Why are Mormons so happy?

[Lemuel]

Elder Holland recently gave a talk to mission presidents about a guy in California who was tracted out by his brother who he didn’t even know since he was long disaffected from the family. A lot of people got that burning in the bosom, my brother being one of them. Elder Holland later had to retract that story because it was a lie.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

The one that would really drive me nuts at fast and testimony meetings was when parents would make their 3 year olds go up to the podium to “bear their testimony.” The mom or dad would then whisper the words into their kid’s ear and then the kid would repeat it into the mic. Totally ridiculous.

 

[ShowersofRoses]

Thank you!

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

Elder Holland later had to retract that story because it was a lie.

It’s been my experience that the LDS have a greater than average tendency to uncritically pass off miraculous anecdotes and Mormonesque urban legends that seemingly support the LDS Church. To be sure, I’d bet this exists to some extent in all religions, and historically the Catholic Church was really bad at it to the point in the High Middle Ages you’d have loads of fake saints and fake relics, but the Catholic Church today is rather skeptical by default when it comes to these things now. Mormons on the other hand love these sorts of stories, so much so that there’s even a word for it in Mormondom: the Faith Promoting Rumor

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

The absolute epitome of brainwashing. I also find it interesting that while the LDS pride themselves on having a “creedless faith”, and not praying in a “vain and repetitious manner”, even the standard adult testimony has the same basic structure and almost always concludes with the same basic talking points:

“I know the Church is true. I know Joseph Smith was a prophet. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know (fill in current LDS President’s name here) is a prophet. I know families are forever… InthenameofJesusChristAmen.”

Me personally, my favorite testimonies to hear growing up came from two particular individuals in our Ward: the senile guy who would recount his dreams of Book of Mormon prophets visiting him and giving him revelations (those really made the Bishopric sweat), and the cantankerously angry guy who would use the F&T as a venue to passive-aggressively air his grievances against the other Ward members: “I know the Lord has blessings in store for humble people like me who don’t dwell on mundane things, like the selfish person who constantly takes my parking spot at Church…”

 

[TOmNossor]

One of the Mormon trolls here says that Mary remained a virgin after she conceived Jesus, which is contrary to official LDS doctrine: .

I would be interested to know who said this and when. I do not recall any LDS making this claim.
I do of course recognize that most Catholic Biblical scholars believe the BIBLE most clearly says that Mary had other children.
That being said, I have never considered this a huge issue and I wonder what LDS would have considered it such?
So which “Mormon* troll here says that Mary remained a virgin?” Can you link to where this is claimed?
Charity, TOm

 

[Kris34]

No catholic scholars don’t believe Mary had other kids. Catholics who have bothered to look up why our Protestant brothers and sisters believe it find out the word means kin, not really brother or sister excusively. If only the Bible were originally written in English!

 

[TOmNossor]

No catholic scholars don’t believe Mary had other kids. Catholics who have bothered to look up why our Protestant brothers and sisters believe it find out the word means kin, not really brother or sister excusively. If only the Bible were originally written in English!

It is my opinion that no Catholic scholar believes that Mary had other kids. To believe that Mary was not a perpetual virgin is to cease to be Catholic. Scholars who claim to be Catholic and believe that Mary had other kids are not “really” Catholic because they deny dogma.
That was not what I claimed however.
What I said was Catholic “Bible Scholars” believe that the BIBLE most clearly reads that Mary had other kids. In other words, the belief one would embrace if they ONLY looked to the text of the Bible, the meanings of the words, and the understanding of the culture that received the words of the Bible; is that Mary had other kids. Father John Meier (whose book received an Imprimatur) would be perhaps the most well-known recent example.
The perpetual virginity of Mary is Tradition and is also dogma and has been believed by many of the ECF (though not all) from very early in the church. But this Tradition is a product of extra-Biblical teachings such as the Protoevangelium of James. The ECF who believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary often reference the Protoevangelium of James (and I think one other apocraphal story as there are two largely incompatible ways in which Mary’s virginity is asserted by those who assert it).
I have never been particularly bothered by the perpetual virginity of Mary. It is clearly early and clearly important to the Catholic and original Protestant faiths. But, it is not something that I would expect a LDS to embrace because of the force of the Biblical case as the Biblical case is weak (though not non-existent just not strong). This is why I was surprised to see that @Lemuel thinks that he has seen a LDS claim this and I wanted to know who?
Charity, TOm

 

[gazelam]

Where do I begin? Joseph Smith, the white stone, the golden tablets, Jesus in America, polygamy as a church teaching, etc etc. Pure fantasy, and the historical Joseph Smith certainly comes across as a complete fake.

