LDS defend the faith as Christian

The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 10/07/07 | By Peggy Fletcher Stack

[colorcountry]

Not only is Mormonism a Christian faith, it is the truest form of Christianity, said speaker after speaker on the first day of the 177th Semiannual LDS General Conference. LDS authorities were responding to the allegation that Mormonism isn't part of Christianity. Made by different mainline Protestant and Catholic churches and repeated constantly during coverage of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, the claim is based on Mormonism's beliefs about God, its rejection of ancient ideas about the Trinity still widely accepted, and the LDS Church's extra-biblical scriptures. "It is not our purpose to demean any person's belief nor the doctrine of any religion," said Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland in the afternoon session. "But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?"

{snip}

The day's sermons included many familiar themes, including the importance of faith, the need for pure thoughts and actions, avoiding pornography reaching out to neighbors and eliminating spiritual procrastination. Hinckley talked about the destructive nature of anger in marriages, on the road, and in life, urging Mormons to "control your tempers, to put a smile upon your faces, which will erase anger; speak with words of love and peace, appreciation and respect."

[greyfoxx39]

In fact, you have provided no reason to believe much of anything.

I don't feel the need to proselytize here. My salvation and my relationship with my Savior and God are not the business of anyone, especially one who feels the need to profess loyalty to a religion that considers all Christians fallen away and apostate. I have no desire or need to preach to those who are unreachable...God will do that in His own time.

I have seen this question asked of others with the aim to find a "gotcha" moment. I would never impute that motivation to you though. You seem honest and reliable. So, be satisfied with my answer.

[Logophile]

I don't feel the need to proselytize here. My salvation and my relationship with my Savior and God are not the business of anyone, especially one who feels the need to profess loyalty to a religion that considers all Christians fallen away and apostate. I have no desire or need to preach to those who are unreachable...God will do that in His own time.

You won't "proselytize" in favor of your beliefs, but you will attack, defame, and belittle my beliefs? That seems rather one-sided.

I do not feel the need to proselytize here either. However, I will defend my faith against unfair or untrue attacks.

If the anti-Mormons stop attacking, I will stop defending.

[Grig]

“The citation for horses is furthermore an ‘anonymous’ article in a Mormon magazine... not exactly strong evidential support.”

That article is from a peer-reviewed journal, and if you check the footnote in that article associated with the quote you see that data being refered to comes from a respected non-LDS source, specifically:

Harry E. D. Pollock and Clayton E. Ray, “Notes on Vertebrate Animal Remains from Mayapan,” Current Reports 41 (August 1957): 638; this publication is from the Department of Archaeology at the Carnegie Institution of Washington. See also Clayton E. Ray, “Pre-Columbian Horses from Yucatan,” Journal of Mammalogy 38 (1957): 278.

Likewise, the information about tons of Olmec iron artifacts comes from Dr. Anne Cyphers of the National Autonomous University of Mexico, a non-LDS Olmec specialist.

As I said before however, even a total lack of any evidence proves nothing, and even absolute proof of that the Nephite civilization did exist still doesn’t prove that the BoM is the word of God. If you want to know if it really is the word of God, you have to find that out from God.

“You mention that you believe Christians interpret the Bible incorrectly. Could you give examples please?”

Interpreting the oneness of the Father and the Son as them being two persons but one being of one substance is a misinterpretation. One that leads to the false doctrine of the trinity. The doctrine that the sacrament as literally becoming the body and blood of Christ is likewise based on a misinterpretation. Original sin, the idea that baptism is optional, that there is to be no more scripture after the Bible, these also are the results of misinterpreting the Bible.

“In an earlier post, you defend the position that God was a man, and then go on to say that it is not doctrinal LDS belief.”

If by God you refer to Christ, yes, God was once a man as the NT says. If by God you mean the Father, there is no doctrine of ours that asserts he was ever mortal or that tries to explain his origin.

“Yet the statement was made by your prophet Joseph Smith ... If he is a prophet, why do you not accept his teachings on this? If he is not a prophet, then why do you follow him?”

