Posted on 12/01/2010 1:09:40 PM PST by Colofornian
You have to admire on some level the faith of these people without ONE SINGLE SHRED of evidence.
Intense but tragically misplaced.
(Note to YR: You have every right in this country to have such faith.)
Mormon (Latter Day Saints) Beliefs Differ From Orthodox Christianity
______________________________________
Is this a remedial class for Mormonism for Mormons 101 ???
It may turn into that
You also have FM. :)
You don't have to wonder, I got a FReepmail slandering Elsie, by name, from a person who obvious;y didn't know that I have been an Inman since day one.
Not to worry, I sent it to Elsie in its entirety, who tells me a good laugh was gotten from it.
A "keeper" to repost (please).
I think an excellent analogy or word picture to the point you repeatedly came back to, T would be:
I think foreign countries are "free" to develop whatever currency they want. (Just don't call it the "U.S. dollar" and print up as much of it as you want, distortion & all).
Some other people believe God is incarnate in a little disc of pressed flour, and we need to eat Him.
Still others believe that way back at the beginning of the universe, God decided whether your yet-unborn great great grandchild is goin' to heaven or to hell.
Yep, a lot of pure-D weird ideas floating around now a days.
No, my thesis is that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. And compared to Hinduism and Islam the differences between LDS and “mainstream” Christians is miniscule to everyone else except them. And I say this being raised Lutheran. But mainly the Mormons are more reliably conservative than “mainstream” Christians. We will all fall to the evils of the totalitarian left if we don’t stick together politically. And that includes all conservatives regardless of religious conviction. Time to bicker amongst ourselves after the atheist left is defeated soundly.
Don't be preposterous. The Mormon people I know are wonderful people and devoted to their children.
Maybe they are just fattening them up..
Name even one elected lds that is conservative. Remember they supported Romney at 92%.
Live in a bubblewrapped world eh?
And compared to Hinduism and Islam the differences between LDS and “mainstream” Christians is miniscule to everyone else except them.
LOL evidence you don't know what you are talking about.
Hinduism and mormonism - both extremely polytheistic, Christianity is monotheistic (I know, big words, look them up)
Islam and Mormonism - both claim to have a prophet produce a new scripture as the latest source of God's revelation. Infact, mormon leaders have liken themselves to islam. Islam also believes in polygamy and mormonism did (and wishes to again)
Do Christians plan on becoming a god like God? No. The list can go on for a while on SIGNIFICANT differences. It isn't rocket science, and an epic fail on your part to try to show there is little or no difference.
But mainly the Mormons are more reliably conservative than “mainstream” Christians.
Right - Romney, Reid and more recently Hatch and utah congresscritters packing Utah to the brim with pork barrel earmark - reliable indeed.
We will all fall to the evils of the totalitarian left if we don’t stick together politically.
Ooooooh a big nasty evil. Pardon me, but 'politically' is in another forum - this is the Religon Forum, where we can discuss religion.
Mormonism is to Christianity what Christianity is to Jewish doctrine.
Mormonism is weird but Christianity ultimately is just as weird. You both make Jesus a god. You have a ritual where you eat his flesh and drink his blood. Thoroughly pagan and against Torah.
The question is:
Are Christians...uhm, Christians?
See here for reference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zA-rZQB-xQ
Hey! I used to work for LDS of Tulsa.
Long Distance Savers....
True story.
“And compared to Hinduism and Islam the differences between LDS and “mainstream” Christians is miniscule to everyone else except them.”
Hinduism believes in 350 million gods.
Mormonism believes in billions, trillions, an infinite number.
Christians believe in ONE GOD.
Is that pass tense or passe?
I get confused.
Rev. Dr. Bobby W. Leggett is not a Mormon. He's the pastor of a small Lutheran church in Blanco, TX. Yet he spends the whole article telling us what Mormons believe, in unflattering terms. Would he approve of an article, written by a Mormon, telling him what Lutherans believe? Would he find it at all convincing?
Scripture says to give a reason for the hope that lies within us, but to do so with gentleness and reverence. The "reason for the hope that lies within us" is not "the beliefs of that other guy over there are so stupid -- let me tell you myself about all the foolishness he believes".
There's a cultic group where I live that rejects the Trinity. Their whole apologetic against the Trinity, posted on their website, consists of refutations against strawman misrepresentations of what Trinitarians actually believe. They would be much more persuasive and impressive if they stuck to either (a) defining their own beliefs and defending them from the Scriptures; or (b) [at least] quoting what actual, knowledgeable Trinitarians say about their faith and then responding to that.
Theirs is the kind of apologetic behavior Christians should avoid, IMO. Our faith simply deserves a better defense.
No love is evident in your posts, so I guess by your fruits, I consider you are guided by one who is NOT my Savior, but from a different neck of the woods. (Your Yellowroses' post #36 to Godzilla)
You know, we've all stepped over the line sometimes in what we say. Perhaps #36 on your part was such an example, and you realized it less than 40 minutes later when you posted what you said in #75.
But then 12 minutes later you turn around and accuse me: I find your terms “leeched” and “kicked to the spiritual gutter” and “apostates” used in a subjective, and incorrect manner. You’ve judged.
Didn't you just "judge" Godzilla less than an hour earlier? As one guided by who? (who was the who you were thinking of here? Satan?)