Catholics that are knowledgeable and charitable have a different opinion of Joseph Smith. The later Catholic scholar Stephen H. Webb wrote the following of Joseph Smith:

By any measurement, Joseph Smith was a remarkable person. His combination of organizational acumen with spiritual originality and personal decorum and modesty is rare in the history of religion. He was so steadfast in his ability to inspire men and women through times of great hardship that none of those who knew him could claim to fully understand him. He knew more about theology and philosophy than it was reasonable for anyone in his position to know, as if he were dipping into the deep, collective unconsciousness of Christianity with a very long pen. He read the Bible in ways so novel that he can be considered a theological innocent—he expanded and revised the biblical narrative without questioning its authority—yet he brusquely overturned ancient and impregnable metaphysical assumptions with the aplomb of an assistant professor. For someone so charismatic, he was exceptionally humble, even ordinary, and he delegated authority with the wisdom of a man looking far into the future for the well-being of his followers. It would be tempting to compare him to Mohammed—who also combined pragmatic political skill and a genius for religious innovation—if he were not so deeply Christian. (Stephen H. Webb, Jesus Christ, Eternal God: Heavenly Flesh and the Metaphysics of Matter (Oxford University Press, 2012)

 

[Lemuel]

There ya go …

 

[gazelam]

gazelam:

There ya go …

My comment was in regard to the conception and birth of Jesus only in response to the question of @kainosktisis regarding the birth of Christ.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

Good grief. What a load of bunk.

 

[Lemuel]

Gotcha. You and your friend should write a book called “Here’s What Mormons Say. Here’s What Mormons Mean”.

 

[runningdude]

I know several Mormons. They run the gamut of emotions just like anybody else.

 

[Limoncello4021]

Agree. This is what “knowledgeable and charitable” people believe about Joseph Smith? Too funny!

 

[TOmNossor]

Gotcha. You and your friend should write a book called “Here’s What Mormons Say. Here’s What Mormons Mean”.

I read what he said and it was not what you claimed. I never thought you were referring to his statement in this thread anyway because he didn’t say anything like what you claimed IMO.
I actually thought you were referring to me. I didn’t realize you would call him a troll. I only thought you hated (or whatever it is) me enough to call me a troll, but I hadn’t said any such thing (and neither did Gazelam).
Gazelam can correct me if I am wrong, but he believes Christ was born to the Virgin Mary.
This DOES NOT say what the Catholic Church teaches that Mary was a perpetual virgin and never had kids after Christ.
LDS believe that Mary conceived Jesus Christ and was a virgin. After this, LDS follow the most clear read of the Bible as I explained above.
It requires a modicum of charity to read what was said and not infer dishonesty or contradiction as you did. You reference a statement from the chapter header of LDS scriptures that claims after Jesus, Mary had other children. Gazelam said nothing to contradict this and surely didn’t mean that.
You should spend more time reading and trying to understand and less time trying to justify your departure from the CoJCoLDS.
Every time you do this it is clear to me that your departure from the CoJCoLDS has more to do with you than with the church to which I belong. If you were 10 times more charitable when you read the history and doctrine of the CoJCoLDS than you APPEAR to be when you read what Gazelem and I write, you would still probably leave. I truly hope you do not treat the history and doctrine of your new church with this desire to find fault at every turn like you seem to have done with your former faith. The type of thinking you evidence if consistently applied will lead you out of Catholicism too.
I also very much hope that I do not appear to treat my former faith as you treat your former faith.
Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Good grief. What a load of bunk.

He only quoted a Catholic author. So your problem in this case is with Stephen H. Webb.

I usually point to Father Jordan Vajda who said that he could see through the many criticisms of the CoJCoLDS and they were very much like the criticism of the Catholic Church. Of course a few years after Father Vajda wrote this, he left the Catholic Chruch, left the priesthood, and became a LDS.

Charity, TOm

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I would imagine that a lot of nice, rational people are raised Mormon by nice, rational Mormon parents, and if they live in a place like Utah most of the people they know are Mormon and it just seems like the normal thing to be.

With respect to converts, I took a tour of their cathedral before it was dedicated, and the tour was given by a nice rational guy and his wife in late middle age, very nicely dressed, who explained that they turned to the Mormon Church after the death of a baby daughter had hit them very hard. I would imagine that perhaps the Mormon folks were very nice to them when this occurred and also to be honest I can see the idea of being married to your same spouse and reunited with your whole family including ancestors again in a beautiful afterlife as being very attractive. Plus the Mormons do give off a “prosperity gospel” air that the Catholics do not. If I wasn’t a “cultural Catholic” and indeed perhaps had little exposure to religion, and then suddenly met a bunch of people from different churches and was trying to pick a place I might fit in, I’d definitely be looking at the Mormons.

I hate to say this, but I can also see the relative lack of diversity in the Mormon church as being a draw for some, who might not even realize that’s what they’re attracted to, but when you go to church, it’s easier if you see people who look like yourself and not people who seem to come from a very different social, racial, economic, etc background.

 

[Chris-Wa1]

Only partly correct Tom. Webb’s statement on JS is a load of bunk. But Gazelam’s assertion that “knowledgible and charitable Catholic scholars” think highly of Joseph Smith is also a load of bunk.

 

[TOmNossor]

Only partly correct Tom. Webb’s statement on JS is a load of bunk. But Gazelam’s assertion that “knowledgible and charitable Catholic scholars” think highly of Joseph Smith is also a load of bunk.

So Webb and Gazelam are both putting forward a load of bunk?
I disagree, but thanks for the clarification.
Charity, TOm