Views on Mormonism?

[Denise1957]

Pablope,

Sorry to disappoint you, but the teachings of Paul, Peter, John, Stephen and James are very clear, and the Trinity is not in those teachings–nor would they agree with any of the approaches taken by those who don’t understand the word “Christian” as so readily explained in the New Testament. The word “Christian” pertains to being not only a true believer in Christ, but acting as a follower of Christ acts, from the heart–from a believing and changed heart, and with the Holy Ghost as a part of the ongoing sanctifying experience of their growth in the gospel, as taught by Paul and by Peter and by John and by James.

Stephen described seeing the Son of God, Jesus Christ, standing on the right hand of the Father, which means he also saw the Father and knew that he was seeing the Father, and also had the Holy Ghost with him as described in that experience.

How does St. Stephen’s description of his vision disprove the Trinity, according to Mormon teaching?

Part of the Apostles Creed which we Catholics recite frequently contains a part which mentions that Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. It isn’t something new to Catholics.

Why is St. Stephen important to Mormons? Another LDS person mentioned St. Stephen a day or two ago.

 

[ParkerD]

How does St. Stephen’s description of his vision disprove the Trinity, according to Mormon teaching?

Part of the Apostles Creed which we Catholics recite frequently contains a part which mentions that Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. It isn’t something new to Catholics.

Why is St. Stephen important to Mormons? Another LDS person mentioned St. Stephen a day or two ago.

Hi, Denise,

I hope you are doing well, and have had a nice day. We’ve enjoyed seeing the neighborhood children with their costumes, and the fun decorations at all the neighbors this evening.

Stephen saw “the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:56) That means They are not only Separate Persons, but that God the Father had a right hand side, or in other words Stephen saw Jesus, in glory, standing at the right-hand side of the glorious body of God the Father, in the vision he described.

When someone stands at the right hand of someone else, then what is being described is two people standing side by side.

Stephen also emphasized the importance of the Holy Ghost as a testifier of truth to individual people–the Jewish leaders to whom he was testifying that they were “resisting” the Holy Ghost. (v. 51)

 

[Denise1957]

Hi, Denise,

I hope you are doing well, and have had a nice day. We’ve enjoyed seeing the neighborhood children with their costumes, and the fun decorations at all the neighbors this evening.

Stephen saw “the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:56) That means They are not only Separate Persons, but that God the Father had a right hand side, or in other words Stephen saw Jesus, in glory, standing at the right-hand side of the glorious body of God the Father, in the vision he described.

When someone stands at the right hand of someone else, then what is being described is two people standing side by side.

Stephen also emphasized the importance of the Holy Ghost as a testifier of truth to individual people–the Jewish leaders to whom he was testifying that they were “resisting” the Holy Ghost. (v. 51)

Thanks for your explanation of why you think that St. Stephen’s vision disproves the Trinity. Is this something that Joseph Smith taught?

Am I understanding you correctly in that you believe that the Holy Ghost testifies truth to individual people, and that’s another reason why St. Stephen is important to you, and perhaps other Mormons?

 

[RebeccaJ]

All I’m thinking is:

Mormons are a bunch of Debby Downers.



St Stephen is an experience of incredible faith, but somehow, that is a sign of apostasy.

Whatever.

 

[Denise1957]

All I’m thinking is:

Mormons are a bunch of Debby Downers.



St Stephen is an experience of incredible faith, but somehow, that is a sign of apostasy.

Whatever.

Yes, he had such incredible faith. What I find inspiring about St. Stephen is that he forgave his attackers - not an easy thing to do. And perhaps St. Paul (then Saul) was moved by St. Stephen’s forgivness of the attackers.

I can’t see anything in St. Stephen’s testimony that would relate to him speaking about the importance of the Holy Ghost as a testifier of truth to ‘individual’ people, though.

St. Stephen does mention Egypt, and Egypt was a focus of Jeseph Smith, but I’m not sure there’s a correlation there. Maybe Parker would know about that.

 

[CopticChristian]

If you are struggling, then you probably have faulty information.

Nobody should feel they understand a religious faith after watching a cartoon, made by detractors. It would be like me claiming I know the Catholic faith because I read all the Chick tracts on Catholics

Or the movie shown in the endowment ceremony…is it a play or a movie?