As for "subjective" and "incorrect"...can't you see what I posted in #100 pure evidence of Mormon ambivalence toward Christians?
On the one hand, Lds "throw the book at us." (Their new "prophets" and "scriptures") -- treating the Christian church as a mere "yesterday" -- and the Mormon church as not only the "new" kid on the (real) church block, but the "only" church in town (the entire world).
On the other hand, I think a lot of grassroots Mormons don't think these Lds "prophets" have been very "civil" in what they've said about Christians. But they can't exactly lambast them for that, now can they? (Not in the hierarchical structure of the Mormon church!)
Yellowroses, you & other Lds are caught in this "catch-22."
If you honor what your Lds "prophets" and "apostles" have had to say about us, well that's problematic on a lot of fronts:
(1) You can't say you don't "judge" -- because you sustain how your "prophets" and "apostles" have "judged" us.
(2) You can't lecture us on being "civil" -- without confessing how "uncivil" your general authorities have been to Christians for 180 years! (Well, I guess you could and can lecture us...but don't you see how "two-faced" you look?)
(3) And, you really can't feel "belief-slammed" (as you told Godzilla) when compared to what Mormons and your tithing $ has done toward Christians for 180 years! [Joseph Smith's "first vision," which you've enshrined as "scripture," labels 100% of Christian creeds as an "abomination" to the Mormon god...Do Christians say 100% of every faith belief of Mormonism is an "abomination"...I don't think so]
So only Mormons can describe their faith accurately? (I don't think so...That's like saying only a leper can accurately diagnose leprosy)
Yet he spends the whole article telling us what Mormons believe, in unflattering terms...The "reason for the hope that lies within us" is not "the beliefs of that other guy over there are so stupid
He does (spend the WHOLE article telling...what Mormons believe in unflattering terms)?
* Paragraph 1: References Lds as "neighbors" (wow! highly unflattering)
* Graph 2: Labels Smith as a "founder" (many apologists go right to the point & label him a "fraud").
* Graph 3: He describes the so-called "appearance" of the "Angel Moroni" and Smith finding "gold plates" and "ancient Native American authors" in very Mormon-like generous terms -- as if it happened. (Why do you deem that "unflattering" when he presents that from the Mormon point of view?)
* Graphs 4 & 6: Let me return to these two below.
* Graph 5: If you -- or any reader -- deems this as "unflattering" in describing Mormon beliefs, well, guess what? All the author is dealing with here is simple math. I mean if you think this is "unflattering," then you must also think historians are "unflattering" in their presentation of 19th century Lds polygamists just by mentioning that they embraced more than one wife!
Now...I agree this author's presentation of Mormons in graphs 4 & 6 were not intended to "flatter." But so what? Since when do we have to duck truth & reality?
Would he approve of an article, written by a Mormon, telling him what Lutherans believe? Would he find it at all convincing?
It all depends. Is it accurate? I read five graphs of your post here...and not once did you lament what he wrote as inaccurate? Therefore, if a Mormon wrote accurately what Lutherans or Evangelicals believe, why is that a problem to you?
Scripture says to give a reason for the hope that lies within us, but to do so with gentleness and reverence. The "reason for the hope that lies within us" is not "the beliefs of that other guy over there are so stupid -- let me tell you myself about all the foolishness he believes".
By this critique of yours -- do you apply it equally to how Jesus dealt with the legalists of His day (the Pharisees?) Was Jesus labeling them as...
...hypocrites...(see Matt. 23:13-15, 23)
...children of Satan (see John 8)
..."blind guides" (Matt 23:16, 24)
...greedy & self-indulgent (Matt 23:25)
..."blind fools" (Matt 23:17)
..."whitewashed tombs" (Matt 23:27)
..."snakes" and "brood of vipers" (Matt 23:33)...
...all terms of reverent endearment?
The author didn't even come close to utilizing this kind of vocabulary! If somebody believes something foolish, and you shine a light on that, doesn't equate to them lacking "gentleness" -- especially given the gentle kid-glove treatment this author did give Mormon beliefs in paragraph 3!!!
Our faith simply deserves a better defense.
You know, your only salient point in your post was when you said: There's a cultic group where I live that rejects the Trinity. Their whole apologetic against the Trinity, posted on their website, consists of refutations against strawman misrepresentations of what Trinitarians actually believe. They would be much more persuasive and impressive if they stuck to either (a) defining their own beliefs and defending them from the Scriptures; or (b) [at least] quoting what actual, knowledgeable Trinitarians say about their faith and then responding to that.
But even then, that's perhaps more of a priority & "style" question...or a mild critique where this could have been improved in a specific way.
If this was some "apologetics guy" coming up with something, and you critiqued him by saying, "Our faith simply deserves a better defense," I might agree with you in some ways. Given this was a pastor, my response is: Hey, I like what this pastor was doing in this area than what most pastors don't do in this area!
Overall, Campion, you've contributed some pretty good posts through the years. Most of this one was way out of line.
Is this a remedial class for Mormonism for Dummies 101 ???
Welcome to MORMONism 101
While we are waiting to start; enjoy the artwork on our walls.
If some of it seems shifty to you, just look at it real close and it will stop moving,
but another location will then start to crawl on you.
Do NOT think our DOCTRINE is this way!
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.