory we are in–to not believe Him, but it’s not a voice I try to listen to.

Peace.

God never said we would be Gods. When I think of that part of Mormon doctrine it makes me think of Pinochio where he is changed into a real boy like his “father” by the blue fairy as a reward for behaving well.

 

[Tony888]

God never said we would be Gods. When I think of that part of Mormon doctrine it makes me think of Pinochio where he is changed into a real boy like his “father” by the blue fairy as a reward for behaving well.

Thats odd, I had a similar image when I read the Catechism on RCC theosis, a long time age.

 

[andrewstx]

I cannot wrap my mind around some of their beliefs. Comments?

It is very difficult to pin down Mormon’s beliefs for they are a continally changing. As has been pointed out they beleive in “contuing revelation”. What has been taught for years could easily be abandoned tomorow.

I’tsike starting over with each new “prophet, revelator, and seer”.

 

[mwok]

Thats odd, I had a similar image when I read the Catechism on RCC theosis, a long time age.

hmmm, are you going to bring up CCC paragraph 460 again?

Because I think we established that what the Catholic Church says about theosis and what you say about theosis are not one and the same.

 

[Stephen168]

Thats odd, I had a similar image when I read the Catechism on RCC theosis, a long time age.

Still cherry picking the Catechism I see. You think you are going to be God like Pinocchio becoming a boy; which is another irrational Mormon belief.

You have lifted one sentence from Part One, Section two, Chapter Two, Article 3, of the Catholic Catechism. Article 3 is about the Incarnation. It is not about the Catholic teaching of deification or theosis.

You have lifted one sentence from Part One, Section two, Chapter Two, Article 3, of the Catholic Catechism. Article 3 is about the Incarnation. It is not about the Catholic teaching of divination or theosis.

 

[TexanKnight]

Do they uses crosses now? They didnt when I was LDS.

I had a Mormon tell me once that using the cross was horrible…it was displaying an implement of torture. This person asked me “if someone shot your wiife and killed her, would you wear a gun around your neck?”

I responded, “if her death saved all mankind from their sins I might”

 

[ParkerD]

God never said we would be gods…

Hi, mwok,

I think it is very much for the best that the wording is as it is in the Bible about this subject. I honestly can’t imagine what the world would have done with that belief amid all the other doctrines that were changed in ways that made them more acceptable to more people, thus changing the “everlasting covenant” and making it a less-than-everlasting covenant.

There is not a question in my mind that God intended that free will choice be available for discerning truths about the everlasting covenant since those truths lead toward needing to understand a greater level of faith, a more constant love for God and others, a more fervent love for truth including the truths so beautifully taught in the Bible, and a continuing willingness to change through repentance and forgiveness and the allowance for Christ to be involved as not just a personal Savior but also as a personal Shepherd toward being “willing to be led toward becoming more like Him.”

So a comment like yours doesn’t surprise me or bother me at all–it’s an elementary non-Biblical way of looking at the subject.

Peace to all readers. Life is good–great to be here enjoying it!

 

[mwok]

Hi, mwok,

I think it is very much for the best that the wording is as it is in the Bible about this subject. I honestly can’t imagine what the world would have done with that belief amid all the other doctrines that were changed in ways that made them more acceptable to more people, thus changing the “everlasting covenant” and making it a less-than-everlasting covenant.

There is not a question in my mind that God intended that free will choice be available for discerning truths about the everlasting covenant since those truths lead toward needing to understand a greater level of faith, a more constant love for God and others, a more fervent love for truth including the truths so beautifully taught in the Bible, and a continuing willingness to change through repentance and forgiveness and the allowance for Christ to be involved as not just a personal Savior but also as a personal Shepherd toward being “willing to be led toward becoming more like Him.”

So a comment like yours doesn’t surprise me or bother me at all–it’s an elementary non-Biblical way of looking at the subject.

Peace to all readers. Life is good–great to be here enjoying it!

I must point out that desiring to be God is a lie from satan.

 

[Stephen168]

There is not a question in my mind that God intended that free will choice be available for discerning truths about the everlasting covenant

The answer to your question should have been “no”. If you received a different answer, then the answer you received was wrong.

It seems like your belief in ‘free will’ is not consistent.

So a comment like yours doesn’t surprise me or bother me at all–it’s an elementary non-Biblical way of looking at the subject.

You use your free will frequently to refer to the Bible without actually referring to the Bible.

 

[ParkerD]

I must point out that desiring to be God is a lie from satan.

mwok,

It was indeed the temptation that Satan used to Eve only (not to Adam) that “your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

I find it always interesting that people use Satan’s temptation as their teacher about what God had as His plan for humankind. I think that is an unhelpful way to look at being taught by the Bible–to stop with those words and say now one knows the will of God on the subject.

But that is what consistently happens. People will not take the many, many passages that talk about becoming like Christ, becoming a joint heir with Him, being made “ruler over many things” through learning complete unselfishness, unconditional love, and the kind of faith described in Hebrews 11. Instead, they dwell on the temptation of Satan who thus becomes the teacher and they say, “That’s the way it is, and that’s all, folks–Satan knows why we are here, and was being perfectly truthful as always.” (Not my way of looking at the way Satan tempts, at all–his way is to always deceive, always.)

 

[ParkerD]

…
You use your free will frequently to refer to the Bible without actually referring to the Bible.

Stephen,

I had given the references in the Bible in my first entry. I have given them many times, with others also, in other entries on this subject. I didn’t feel the need to give the references again, but if you need them, then let me know.

Have a good day. It is so beautiful where I live right now, I feel very grateful for this wonderful season of the year.