 

[CopticChristian]

In the New Testament Church that Jesus established, the members called themselves “Saints.” The name “Christians” for the followers of Christ apparently originated when non-believers first called the followers of Christ “Christians” at Antioch. “And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” (Acts 11:26) Since the church did not originate the name Christian, no single denomination can claim ownership of the term. The fact that the Catholic Church does not recognise an LDS baptism makes complete sense to me, and it simply means that we are not Catholics. We are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. According to the Bible, those who follow and believe in Christ are called Christians.

Salt Lake City is a City and yet many know by saying I’m from Salt Lake they understand it to be a city…

The Mormon Tabernacle Choir is a Choir and yet when we hear that it was sung by the Mormon Tabernacle we know that it was a choir…

The Catholic Christian Church is the Catholic Church although not always stated so…to say you are not Catholic is to say you are not Christian…

Since the Catholic Church produced the Bible and we are not Bible alone but rather Bible/Tradition/Magesterium in our teachings and you refer to your fallible interpretation of the Bible, this would equate you as a deranged form of Protestant thought…since Mormons sprung forth from a deranged Protestant…

 

[CopticChristian]

The Catholic Church accepts all Catholic and most Protestant baptisms which only means we are neither Catholic nor Protestant and that we don’t accept the Nicene Creed. Unlike a Jew or a Muslim, Latter-day Saints believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (1 John 4:15), who died for the sins of the world, and rose from the dead on the third day. (1 Cor, 15: 3-4) LDS are baptised “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” and believe as we are told in the Bible that there is only “one baptism.” (Mark 16:20)

Wrong…
ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm

The formula used by the Mormons might seem at first sight to be a Trinitarian formula. The text states: “Being commissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (cf. D&C 20:73). The similarities with the formula used by the Catholic Church are at first sight obvious, but in reality they are only apparent. There is not in fact a fundamental doctrinal agreement. There is not a true invocation of the Trinity because the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, according to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are not the three persons in which subsists the one Godhead, but three gods who form one divinity. One is different from the other, even though they exist in perfect harmony (Joseph F. Smith, ed., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith [TPJSI, Salt Lake City: Desert Book, 1976, p. 372). The very word divinity has only a functional, not a substantial content, because the divinity originates when the three gods decided to unite and form the divinity to bring about human salvation (Encyclopaedia of Mormonism [EM], New York: Macmillan, 1992, cf. Vol. 2, p. 552). This divinity and man share the same nature and they are substantially equal. God the Father is an exalted man, native of another planet, who has acquired his divine status through a death similar to that of human beings, the necessary way to divinization (cf. TPJS, pp. 345-346). God the Father has relatives and this is explained by the doctrine of infinite regression of the gods who initially were mortal (cf. TPJS, p. 373). God the Father has a wife, the Heavenly Mother, with whom he shares the responsibility of creation. They procreate sons in the spiritual world. Their firstborn is Jesus Christ, equal to all men, who has acquired his divinity in a pre-mortal existence. Even the Holy Spirit is the son of heavenly parents. The Son and the Holy Spirit were procreated after the beginning of the creation of the world known to us (cf. EM, Vol. 2, p. 961). Four gods are directly responsible for the universe, three of whom have established a covenant and thus form the divinity.

and…

The Intention of the Celebrating Minister. Such doctrinal diversity, regarding the very notion of God, prevents the minister of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from having the intention of doing what the Catholic Church does when she confers Baptism, that is, doing what Christ willed her to do when he instituted and mandated the sacrament of Baptism. This becomes even more evident when we consider that in their understanding Baptism was not instituted by Christ but by God and began with Adam (cf. Book of Moses 6:64). Christ simply commanded the practice of this rite; but this was not an innovation. It is clear that the intention of the Church in conferring Baptism is certainly to follow the mandate of Christ (cf. Mt 28,19) but at the same time to confer the sacrament that Christ had instituted. According to the New Testament, there is an essential difference between the Baptism of John and Christian Baptism. The Baptism of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which originated not in Christ but already at the beginning of creation (James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith [AF], Salt Lake City: Desert Book, 1990, cf. pp. 110-111), is not Christian Baptism; indeed, it denies its newness. The Mormon minister, who must necessarily be the “priest” (cf. D&C 20:38-58.107:13.14.20), therefore radically formed in their own doctrine, cannot have any other intention than that of doing what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does, which is quite different in respect to what the Catholic Church intends to do when it baptizes, that is, the conferral of the sacrament of Baptism instituted by Christ, which means participation in his death and resurrection (cf. Rom 6,3-11; Col 2,12-13).

oops…

B) If a believer baptized in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, after renouncing his or her faith or having been excommunicated, wants to return, he or she must be rebaptized (cf. AF, pp. 129-131).

