Is the LDS Church right for me?

[jwilliams190800]

Hi there, below is a sort of 'factfile' about me and at the end of this, I would appreciate it if people would give me their opinion on the question posed in the thread title.
My Beliefs:
For a while I've considered myself to be agnostic and would perhaps still describe myself as such to an extent.
Recently, through deliberation and thinking, I have decided that for a universe like this one to exist then there must be some external force: a God. Jesus Christ did exist and this fact has been agreed by many scholars and whether or not he was the son of God is not my place to be seen but I believe that there was a connection and that Jesus was an incredible man who might not necessarily have been responsible for the miracles in the bible. But I believe that the miracles could be metaphors for the effects of his words.
Now, if Jesus Christ was truly sent by God to spread his word and absolve our sins then, logically, God would want more of the Earth's population to know the truth than just those in the Middle East, so Jesus might have appeared around the globe, as the LDS Church believes happened in America. But at the same time, surely Jesus would have appeared in Australasia or Africa?
My thoughts on the LDS Church:
I did research into the church, in a critical manner, and realised that despite what Popular Culture and the media has fostered within society as negatives of the LDS Church made sense with me. For example: ruling over an entire universe would be an incredibly daunting task, so it makes sense that one God would rule over one world and another would rule over another. It also makes sense to me that through adherence to guidelines the mind can be focused and our true potential can be achieved.
Conclusion:
I'm feeling very confused about what to do and whether taking this step into what many regard as a cult is right for me. Please help

 

[Albion]

Since you ask, my answer is "Don't do it." While you raise several points that are reasonable (and reasoned out)...the entirety of Mormon theology, and the fact that it's unique to that church out of all Christian history, shared by no other Christian church, should IMHO weigh more heavily in your thinking.

In addition, there are other answers to the ideas that you say attract you to the LDS. For example, it's not as though Jesus gave any indication that he was content to have followers in only Palestine and vicinity. His final commandment to his most trusted disciples was to go into the whole world and make converts of all nations. And this they promptly did, such that there were Christian communities from Britain to India in the first century alone.

Meanwhile, even if we believe the Book of Mormon's account of Christ descending into America shortly after his Ascension in the Middle East, this certainly did NOT cause the Americas to convert to Christ. According to Mormon accounts, the people who supposedly received Christ in that way died out or nearly so. In other words, Western Civilization was thoroughly Christianized--and much of the rest of the world as well--for many centuries before the Native Americans were...and before anyone heard of the Book of Mormon.

 

[jwilliams190800]

Thank you for your reply, Albion. It is true that Jesus commanded his followers to spread his word, but it is unlikely that they would have gone to the lengths of going to the Americas. So, I suppose you are right about the reasoning behind Christianity not starting in America. And I am aware that there are many discrepancies between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, which again could be mitigated through reasoned argument.
I value your opinion and have taken it aboard, however, I unfortunately don't see how your comments linked to my question directly.

 

[Albion]

Thank you for your reply, Albion. It is true that Jesus commanded his followers to spread his word, but it is unlikely that they would have gone to the lengths of going to the Americas. So, I suppose you are right about the reasoning behind Christianity not starting in America.

That doesn't sound exactly like the point I was attempting to make. I was saying that Jesus obviously did want the faith to spread far and wide and commissioned people to do it. They did it pretty well, and the faith continued to spread from that time forward. But if we think of the story of Christ witnessing in the Western Hemisphere in ca.33AD as told in the Book of Mormon, what did this accomplish? Well, essentially nothing. So what would make you say that "logically, God would want more of the Earth's population to know the truth than just those in the Middle East?" It didn't accomplish that objective!

And I am aware that there are many discrepancies between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, which again could be mitigated through reasoned argument.

If you can harmonize the two, I'd be interested in hearing about it. Generally, it's said that they two storylines are so unlike each other (aside from the BOM being salted with individual verses from the Bible) that they aren't compatible.

I value your opinion and have taken it aboard, however, I unfortunately don't see how your comments linked to my question directly.

OOh. Then I must have missed the boat entirely. I thought I was speaking directly to it, although I didn't cover every point or example you offered in the OP.

 

[jwilliams190800]

So what would make you say that "logically, God would want more of the Earth's population to know the truth than just those in the Middle East?"

I suppose to me it makes sense that God wouldn't want His son to sacrifice his life without the people he was doing it for knowing. Not necessarily the details, but you would want to know that someone has saved you, right?

If you can harmonize the two, I'd be interested in hearing about it. Generally, it's said that they two storylines are so unlike each other (aside from the BOM being salted with individual verses from the Bible) that they aren't compatible.

I'm not able to say that I can harmonize the two books; I haven't been able to read them in much detail and analyse the issues with compatibility, but most stories can link and exist simultaneously, especially when they are on the same subject.