Prophets do not share God’s omniscience. They get revelation on specific matters and on everything else they are free to form their own opinions. Those opinions are not infallible and they are not doctrinal either.

Just saying ‘Joseph said it so it must be their doctrine’ is false, that isn’t how the church operates. For something to be doctrine it must be endorsed by the whole First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve (all of whom hold the key of prophecy for the church) then formally presented to the members as doctrine.

“As a starting premise, this in itself flies against scripture, and contradicts who the God of the Bible declares himself to be.”

In post 218 I gave you many quotes from the early church fathers and other sources that clearly showed the idea of theosis was part of 1st century orthodox Christian teaching. The link I gave then give additional information, including the scriptural support.

[Grig]

“The following is but an excerpt fromt he above source:”

Even after being shown that quotes it uses are altered from the original text to change the meaning you still re-post it.

That sure tells me a lot.

[Grig]

“If subjective experience is the basis of truth, then there
is no truth because everyone’s subjective experience differs.”

Well it’s a good thing we don’t teach that subjective experience is the basis of truth then.

There are some truths however that can only be known by experience. For example, the only way to know what salt tastes like is to taste it. Christ employed the same idea when he said: “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” (John 7: 17)

So if you don’t like that principle, take it up with Christ.

[Grig]

DNA disproves the BOM only if you believe in some bogus studies that don’t hold water.

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai195.html
http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_and_DNA_evidence

[Grig]

“BTW, RM, isn’t this statement “So you want someone who belongs to a church but doesn’t ‘really’ belive in it?” mind-reading?”

No, that’s a question. Notice the ‘?’

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Logophile,

When you see the glory of God and Christ standing at the
right hand of God, let me know. This was Stephen, the first
martyr of the Church.

When you have a real vision of heaven opened up an a sheet
being lowered, let me know! This was Peter, an original
Apostle of God.

When you see a Macedonian beckoning to you, let me know.
This was the Apostle Paul, chosen by Christ to bring the
gospel to the gentiles.

Your attempts to make their experience normative is
laughable... or at least it would be if the eternal
consequences were not tragic.

This would go back to the failure of mormonism to understand
basic Bible study.

Good try though. You and Jeffords the restored polygamist,
Mormon leader...

and Sun Myung Moon, the self-declared “Christ” and his
Moonie followers are on the same path -

substituting subjective experiences for objective truth.
Based on your subjective experience, you then judge what
else is true.

You are not alone though. It is common among cults.

[JRochelle]

All you can show is apologists sites?

Come on! What do you expect them to say?

[greyfoxx39]

However, I will defend my faith against unfair or untrue attacks.

I'm sure you will...however there is a tendency on the part of you apologists to see ANY factual information posted on the mormon religion or Joseph Smith as unfair and untruthful . The use of the "victim card has been a tactic of the LDS for over one hundred years.

"you will attack, defame, and belittle my beliefs" Remember Joseph Smith's declaration:

 19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all ^awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those ^bprofessors were all ^ccorrupt; that: “they ^ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ^ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the ^fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the ^gpower 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 ^alying 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, ^bmother 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.” 

 

[greyfoxx39]

A question would NORMALLY be worded “So DO you want someone who belongs to a church but doesn’t ‘really’ believe in it?” Your statement omits the ‘DO’, making it a declaration and not a question in spite of the ‘?’ at the end.

[Logophile]

When you see the glory of God and Christ standing at the right hand of God, let me know.

Why? Would you believe me?

Or would you dismiss it as merely a "subjective" experience?

[MHGinTN]

I seriously doubt you even understand the swisscheese arguments at your posted links. You post those links in the belief that they refute the DNA evidence which refutes the Smithian claims in the B of M. Do you even know what ‘coalescences’ is? Do you even understand that the argument that ‘if a female fails to produce a daughter, her mtDNA goes extinct’ is absurd on the face of it since if she has any female relatives (sisters, aunts) the SAME mtDNA is passed on from them?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“When you see the glory of God and Christ standing at the right hand of God, let me know.

