Posted on 07/05/2007 3:00:33 AM PDT by Gamecock
The following draws from the book Is the Mormon My Brother by apologist James White. Earlier this year, Paul Kaiser reprinted a Worldview article titled 10 Mormonism Facts which generated a myriad of responses from visitors who stated that Mormons were being misrepresented and are simply our brothers & sisters in the Body of Christ. Let’s look at what Dr. White presents using LDS resources:
The First Vision
Without question the key revelation in Mormon Scripture regarding the nature of God is to be found in what is known as the First Vision of Joseph Smith. The vision itself is fundamental to all of LDS theology. Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie described the vision:
That glorious theophany which took place in the spring of 1820 and which marked the opening of the dispensation of the fullness of times is called the First Vision. It is rated as first both from the standpoint of time and of pre-eminent importance. In it Joseph Smith saw and conversed with the Father and the Son, both of which exalted personages were personally present before him as he lay enwrapped in the Spirit and overshadowed by the Holy Ghost.
This transcendent vision was the beginning of latter day revelation; it marked the opening of the heavens after the long night of apostate darkness; with it was ushered in the great era of restoration, the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:21.) Through it the creeds of Christendom were shattered to smithereens, and because of it the truth about those Beings whom it is life eternal to know began again to be taught among men. (John 17:3.) With this vision came the call of that Prophet who, save Jesus only, was destined to do more for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. (D. & C. 135:3.) This vision was the most important event that had taken place in all world history from the day of Christ’s ministry to the glorious hour when it occurred.(1)
And Mormon Prophet Ezra Taft Benson said,
Joseph Smith, a prophet of God, restored the knowledge of God. Joseph’s first vision clearly revealed that the Father and Son are separate personages, having bodies as tangible as mans. Later it was also revealed that the Holy Ghost is a personage of Spirit, separate and distinct from the personalities of the Father and the Son. (See D&C 130:22.) This all-important truth shocked the world even though sustained by the Bible. (2)
How is it that the creeds of Christendom were shattered to smithereens and the knowledge of God was restored by this one vision? While the story is as familiar to Mormons as John 3:16 is to Christians, we present Joseph Smith’s own recounting of the story in full, taken from the LDS Scriptures (and hence carrying canonical authority). However, we note that the account that appears in the LDS Scriptures was written in 1838, eighteen years after the events described:
14 So, in accordance with this, my determination to ask of God, I retired to the woods to make the attempt. It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty. It was the first time in my life that I had made such an attempt, for amidst all my anxieties I had never as yet made the attempt to pray vocally.
15 After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon bysome power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.
16 But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction—not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.
17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)–and which I should join.
19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong;(3) and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.
20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, Never mind, all is well I am well enough off. I then said to my mother, I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true. It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy? (Joseph Smith History 1:14-20).
What does this vision, recorded in LDS Scripture, teach concerning God? First and foremost, it presents to us the concept of a plurality of gods. This arises from the fact that God the Father is a separate and distinct physical entity from Jesus Christ, His Son. God the Father is possessed of a physical body, as is the Son. This is why McConkie can claim the creeds of Christendom were smashed to smithereens, for the vision has always been interpreted by the LDS leadership to teach that God the Father is a separate and distinct person and being from the Son. The unity of Being that is central to Christian theology is completely denied by Joseph Smith in the First Vision. Hence, you have one God, the Father, directing Smith to another God, the Son.
While it is not our intention to critique these teachings at this point, it should be noted that there are a number of problems with the First Vision, and with the entire development of the LDS concept of God as well. As we noted, this version of the First Vision was not written until 1838. Previous versions, however, differed in substantial details from this final and official account. Most significantly, the presence of both the Father and the Son as separate and distinct gods is not a part of the earlier accounts.(4)
————————————————-
(1) Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine,2nd ed., rev. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), pp. 284-285, LDSCL.
(2) Ezra Taft Benson, Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988), p. 4, LDSCL. On page 101 of the same book, we read this strong statement:
The first vision of the Prophet Joseph Smith is bedrock theology to the Church. The adversary knows this and has attacked Joseph Smith’s credibility from the day he announced the visitation of the Father and the Son. You should always bear testimony to thetruth of the First Vision. Joseph Smith did see the Father and the Son. They conversed with him as he said they did. Any leader who, without reservation, cannot declare his testimony that God and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith can never be a true leader, a true shepherd. If we do not accept this truth if we have not received a witness about this great revelationwe cannot inspire faith in those whom we lead.
(3) One of Mormonism’s leading scholars, James Talmage (and a General Authority), said the following in the General Conference of April, 1920:
This Church, therefore, from its beginning, has been unique, for the organization of the Church was forecasted in this declaration that at the time of Joseph Smiths first vision there was no Church of Jesus Christ upon the earth; and I do not see why people should take issue with us for making that statement (CR1920Apr:103).
(4) I noted a number of the historical problems with Mormonism in Letters to a Mormon Elder, pp. 88-106. For a fuller treatment of this issue, see H. Michael Marquardt and Wesley P. Walters, Inventing Mormonism (Salt Lake: Smith Research Associates, 1994), pp.1-41, and Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1982), pp. 143-162.
The defining aspects of a true Christian would need to include the following, as a minimum: (although this is not a comprehensive list)
1. Must be called by God and believe in one holy sovereign God, comprised of three persons: Father, Son (Jesus Christ), and Holy Spririt.
2. Must be re-born through God’s Spirit - transformed into a new creation in Christ Jesus and given a new nature from the one true living God.
3. Must confess they were born in sin, totally depraved and that their sin can be satisfied only by the blood of Jesus Christ alone who is wholly man yet wholly God.