 

[Tony888]

I must point out that desiring to be God is a lie from satan.

desiring to be ‘Christlike’ can lead to ‘shared divinity’ as the RCC doctrine states

however, desiring to be ‘king of the hill’ is selfish and pridefull, and does not lead one to be Christlike. Thus, as you point out, any follower of Christ who want’s to be ‘god’ is on the wrong path

 

[Stephen168]

I had given the references in the Bible in my first entry. I have given them many times, with others also, in other entries on this subject. I didn’t feel the need to give the references again, but if you need them, then let me know.

Yes, I see them, but none of them say the Master will make you Master, or God will make you God, or the Father will make you the Father.
So mwok’s point is valid: The created can not become the creator in a monotheistic religion.
After being taught polytheism by Joseph Smith and then reading the passages you provided, I see how they could re-enforce a belief in an infinite line of gods (polytheism); which was walnutleviosa’s point.

 

[ParkerD]

Yes, I see them, but none of them say the Master will make you Master, or God will make you God, or the Father will make you the Father.
So mwok’s point is valid: The created can not become the creator in a monotheistic religion.
After being taught polytheism by Joseph Smith and then reading the passages you provided, I see how they could re-enforce a belief in an infinite line of gods (polytheism); which was walnutleviosa’s point.

Stephen,

To be like Christ, who is usually in a person’s mind when they see the word “Master” with a capital “M” used in the New Testament, would mean that Christ can indeed “make you like the Master”–not the same person, of course, but “like” Him.

Christ is “like” the Father, but I realize that belief is not really considered accurate (although Christ taught it over and over) in how it is taught from what I have read by those who write about the “Trinity”.

Whether God the Father had a plan that included having spirit children be able to become like Christ through His grace and through the Father’s mercy, is the basic question that has its answer clearly in the Bible, but yet needs to be “found out” rather than be told without some thinking and reflecting on the part of the person doing the studying. I think the Bible should be studied and thought about and prayed about as to what God is teaching the reader through its teachings.

As to the non-belief in the Intercessory prayer that again comes forward in the comment about “polytheism”, I am comfortable that Christ knew exactly what He was praying that the Father would grant, and that His prayer was exactly corresponding to His Father’s will.

 

[RebeccaJ]

ParkerD, The first thing to know when speaking about God, is God is.

God is Father in relationship to the Son, which is an eternal relationship, one without beginning or end. This relationship is one of perfect unity, One Being, where two are not dissolved into one.

We know the Father through the Son, as the Son knows the Father and the Father knows the Son.

God is Father, in relationship to us as our Creator. We are Created by the Word of God, Who is Jesus Christ.

In this, we see and understand, the perfect love of the Father for the Son is made known to us, by the Son. The Son, Revealed by the Father, Reveals the Father to us. Knowing our relationship to Jesus Christ, as loved, wanted, cared for in ways that go beyond that of a biological father. So we cry, Abba!, Father!, and we know by the Holy Spirit a most certain thing: we are known by God, Who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

There is nothing greater for me to tell you than, God knows you, deeper, clearer, unveiled and nothing hidden, precisely because He Is Who He Is. FATHER, Son and Holy Spirit.

 

[mtolympus]

Matthew 1 “She was found with child of the Holy Ghost.”

Let me take one point at a time. My purpose is not to prove our doctrine to you, but only to show that Mormons do believe the Bible.

The Holy Ghost gives comfort, power, and understanding of truth that supersedes the natural or mortal level. Mary, Elisabeth, and John were each fulfilling very different purposes for God when the Holy Ghost came upon them. It was the Holy Ghost that gave them the power and understanding that was required to accomplish their missions. “You will receive power when the Holy Ghost comes upon you.” (Acts 1:8)

Brigham Young was correct. Jesus is not the son of the Holy Ghost, even though in Matthew he was called “child of the Holy Ghost.” (Matt. 1:18) John the Baptist’s birth was also a miracle, for his mother Elisabeth was barren, and both of his parents were “well stricken in years.” (Luke 1:7) John “was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.” (Luke 1:15) Therefore, John might also be called a child of the Holy Ghost, even though Zacharias is his father. Jesus is “the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14) and “shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35)

 

[mtolympus]

The first spirit to be born in heaven was Jesus, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 129)

“Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Col. 1:12-16) emphisis added

 

[Heuchler]

“Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Col. 1:12-16) emphisis added

So, this means that Christ was the first and there was nothing before him showing that God the Father could not be a part of creation. Thank you then.

 

[Heuchler]

Let me take one point at a time. My purpose is not to prove our doctrine to you, but only to show that Mormons do believe the Bible.

The Holy Ghost gives comfort, power, and understanding of truth that supersedes the natural or mortal level. Mary, Elisabeth, and John were each fulfilling very different purposes for God when the Holy Ghost came upon them. It was the Holy Ghost that gave them the power and understanding that was required to accomplish their missions. “You will receive power when the Holy Ghost comes upon you.” (Acts 1:8)

Brigham Young was correct. Jesus is not the son of the Holy Ghost, even though in Matthew he was called “child of the Holy Ghost.” (Matt. 1:18) John the Baptist’s birth was also a miracle, for his mother Elisabeth was barren, and both of his parents were “well stricken in years.” (Luke 1:7) John “was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.” (Luke 1:15) Therefore, John might also be called a child of the Holy Ghost, even though Zacharias is his father. Jesus is “the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14) and “shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35)

In Luke it says

How shall this be done, because I know not man?35 And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon you and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you.

I know no man which means I have not physically had sex with a man. The response was that the Holy Spirit would come down and lead to her impregnation.