Even in regard to these last elements it is clear that the Baptism of Mormons cannot be considered valid; since it is not Christian Baptism, the minister cannot have the intention of doing what the Catholic does.

no, no no…

Summing up, we can say: The Baptism of the Catholic Church and that of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints differ essentially, both for what concerns faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in whose name Baptism is conferred, and for what concerns the relationship to Christ who instituted it. As a result of all this, it is understood that the Catholic Church has to consider invalid, that is to say, cannot consider true Baptism, the rite given that name by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints.

nice try using the Father, Son and Holy Spirit…

 

[CopticChristian]

No, Stephen, the problem is that your definition of polytheism does not take into account the Savior’s intercessory prayer, which talks about being “one” with Them. That is not how the world views the word “polytheism”.

Polytheism is reflective of Greek and Roman mythology. Since your beliefs about the Trinity derive from a Greek philosopher as one of their fundamental basis, then I would say that leans more toward a Deistic belief not shared certainly by the Jews and not shared certainly by me.

But I think the Savior would describe what He was praying for humankind to be with Him, as more “monotheism” (being One) than “polytheism”, given the connotation the world brings to the two words.

Yes or No…you did not answer the one simple question…

Do you as taught by the Mormon Church believe you will become a god?

 

[CopticChristian]

Pablope,

Sorry to disappoint you, but the teachings of Paul, Peter, John, Stephen and James are very clear, and the Trinity is not in those teachings–nor would they agree with any of the approaches taken by those who don’t understand the word “Christian” as so readily explained in the New Testament. The word “Christian” pertains to being not only a true believer in Christ, but acting as a follower of Christ acts, from the heart–from a believing and changed heart, and with the Holy Ghost as a part of the ongoing sanctifying experience of their growth in the gospel, as taught by Paul and by Peter and by John and by James.

Stephen described seeing the Son of God, Jesus Christ, standing on the right hand of the Father, which means he also saw the Father and knew that he was seeing the Father, and also had the Holy Ghost with him as described in that experience.

Wow have you got a problem…Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic Christian…Protestants of every stripe all read the same book long before Joe Smith and see Trinity in the passages of the same book…now Protestants are fallible however at least they accept what those that teach the Trinity believe…you are way out there…

 

[NewSeeker]

Since your beliefs about the Trinity derive from a Greek philosopher…

Which greek philosopher would that be?

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks for your explanation of why you think that St. Stephen’s vision disproves the Trinity. Is this something that Joseph Smith taught?

Denise,

I don’t recall seeing that particular example used by Joseph Smith to explain the Godhead, but perhaps he did. If I get time, I’ll research whether he did.

Am I understanding you correctly in that you believe that the Holy Ghost testifies truth to individual people, and that’s another reason why St. Stephen is important to you, and perhaps other Mormons?

I haven’t seen that the verse I noted about the Jewish leaders “resisting” the Holy Ghost was used by others who have written about the vision Stephen had, but I think it is an important example of how the Holy Ghost was so essential in the teachings of the apostles and the seventies (Stephen being a seventy). So I thought I should bring the two ideas together in writing to you.

 

[ParkerD]

Which greek philosopher would that be?

NewSeeker,

You were one who wrote about Aristotle, and about “First Cause” and creation. “First Cause” is the ultimate foundation of the Trinity doctrine, since that has to be in place for the Trinity doctrine to work.

 

[Denise1957]

Denise,

I don’t recall seeing that particular example used by Joseph Smith to explain the Godhead, but perhaps he did. If I get time, I’ll research whether he did.

I haven’t seen that the verse I noted about the Jewish leaders “resisting” the Holy Ghost was used by others who have written about the vision Stephen had, but I think it is an important example of how the Holy Ghost was so essential in the teachings of the apostles and the seventies (Stephen being a seventy). So I thought I should bring the two ideas together in writing to you.

Hi Parker, and thanks for your reply. The example of St. Stephen that you gave which you believe disproves the Catholic view of the Trinity - would you know if this is a widely accepted view in the LDS? LDS is so different than Catholicism, in that mormons seem to be allowed to have private interpretations of many aspects of the LDS faith. Please correct me if I’m wrong about that.