4. Must repent of their sins and bear fruit which God has called all His disciples to exhibit.
5. Must look to the Bible as the inerrant Word of God and through the guidance of God’s Holy Spririt, the sole source for all teaching and discernment of the will of God.
I could probably go on, but these are certainly foundational. It should be noted that there are some religions that may adhere to these but often add to the gospel beyond what is prescribed in the Bible - this violation can be just as bad (or worse) than missing some of the primary tenets of faith.
Mormons who achieve the highest level of salvation will get their wives and the ability to make spirit babies as they act in a god form populating other planets. You may not like how I say it but thats the truth. If you wish to deny that there are two possibilities one you are lying, two you are not a very good Mormon.
You cannot reasonably call something a heresy unless you have some definition of orthodoxy.
But you don not need a *complete* definition. The minute you say God is alone as the God of the Entire Universe, he is as a tri-person God head eternal going forward and backwards in time you exclude mormons because they *dont* believe that. No matter how much they might agree with other points of the definition they are heretics.
How do you define Christian?
Start with the nature of God, eternal existing before time as the Father Son and Holy Ghost, perfect in nature and power and there will never be any God anywhere else. Already Mormons fail.
Yep, garbage master noted.
I am going to take a guess based on the anti-Catholicism expressed there that you belong to a denomination that is either Evangelical or at the very least, clearly low church.
If you knew anything about the Catholic Church, you would know that we don’t deify Mary.
With this in mind, please comment on the practice of mormons of baptizing the dead. The claim is that the dead may then "accept or reject" the baptism and related ordinances performed in LDS temples.
Perhaps this is the mormon version of the unified Christian church? I don't remember it being described that way, but I left the church many years ago before they decided that instead of being a "peculiar people" not like other churches, they now want to be known as Christian.
How about AFTER they are dead?
What is a "low church?" I was raised Baptist...
"... know that we don’t deify Mary."
... and I know you don't.
High Church applies to denominations such as Catholicism, Episcopalianism, Lutheranism, the Orthodox church, etc.
Low Church denominations would include most Baptist incarnations, Pentecostalism, the snake handlers, etc. By the definition of what an evangelical church truly is, and how evangelicals worship, as opposed to how say, the Catholic worships, is what marks the Evangelical as belonging to a low church religion and the Episcopalian as belonging to a high church religion.
It’s more of a word used in the South, because in general, there is a correlation between religious preference and social status. Outside of actual preachers, in general, members of low church denominations tend to be lower on the social heirarchy than members of high church denominations. Of the two major Protestant faiths in the South, numerically speaking, the Baptists have the numbers, but, in general, Methodists tend to have more money and more affluence, and, it is also true that Baptists who are in the Southern upper class tend to often reject certain elements of Baptist social teaching (such as those regarding alcohol)
It also has a meaning theologically speaking, but I’m not a theologian so I can’t go into that.
..but often add to the gospel beyond what is prescribed in the Bible - this violation can be just as bad (or worse) than missing some of the primary tenets of faith.
Have you ever searched the "text" of the Bible for some of the words you have used. If the Bible is going to be the "standard" then many of the words you are using (that were added later by Greek Philosophers) should be disqualified.
totally depraved
wholly man yet wholly God.
inerrant
Jesus never used these words. The Apostles never did.
"Yep, I had the right idea with exterminatin' them, didn't I? Just ol' 'Burn, bein' ahead of the curve once again..."
I see.
"Low Church," okay.
That's begging the question.
Which version of each creed is definitive?
With the exception of the Filioque, I'm not aware of any significant differences in versions or translations.
The Nicene Creed dates from the fourth century; the Athanasian Creed is even later. What about those who lived before these creeds were formulated? Would they be considered Christians in your view?
Interesting question, but a red herring in the present discussion.
I am told that the Eastern Orthodox do not formally recognize either the Apostles' Creed or the Athanasian Creed. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong.) Are they Christians?
Related to the issue of the Filioque, IMO. The Nicene Creed is the official creed of the EO, but I’m not aware that the EO would deny anything in either of those other creeds (with the exception of the Filioque).
“Mormonism is:
A re-wrap of Hinduism and is a presursor to Scientology and Raelianism. “
Wow, I forgot all about Raelianism, they are also “sorta” polygamous.
“About one half of all LDS members become inactive or leave the Church entirely. All those people who leave, left for a reason....they aren’t all liars.”
It’s the Jack Mormons who go atheist that I worry about, like my boss.
“Low Church” is a neutral term that describes a type of worship that does not follow a prescribed order of service, that does not follow certain liturgical patterns, and does not make use of developed ritual or ceremony. On the other hand, you have the term, “High Church”, which describes a type of worship emphasizing the liturgical, ceremonial, and traditional elements in worship. The two terms are descriptions of differing attitudes towards worship.
The terms actually came about in the Anglican church in the 16th & 17th centuries, but have come to refer, in a more general way, to how any church worships.
By the way, I’m always amused when I see “snake handlers” lumped in with Baptists and other Protestants, when there might at the very most be about 2000 people who indulge in this practice. It’s hardly a significant or accepted movement.
Now, I’m reading this post, and wondering how on earth we got to a discussion about high church/low church on a thread about Mormonism? You never know where these threads will wander!
And you presume that you know the stories of all of those who have left the Church, and that you speak for them?!
Most of the people that I know who have gone inactive or left the Church don't go around spreading lies like you do. Most have the good sense to leave the Church alone after they've left the Church. Either the Church just wasn't for them, or they just weren't cut out for the Church. No harm. No foul.
I’m accustomed to defending the Catholic Church against attacks from my fellow Protestants, but it’s rare when I have to reverse the situation.
See #16.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.