PBS Special on Mormon Church

[AKAK]

Oh boy...

"My Trinity is better than your Trinity and my prophets are better than your prophets"

Any Jews or the House?

Maybe they can straighten up this mono/polytheistic trainwreck.

 

[mooktarr]

I am a firm believe in a man having all the women he wants .... Sign me up!

 

[Gatorubet]

Question; Do either of you guys , after four pages, think you will convince the other?

Oh hell no...

But it entertains me to see every reference to multiple gods (and men becoming gods) flat out ignored, usually countered with some reference to Jesus. That is the PR plan they use, and they are nothing if "on-topic" from a PR standpoint. Kudos to Salt Lake City.

Golf's not gonna win any arguments on the "Christianity" label once he admits the LDS Church is not monotheistic....so he won't.

 

[Gatorubet]

Oh boy...

"My Trinity is better than your Trinity and my prophets are better than your prophets"

Any Jews or the House?

Maybe they can straighten up this mono/polytheistic trainwreck.

Scientologists. We need Scientologists to straighten this out. If Tom would jump on the Holy Coach of Saint Rosie the Lipid, he would receive a sign and guide us.

 

[Deety]

Here's how I see it, after years of discussion with my LDS friends and missionaries.

You're both followers of Christ, but because you have different ideas about who He was and what it means to be a Christian, neither of you can really refer to the other as a "true" Christian because neither of you thinks the other quite has the truth. The same friction does exist between, say, Protestant churches, but it's not as significant and generally speaking people have agreed to be more polite about it (perhaps because most people can't name the differences anyway).

The primary difference is that while most followers of Christ believe Christ and the Father are one in essence, in LDS doctrine, they are one in spirit or purpose, more along the lines of how we sometimes say married people are "one," but on a much different level. While strictly speaking this may be polytheistic, it is far different than the idea of embracing several different gods, because there is still only one group of ideas and truths involved.

It still all boils down to whether or not you think Joseph Smith was a prophet, though. I think the LDS church gets it right in many ways, but when you can't accept the basic premise, the rest doesn't matter.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Golf's not gonna win any arguments on the "Christianity" label once he admits the LDS Church is not monotheistic....so he won't.

From my understanding, being Christian is pretty much contingent on subscribing to Jesus Christ as the son of Man, not mono or polytheism. Not to mention Islam considers Cathliocs and other subscribers of the trinity polytheistic..

so like Deety said, it's hard to come to common grounds when you have diffrent ideas of the Truth.

 

[jwinslow]

From my understanding, being Christian is pretty much contingent on subscribing to Jesus Christ as the son of Man, not mono or polytheism.

Christ's teachings don't leave room for polytheism.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Christ's teachings don't leave room for polytheism.

Through your lense is the point.. thats why i included the islam refrence.

 

[jwinslow]

Through your lense is the point..

Ok, then show me how Christ's teachings don't contradict LDS theology. To me, these inconsistencies are spot on. Do you disagree?

IRR.org

The Bible teaches and orthodox Christians through the ages have believed that there is only one True and Living God and apart from Him there are no other Gods (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 43:10,11; 44:6,8; 45:21,22; 46:9; Mark 12:29-34).
By contrast, the Mormon Church teaches that there are many Gods (Book of Abraham 4:3ff), and that we can become gods and goddesses in the celestial kingdom (Doctrine and Covenants 132:19-20; Gospel Principles, p. 245; Achieving a Celestial Marriage, p. 130). It also teaches that those who achieve godhood will have spirit children who will worship and pray to them, just as we worship and pray to God the Father (Gospel Principles, p. 302).

Or another large diversion

2. WAS GOD ONCE A MAN LIKE US?
The Bible teaches and orthodox Christians through the ages have believed that God is Spirit (John 4:24; 1 Timothy 6:15,16), He is not a man (Numbers 23:19; Hosea 11:9; Romans 1:22, 23), and has always (eternally) existed as God ? all powerful, all knowing, and everywhere present (Psalm 90:2; 139:7-10; Isaiah 40:28; Luke 1:37).
By contrast, the Mormon Church teaches that God the Father was once a man like us who progressed to become a God and has a body of flesh and bone (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22; "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" from Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-347; Gospel Principles, p. 9; Articles of Faith, p. 430; Mormon Doctrine, p. 321). Indeed, the Mormon Church teaches that God himself has a father, and a grandfather, ad infinitum (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 373; Mormon Doctrine, p. 577).