Also, I looked through St. Stephen’s testimony last evening, but I couldn’t find where he said anything about the Holy Ghost testifying truth to individuals. Could you point out where this is? I’m not trying to disprove what you say; I’m just trying to understand the Mormon view at this time. Also, how aware where the Jews at that time that the Holy Ghost exists - do you happen to know? I don’t know anything about that.

 

[NewSeeker]

NewSeeker,

You were one who wrote about Aristotle, and about “First Cause” and creation. “First Cause” is the ultimate foundation of the Trinity doctrine, since that has to be in place for the Trinity doctrine to work.

Yes, Aristotle posited a First Cause, which is what I pointed out. He did not say the ‘“First Cause” is the ultimate foundation of the Trinity doctrine.’ As you know, Aristotle was no Christian. You seem to believe that some early church father relied on Aristotle to develop the initial form of the trinitarian dogma. Do you know who this early church father was or are you just assuming this is the case?

 

[Stephen168]

You can read the article. It’s about Aristotle. He was the Greek philosopher, and the “First Cause” creation originated with him.

And I agree that that entire subject may well be a myth for you, but I have seen several Catholics refer to Aristotle and his views as supporting the Catholic belief in the “First Cause” and thus the “Trinity” dwelling outside of the universe and outside of space and time

Alexander the Great (356-323BC) conquered the area which brought Greek culture to the region. Aristotle (384-322BC) reasoned there had to be an uncaused cause or unmoved mover. This reasoned two religious ideas 1) there is only one God and 2) he created everything out of nothing. The Jews already believed there was only one God who created everything, but Greek thinking started Jews thinking about God the creator; a God who created everything out of nothing. It is only reasonable to think it so.

The God of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity is a God of faith and reason. The gods of Mormonism are not reasonable by the fact there are more than one, and they are inside creation.

As you can also see, Aristotle lived 300 years before Christianity, and had no influence on the revelation of the trinity revealed by Christ.

Interesting you said that several Catholics refer to Aristotle. I know Catholic thinking; I want to know what the Mormon Church teaches in regard to the mythical Greek Philosophy and Philosopher that Mormons refer to as some kind of slam against Catholicism. Can you tell us?

 

[KathleenGee]

I have referred to St. Thomas, who brought the erudite tradition into the use of philosophy, reason with faith.

Aristotle and others after him, including Arab scholars, went on with their particular philosophies without God.

What St. Thomas did was prove the existence of God…as God as the Unmoved Mover.

Mormons would do well to study the Summa…but I hope they don’t in time then claim it to support their beliefs as they are starting to do now with the Early Church Fathers…

It is St. Thomas Aquinas who also said how can one compare the intellect of a human compared to God’s…like the eye of an owl next to the sun…noting the owl can see only in darkness.

And towards the end of his life, his prayers lifted him up before the altar, fellow Dominicans witnessing him levitating…Afterwards, after seeing a glimpse of heaven, he then answered that all his writings were as straw.

 

[NewSeeker]

Yes, Thomas Aquinas relied upon Aristotle to develop a distinctly Christian philosophy of the First Cause and Prime Mover. Thomas lived centuries after the trinitarian dogma was first propounded. My original question still stands, Parker. Your assumption is that trinitarianism came from Aristotle. If true, this development must have occurred prior to the 3rd Century (of course, we know trinitarianism is part of the Christian Revelation, but let’s explore your position further and assume, for the sake of argument, that it is not). Can you demonstrate this development with documentary evidence and name the Christian philosopher(s) who is/are responsible? Or is this development just an assumption on your part?

 

[Robert_in_SD]

If you are struggling, then you probably have faulty information.

Nobody should feel they understand a religious faith after watching a cartoon, made by detractors. It would be like me claiming I know the Catholic faith because I read all the Chick tracts on Catholics

Good point. What’s the best non-biased source for learning about LDS practices and beliefs?

Peace,
Robert

 

[mtolympus]

All I’m thinking is:

Mormons are a bunch of Debby Downers.



St Stephen is an experience of incredible faith, but somehow, that is a sign of apostasy.

Whatever.

I believe that both Catholics and Mormons agree on one thing, that Stephen was a martyr.

Debby Downers? I don’t know what that means, but I’m sure that is not the worst name we have been called. Maybe we are making some progress!