LDS Why do Mormons think all Christians are in apostasy?

[tickingclocker]

I have a good understanding of Mormonism. I checked the Gospel Principles manual and it states:

"Those who inherit the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, who become gods, must also have been married for eternity in the temple."

Page 272; Chapter 46

And it also states that those who inherit the celestial kingdom "received the testimony of Jesus Christ, and were baptized".

So you see this would disqualify a Hindu woman.

And that Hindu woman would in all probability never be baptized on this earth. She also would never be able to be baptized in heaven, having no mormon relatives. There is no baptism "in" heaven within mormonism once Jesus returns either. Also, the best of good non-Mormons will never be able to enter the Celestial heaven, as there is no moving between the three heavens--for anyone, including Mormons, married or unmarried. Once the Hindu woman enters the lowest heaven, she will remain there, despite learning more of salvation. She will never be able to become a Mormon god. That is reserved for the best of good Mormons alone. Not even mediocre LDS can rise above the middle heaven, nor can they ever descend to the lowest tier within mormonism. The level you enter is the one you 'inherit'. There is no other for anyone "to" inherit.

I gather this theory was deliberately designed to encourage Mormons to be the best Mormon they can be, considering mormonism is based on works and not just God-given faith like it is within orthodox Christianity. That's my opinion.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I have a good understanding of Mormonism. I checked the Gospel Principles manual and it states:

"Those who inherit the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, who become gods, must also have been married for eternity in the temple."

Page 272; Chapter 46

And it also states that those who inherit the celestial kingdom "received the testimony of Jesus Christ, and were baptized".

So you see this would disqualify a Hindu woman.

Good work. It's good to document sources, many do not.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Are you talking about the point that there are Christians on here that are seemingly 100% devoted to "exposed the Mormon cult", and don't ever actually talk about Christ or the Good News?

Seems like a pretty valid point.

A small clarification. There is no percent of being a cult. You are either a cult, or not a cult, so no need for a percentage. Since Mormons are using the word cult, that naturally makes me think that it is an ok word to use.

Who are you talking about? Too make such a general statement about Christians like this is not right and I believe should be edited off.

These kind of general statements only lead to discourse.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Marketing 101 time, I take it.

"When attempting to sell someone on a concept, idea, or product, never go 100% negative on the competition. Always take at least some time to promote your own material. Otherwise, you risk alienating the people you are trying to win over."

A very clear example of this in the theological realm happened back during the 1800s. J. Golden Kimball was a senior leader in the church's missionary efforts in the Southern United States during the post-Reconstruction period, and so he became a figurehead for what was happening. During a previous missionary effort, he had encountered a Reverend Weatherbee, a minister who was famous throughout the region for his fire-and-brimstone sermons and his unflinching views on anyone who disagreed with him.

Naturally, when the pair were scheduled to debate one another in public, it drew quite the crowd.

Weatherbee went first. His entire debate strategy was thus: make a statement of faint praise, then say "...but they're going to Hell" after it. "Mormons are good people, but they're going to Hell." "My opponent is a good person, but he's going to Hell." Et cetra.

Weatherbee continued this line of sermonizing for two hours, never once varying from his mantra of "...but they're going to Hell."

In response to this barrage, Kimball had just one thing to say: "I'd rather be a Mormon and go to Hell than not be a Mormon and not know where the [censored] I'm going."

The audience, it is reported, unanimously declared Kimball the winner of the debate.

Why should a Christian market the gospel like it is a product? Our Savior did not market grace like a product, and neither do we.

Is that what Mormons teach, marketing concepts to their members and missionaries? That's sad.

Nice story, but no documentation or transcript of the debate attached, so it can not be verified. you have no idea if there was even a strategy behind what he said, nor that it was a barrage.

I do not think what Kimball said at the end of the debate shows that Mormons are good people.

You cannot just make general statements.

 

[ToBeLoved]

No, what we're seeing is the same tired old arguments being trotted out for the nth time.

I'd suggest putting away the Ed Decker and picking up the C. S. Lewis for a while.

How long have these LDS threads been open? 4 months? And how many threads exist in the LDS sub-category, maybe 13 tops.

Your lack of credibility is noted. And why not just not answer at all if that is your feelings? I'm going to have to find out who Ed Decker is. If you do not like him, maybe he has something for me to learn.

There is so little learning on these threads, maybe some come here and see the negative tone showing falsehoods.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Okay here we go with my long awaited long version. I've gone over and over it but I'm dyslexic and I spell so badly my word prepossess gets confused. Without my good hubby who can spell anything by my side we would all be very lost. I also skip words and arrange them in strange orders so if I come in and edit here and there don't be surprised.

I’m going to open with two passages and a question

Acts 2
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Hi

Can you double-check the verses you have listed above? It is listed as Acts 2:20-21 but when I went to these verses I found something else.

 

[John Davidson]

No, what we're seeing is the same tired old arguments being trotted out for the nth time.

I'd suggest putting away the Ed Decker and picking up the C. S. Lewis for a while.

I'm sorry I don't know who Ed Decker is but I have read C.S. Lewis.

 

[ToBeLoved]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed

I've brought this up before, and was rather disheartened by the response.

Even though this is an official, formative creed of mainline Christianity,

1. Few posters here had even heard of it

2. Fewer still could make sense of it.

It's very perplexing that Mormons are telling us what is important to Christians. Either today, in the past or in the future.

One HUGE problem I see with this is that Mormonism actually borrows many Biblical words and terms from the Bible. The HUGE PROBLEM is that they alter the meanings of these words to their understanding and I have found that basic wording that Christians use many times to communicate.