If you wish to subscribe to LDS theology, that's your choice. But the theological disparity is so enormous that I don't see how they could be the same religion.

more of the same from another source

Mormonism teaches​

Mormon theology teaches that god is only one of countless gods, that he used to be a man on another planet, that he became a god by following the laws and ordinances of that god on that world, and that he brought one of his wives to this world with whom he produces spirit children who then inhabit human bodies at birth. The first spirit child to be born was Jesus. Second was Satan, and then we all followed. But, the Bible says that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 45:5), that God has eternally been God (Psalm 90:2) -- which means he was never a man on another planet. Since the Bible denies the existence of other gods (and goddesses), the idea that Jesus is the product of a god and goddess couple is rejected. The Bible tells us that Jesus The Jesus of Mormonism is definitely not the same Jesus of the Bible. Therefore, faith in the Mormon Jesus, is faith misplaced because the Mormon Jesus doesn't exist.

thats why i included the islam refrence.

That's not really a rebuttal. They believe we worship a trio, just as we believe. How we view that trio is the difference. What is recognized as God(s) does not change.

 

[Deety]

Just as a side note, anything that comes from an anti-Mormon or purportedly objective source is highly likely to be flawed. I've read a bunch of them, and found that inaccuracy abounds.

There are also commonly misinterpretations in writings embraced by Church members like Mormon Doctrine, referenced above. MD is a very interesting read - I pulled it off my college boyfriend's bookshelf and read it through as my intro to the LDS Church... yow - but it's still a personally interpreted explanation of doctrine and not doctrine itself.

 

[jwinslow]

I understand sources can be flawed, perhaps you can set me straight... it's been a few years since I studied their theology directly (so I took the lazy route via google). Do they believe there are many gods, and we can become gods ourselves? If so, how does one mesh that with the 'one and only' teachings of JC?

 

[Bleed S & G]

Oh yeah, crap flinging and bad "manner". What manner is that exactly? If he was advocating that the world was sitting on top of a giant Turtle, as one world religion does, would you consider it rude to point out that all core samples taken to date have not struck turtle, or would that be too mean also? (this is not intended as a backhand slap at LDS, just an example of the clearest religion/science rift I could think of)

Im not saying your being 'too mean' for pointing out what you, others, or myself think are flaws in his beliefs.. the answers of your poll pretty much tell the story. Your trying to be cute & funny, and its stupid. now most of the debate in here hasn't been bad at all, but you seem to have at least one stupid ass paragraph per post. You didnt start this thread to have an intelligent debate or discusson. I mean your response to an offended member of the LDS church was:

My apology.

Which is all fine and well, but i thought it to be an asshole jesture along with the poll, and a few more response you tossed in.

I have not called him a name, tried to convert him to PCUSA, or uttered an example of LDS theology that does not have a factual basis.

I never said you did

They are not "christian" in the eyes of 99.9% of self-professed Christian Churches for the reasons I mentioned. That does not make him a bad guy, or his religion a bad religion. But it does not make them Christian either, any more than a Muslim could call himself a Christian simply because they share large parts of the Old Testament.

Since when does popular opinion make things fact? Who cares what "self-professed Christian Churches" think on a subject like this.. history shows that 99.9% of these churches havn't really been Holy Churches. Im pretty sure its easy to spell out, and this argument in my eyes at least is stupid.. if someone believes in Christ and his teachings.. they are a "Christian." I see why you have an issue with this:

Well, "condemn" is in the eye of the beholder. I mean, every one of the many religions who claim that it is the only true religion condemns by implication any rival religion that says "no....we are the only true religion"

I think our diffrence of opinion is.. there is no true religion. Getting to the kindgom through Christ dosen't mean, from my perspective, you must follow a certian creed. In order to get to the kingdom, you need to live as Christ did, our ultimate example on how to lead a human life. Live with love, don't judge.. it's mans place to forgive. Do you think a being as high and mighty as our Lord gives a shit what details a peticuliar person subscribes to. Your on some crusdae to prove LDS is a pagan religion it seems, where you should be focusing on your own quest to know & serve the Lord. All I'm saying I guess is, i wouldn't hang my hat on your church and their opinions of others faith. Every single person has their own belifs that differ from what they are being preached to on Sundays.