 

[Albion]

I suppose to me it makes sense that God wouldn't want His son to sacrifice his life without the people he was doing it for knowing. Not necessarily the details, but you would want to know that someone has saved you, right?

Yes. I'm with you in principle, please understand. My reservation is in the "carry through" or the proof of that pudding. Jesus had only a relatively few followers at the time of his crucifixion--maybe 500 or a few hundred more. He did, however, and as is shown us in Scripture, commission his Apostles to take the message to the whole world...which they did! Historians will tell you that the growth of Christianity within the Roman Empire was remarkable by any standard.

So how does Mormonism solve anything for you when it comes to that "problem?" There's no evidence of the American Indians being Christians before Columbus, and even if we believe the account of Christ in the Americas as given in the Book of Mormon, it was only a witness, not something that actually remedies the historical account I referred to above. The Mormon "answer" doesn't come close to accomplishing anything near to what the early Christians did in the Roman world, so how can it be an improvement on it?

That's why I say that I can understand the idea of Christ showing himself, etc., but not the Mormon example.

I'm not able to say that I can harmonize the two books; I haven't been able to read them in much detail and analyse the issues with compatibility, but most stories can link and exist simultaneously, especially when they are on the same subject.

Well, I always recommend people who are seekers to do their research. There is plenty that's available, pro and con alike, on the history and teachings of the Latter-day Saints. I hope you will hold your decision in abeyance until you've given it all a careful study. Along the way, please include the other allegedly inspired writings that form the basis for some of the theology of Mormonism, such as Doctrines and Covenants and the Book of Abraham.

 

[JamieRedheadUK]

My personal view is that since the LDS organisation denies the trinity by stating that the Lord Jesus Christ is a lesser God than the Father they are a cult.

 

[jwilliams190800]

So how does Mormonism solve anything for you when it comes to that "problem?" There's no evidence of the American Indians being Christians before Columbus, and even if we believe the account of Christ in the Americas as given in the Book of Mormon, it was only a witness, not something that actually remedies the historical account I referred to above. The Mormon "answer" doesn't come close to accomplishing anything near to what the early Christians did in the Roman world, so how can it be an improvement on it?

I suppose the way to answer that is to see it not as the enlightenment of people but as a warning as to what happens if you reject Christ: the Native Americans were almost completely wiped out and their culture destroyed. This could be seen as proof of God punishing those who reject His teachings?

Well, I always recommend people who are seekers to do their research.

I did do a fair bit of research before posting on this forum because I didn't want to come across as ignorant about the church and other related matters.

Along the way, please include the other allegedly inspired writings that form the basis for some of the theology of Mormonism, such as Doctrines and Covenants and the Book of Abraham.

I shall certainly do this, thank you

 

[John Davidson]

Hi jwilliams190800,
I would strongly caution you against joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are listed as a cult in Walter Martin's book "The Kingdom of the Cults" http://www.christianbook.com/kingdom-the-cults-rev-and-updated/walter-martin/9780764228216/pd/228218?dv=c&en=google&event=SHOP&kw=books-0-20|228218&p=1179710&gclid=CjwKEAjw55K4BRC53L6x9pyDzl4SJAD_21V1WE-PQiePyPgpyXDXM3U9B7wNy4uEVZvRTFnSmzdoZRoCgYLw_wcB

I am going to list for you a few of the things about the LDS church that are unorthodox:

1. Coffee, Tea, & Alcohol are not allowed.
2. Heavenly Father & Jesus Christ are not the same God (LDS do not believe in the Trinity).
3. Blacks were not allowed to hold the priesthood until 1978.
4. The building of Temples for Christians is unbiblical (the body of Christ is the Temple).
5. Mormons are required to wear special garments (underwear).
6. Tithing is required in order to enter the Temple.
7. Joseph Smith claimed that he had around 20 Visions (Jesus Christ, Moses, Heavenly Father, Angel Moroni, etc.)
8. Joseph Smith had around 28 wives.
9. Joseph Smith translated the Book Of Mormon while looking into a hat at a "seer stone", he did not use the golden plates.
10. The original BOM contained thousands of errors that later were corrected.
11. There is no archaeological evidence that the American lands listed in the BOM ever existed.
12. Mormons use water instead of wine for communion.
13. LDS have two "Priesthoods" the Aaronic and Melchizedek which is taught nowhere in scripture as applying to the NT Church.
14. Mormons believe that Sunday is the "Sabbath" and are required to rest on that day.
15. The doctrine of "sealing" and "eternal marriage" which were renounced by Jesus statements.

 

[jwilliams190800]

They are listed as a cult in Walter Martin's book "The Kingdom of the Cults"

I would ask you how you define a cult, if that's possible?