 

[John Davidson]

Do you really want to push this point?

Yes, I do. I ask again what particularly about the Apostle's Creed is abominable?

The Apostles' Creed is just so much formulaic legalese, and as such is nothing more than a bloody shirt that so many of your predecessors have raised whenever the issue of the creeds is brought up.

The Apostles Creed is word for word scripture.

In fact, it's the only creed most mainline Christians ever bring up.

Really? I'm familiar with both the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed as well. We recite either the Nicene Creed or the Apostles Creed weekly in Church. The Athanasian Creed we recite less often but we do use it every so often.

Couple this with the lack of knowledge displayed about the Athanasian Creed, and I find myself wondering just how often these supposedly key and foundational materials are still being taught.

Every Sunday at my Church.

 

[John Davidson]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed

I've brought this up before, and was rather disheartened by the response.

Even though this is an official, formative creed of mainline Christianity,

1. Few posters here had even heard of it

2. Fewer still could make sense of it.

Like I said, we recite it every once and awhile at Church. We don't say it weekly like we do either the Nicene or Apostles Creeds.

1. I am familiar with it.

2. It's mostly about the Trinity.

But I wasn't asking you about the Athanasian Creed. My question was this: What particularly about the Apostle's Creed do you find abominable?

 

[John Davidson]

"When attempting to sell someone on a concept, idea, or product, never go 100% negative on the competition. Always take at least some time to promote your own material. Otherwise, you risk alienating the people you are trying to win over."

So what's your point? No one is going 100% negative here so I really fail to see how your post is relevant.

 

[withwonderingawe]

Hi

Can you double-check the verses you have listed above? It is listed as Acts 2:20-21 but when I went to these verses I found something else.

Ah you're right it's acts 3

 

[withwonderingawe]

And that Hindu woman would in all probability never be baptized on this earth. She also would never be able to be baptized in heaven, having no mormon relatives. There is no baptism "in" heaven within mormonism once Jesus returns either. Also, the best of good non-Mormons will never be able to enter the Celestial heaven, as there is no moving between the three heavens--for anyone, including Mormons, married or unmarried. Once the Hindu woman enters the lowest heaven, she will remain there, despite learning more of salvation. She will never be able to become a Mormon god. That is reserved for the best of good Mormons alone. Not even mediocre LDS can rise above the middle heaven, nor can they ever descend to the lowest tier within mormonism. The level you enter is the one you 'inherit'. There is no other for anyone "to" inherit.

I gather this theory was deliberately designed to encourage Mormons to be the best Mormon they can be, considering mormonism is based on works and not just God-given faith like it is within orthodox Christianity. That's my opinion.

wrong wrong

 

[withwonderingawe]

Good work. It's good to document sources, many do not.

But he forgot the millennial period where most of these proxy baptisms will done.

 

[John Davidson]

But he forgot the millennial period where most of these proxy baptisms will done.

So are you saying that if someone dies and they enter the Telestial Kingdom they could later cross over to the Celestial Kingdom after someone does a proxy baptism for them?

 

[Jane_Doe]

So are you saying that if someone dies and they enter the Telestial Kingdom they could later cross over to the Celestial Kingdom after someone does a proxy baptism for them?

No.

Go read the Gospel Essentails chapter on baptisms for the dead.

 

[withwonderingawe]

I'm sorry I don't know who Ed Decker is but I have read C.S. Lewis.

First anti Mormon pamphlet I ever read was from dear old Br. Ed, he lied through his teeth. He knows that most non Mormons don't have access to all the documentation and will believe everything he says. I had to go to the library to look up his quotes, I found he only gave half quotes and total misquoted the D&C.

 

[ToBeLoved]

But he forgot the millennial period where most of these proxy baptisms will done.

I just said that I appreciated that he documented the sources that he got his information from. I did not say it was a complete look at the topic.

 

[John Davidson]

No.

Go read the Gospel Essentails chapter on baptisms for the dead.

As usual I appreciate the answer I have received.

There is no chapter on baptisms for the dead.

There is however a chapter on Baptisms and a chapter on Temple Work.

I read the chapter on Temple Work but my question was not answered.

 

[withwonderingawe]

So are you saying that if someone dies and they enter the Telestial Kingdom they could later cross over to the Celestial Kingdom after someone does a proxy baptism for them?

When you die your spirit enters what we term as the spirit world, this is broken up into three places.

There's paradise for those who have accepted Jesus as savior, don't even need to be baptized to get there. The man on the cross next to Jesus wasn't.

There's a spirit prison which has two areas, in one part those who never had a chance to hear the gospel are taught and given a chance to bow the knee to Jesus. Then there is a place of despair where the truly wicked are left to "the buffetings of Satan" D&C 78. They remain there until they have paid the last farthing which will be when they finally bow the knee to Jesus.

Everyone will remain there until the second coming and the resurrection begins. All of those who have been baptized or accepted their vicarious baptism will be resurrected first and commence doing the baptism work for those still waiting in Paradise. Eventually everyone will have the opportunity to except or reject their baptism. On the final judgment day after the millennium the decision as to who goes where will be made. Those who reject the baptism will go into the Telestial Kingdom. Those who do accept will can either be sent to the Terrestrial Kingdom or the Celestial Kingdom. I believe this will be a choice we make. We imagine that the Telestail kingdom will be a place of beauty and peace. Those there will live as brothers and sisters, they will have access to Jesus as their Savior and King.

The Celestial Kingdom is seen as the place where God the Father lives and where over time we will become one with him,

"To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." Rev 3

" He that overcometh shall inheritall things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" Rev 21