Take a little piece from every religion and you start to piece together a good one. But much of a good religion lies within the believers heart and mind.. and each one has their own diffrent twist and opinions and feel they are right in their assumptions of God. You and me have no idea what God is or what He thinks or for this matter what He considers "chirstian".. it's almost blasphemous to say you do.

Sorry if you don't like any religious discussion that is not "Kum-bi-yah, let's all ignore any differences." There are differences. And it does not mean that I'm right on my flavor religious choice. But it also does not mean that I have to agree that we both are "Christians" given the doctrinal differences. Why is that a big hairy deal?

I guess what struck a wrong cord with me, here you are claiming you're a chrisitan but you don't represent Christ very well with the things you're saying. You remind me of most "christians" i've been around.

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."- Gandhi

 

[Bleed S & G]

Ok, then show me how Christ's teachings don't contradict LDS theology. To me, these inconsistencies are spot on. Do you disagree?

IRR.org
Or another large diversion
If you wish to subscribe to LDS theology, that's your choice. But the theological disparity is so enormous that I don't see how they could be the same religion.

So you aren't even really sure what LDS theolgy is, after reading the post below deetys - but thats beside the point here. Look, if what your assuming about their theology is correct, yes there a huge diffrences in belifes.. but they are still a 'christian church' IMO if they believe in Christ as the messiah. maybe my idea on the label (and thats ALL that it is anyways) christian is wrong.

That's not really a rebuttal. They believe we worship a trio, just as we believe. How we view that trio is the difference. What is recognized as God(s) does not change.

They look at us as pagans believe in the trinity.. ever talked to a muslim? maybe the belifs per sect and person vary but from my conversations they laugh at the idea of the trinity and they do consider it polytheism.. thats one of their big beefs with the cath church and the like.

 

[jwinslow]

What confuses me is why afgolfer will not address these inconsistencies. If it really is a problem of 'lenses' or 'semantics' then where are the rebuttals?

So you aren't even really sure what LDS theolgy is

Am I a scholar? No, but I studied it directly about 4-5 years ago well enough to understand it's wide-sweeping differences from Christianity. When I don't continue to study something, it usually slips out of my memory. I can't remember spanish despite 4 years of it in school.

I worded my question that way so she could address that inconsistency directly, especially since her study seems to be more intensive.

Look, if what your assuming about their theology is correct, yes there a huge diffrences in belifes.. but they are still a 'christian church' IMO if they believe in Christ as the messiah. maybe my idea on the label (and thats ALL that it is anyways) christian is wrong.

It probably is an issue of semantics. Much of their religion is based upon Christ, but for my analytical side... there is too much that contradicts the direct Word of God, both in the Old Testament and His spoken words as Jesus Christ.

They look at us as pagans believe in the trinity.. ever talked to a muslim? maybe the belifs per sect and person vary but from my conversations they laugh at the idea of the trinity and they do consider it polytheism.. thats one of their big beefs with the cath church and the like.

That's fine. They can disbelieve... just like I can disbelieve some of the truths they hold dear. But to me, we're viewing the same basic set of attributes of Christianity. The very foundation for God(s) in LDS & Christianity are different.

I don't believe a Muslim would view LDS & Christianity in the same light. They might scoff at both and dismiss them quickly, but the rebuttals would be largely different, imo.

 

[Bleed S & G]

What confuses me is why afgolfer will not address these inconsistencies. If it really is a problem of 'lenses' or 'semantics' then where are the rebuttals?

golfer would need to address this, and im with you it'd be nice to hear what the stance is on the questions raised.

the direct Word of God, both in the Old Testament and His spoken words as Jesus Christ.

Don't let BKB see this :)

That's fine. They can disbelieve... just like I can disbelieve some of the truths they hold dear. But to me, we're viewing the same basic set of attributes of Christianity. The very foundation for God(s) in LDS & Christianity are different.

Right, i really don't care what they belive either.

I guess we need to have christianity defined but im tired of debating this to be honest, i cant seem to say what i want how i want.