 

[John Davidson]

I would ask you how you define a cult, if that's possible?

I would define a cult as a group that does not follow mainstream orthodox Christianity but has many heterodox beliefs.

 

[jwilliams190800]

I would define a cult as a group that does not follow mainstream orthodox Christianity but has many heterodox beliefs.

So anything that isn't 'normal' is a cult? Does that mean people who don't follow the main political beliefs of your area are cultists?

 

[AGTG]

The Mormon church isn't "right" for anyone because it's off the rails doctrinally. The error in certain denominations brings forth cultic norms of control and more bondage.

If you want to sincerely follow Christ, read the New Testament regularly, ask the Holy Spirit to teach you, and find a small congregation near you that respects your relationship with Father God by Jesus' work of the cross and focuses on the clear Biblical truths in the New Testament.

 

[Albion]

I would ask you how you define a cult, if that's possible?

The many cult-watching organizations and the best known writers in the field (such as the late Walter Martin) have identified three main characteristics of a cult: Denial of the nature of God (denial of the Trinity, IOW), Denial of the nature of Man (as having an immortal soul), and/or Using some source of authority other than the Bible. The Mormon church denies the Trinity several ways and of course is most famous for saying that it has found a whole new testament of Scripture (the Book of Mormon).

So anything that isn't 'normal' is a cult? Does that mean people who don't follow the main political beliefs of your area are cultists?

No, that's the point of using the word "cult." It's to keep churches that are very unusual in various ways (like the Amish lifestyle or some of the Pentecostals and their ideas on "gifts of the Holy Spirit") separate from the ones that actually reject basics of the Christian faith, such as the nature of God, Man, or God's Word in Revelation, that are held by just about all other Christian churches, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox.

 

[John Davidson]

So anything that isn't 'normal' is a cult?

A cult is a group that does not follow the historical Christian faith but strays into many grave errors. Cults typically do not honor the creeds of the church (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, etc.) but deviate from them in doctrine. In my previous post I gave you many reasons why Mormonism is heterodox and should be considered a cult.

Does that mean people who don't follow the main political beliefs of your area are cultists?

No. We aren't talking politics here we are talking religion.

 

[jwilliams190800]

three main characteristics of a cult: Denial of the nature of God (denial of the Trinity, IOW), Denial of the nature of Man (as having an immortal soul), and/or Using some source of authority other than the Bible.

Wouldn't that make Atheists part of a cult? They are of the religious belief of Atheism, they deny the nature of God, deny the nature of Man and certainly don't use the Bible as the source of authority.

reject basics of the Christian faith, such as the nature of God, Man, or God's Word in Revelation, that are held by just about all other Christian churches, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox.

I would ask who defines the 'basics' of the Christian faith. Isn't the beauty of religion that everybody experiences it in a different way? So why can't somebody believe in Christ, but not believe in the trinity? One of the definitions of a Christian in the Collins Dictionary is 'a person who believes in and follows Jesus Christ'. Therefore, Mormons are Christians and what they believe are basics of the Christian faith are the basics of Christian faith to them. Regardless of how others feel

 

[jwilliams190800]

In my previous post I gave you many reasons why Mormonism is heterodox and should be considered a cult.

I fail to see how unorthodox practices are indicative of a cult? All denominations, by that logic, are unorthodox and therefore are cults because every church does something different that to other churches is unorthodox.

No. We aren't talking politics here we are talking religion.

Technically, religious beliefs could be considered as politics; look at the past: the Church of England has its roots in the Church in England, which was an unorthodox (at the time) version of the Roman Catholic Church and was created as a direct result of political differences between Henry VIII and religious leaders of the time.

 

[jwilliams190800]

I apologise if my recent posts have offended people. However, I don't believe that calling a religion with 13 million followers spread all over the globe a cult is correct. The oxford dictionary gives this as the definition of a cult: 'A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposingexcessive control over members:'. I would hardly call 13 million people a small group.

 

[John Davidson]

I fail to see how unorthodox practices are indicative of a cult?

Well then you fail to see the plain and clear truth. If you can't understand why the many blasphemous doctrines of the Mormon Church makes them a cult then I am unable to assist you.

All denominations, by that logic, are unorthodox and therefore are cults because every church does something different that to other churches is unorthodox.

No, all denominations are not cults because many adhere to the traditional tenets and creeds of the Christian faith.

 

[John Davidson]

I apologise if my recent posts have offended people. However, I don't believe that calling a religion with 13 million followers spread all over the globe a cult is correct. The oxford dictionary gives this as the definition of a cult: 'A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposingexcessive control over members:'. I would hardly call 13 million people a small group.

It appears that you need to do a little more research on the definition of a cult. Perhaps you should start with Dr. Martin's book. This link may also be of assistance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult#Christian_countercult_movement