“Why? Would you believe me?

“Or would you dismiss it as merely a “subjective” experience?

Well I - wait

hold on...

You’ll never believe this, but a Macedonian is waving me
to cross over. TTYL!

[Logophile]

Well I - wait hold on... You’ll never believe this, but a Macedonian is waving me to cross over. . . .

In other words, you have no answer.

Indeed, it has become clear that you have nothing to offer.

As for me, I will continue to trust the scriptural accounts of the apostles, prophets, saints, and the Lord himself, as well as my own "subjective" experiences with the Holy Ghost.

Good night.

[MHGinTN]

“As for me, I will continue to trust the scriptural accounts of the apostles, prophets, saints, and the Lord himself ...” Ah, but your religion is founded on not believing Jesus or the Bible else you wouldn’t claim Christianity needed to be ‘restored’, as if God’s Spirit failed to keep it operational for 1700 plus years. Dissembling and double talk is not hiding the heresies. Sorry.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

PULEEEEESSSSSSSSE!

The one time I have a vision of a Macedonian
and you have to continue interrupting with
yacking!

It was dramatic! It felt like electricity as
the Macedonian reached out his hands and touched
my face... then he leaned over and spoke without
moving his lips. Right in my ear...

“This is an Apostolic Vision. Do not fear the
burning of electricity as it pulses through
your human body.

“Hear and know, Joseph Smith and the cult he
spawned are false.”

I answered, but I know this!

He spoke, “Yes, but now you’ve had an experience
to back up what the Bible clearly speaks. Those
entrapped in the cult will claim superiority over
the Church and those who are His because of false
experiences. Now you too have an experience! Feel
the power. Never forget this moment - nor the
message I’ve given you.”

As he let my head go, everything swirled and I
literally dropped to the ground. Only now, have
I recovered enough to speak of my testimony.

Thankfully, I can now confidently say, the experiences
posted earlier by you and others are false. The
Macedonian Vision has testified directly to me and
with great power.

whew... I’ve got to go lay down for a while.

ampu

[Logophile]

Remember Joseph Smith's declaration . . . .

Yes, I remember it quite well. Joseph Smith says he received a revelation from God telling him that the existing Christian churches were in error. Indeed, he said that their creeds were an abomination.

You believe otherwise. Fine. State your reasons for believing that your branch of Christianity is right. (That is something you have refused to do.)

But your disagreement with Joseph Smith's revelation does not excuse you from the obligation of being truthful, fair, and civil in dealing with others—even Mormons.

In other words, your belief that Joseph Smith was a scoundrel does not give you license to become a scoundrel yourself.

Good night to you.

[Logophile]

Ah, but your religion is founded on not believing Jesus or the Bible else you wouldn’t claim Christianity needed to be ‘restored’, as if God’s Spirit failed to keep it operational for 1700 plus years. Dissembling and double talk is not hiding the heresies. Sorry.

So you say.

But then you say a lot of things. Much of what you say is nonsense. When that fails to impress, you resort to vituperation.

Now you say that we Mormons are guilty of dissembling, double talk, and heresies. Fine. You have established that you are anti-Mormon.

But you are another one who refuses to state exactly what you favor. If I were to leave the LDS Church, as you suggest, I would want to join another church. Which church would you recommend, and why?

[Religion Moderator]

The following is not "reading minds:"

"The unspoken message in that is that 'God reveals OUR truth, but the rest of you just THINK He reveals His truth to YOU.'"

The underlined part narrows the claim to the statement made, not the poster. It is more an interpretation or paraphrase.

As another example, if I said "you are a liar" that would be reading your mind - that you intended to deceive. But if I said, "that statement is false" it is not reading your mind - it is academic.

The following is not mind reading either:

"So you want someone who belongs to a church but doesn’t ‘really’ belive in it?”

It is a question. Words like "do" are often omitted in casual correspondence.

Likewise, in the above example (the second one) - I might have merely said "False!" - the "That statement is ..." should be understood in normal reading.