LDS Mormon vs Christian

[Jane_Doe]

Another mischaracterization by you Jane. Shame on you! The Nicene Creed is based on Scripture, so they cannot be "extra-scriptural". And the lds has 13 Articles of Faith, which is your own "non-Scriptural" creed.

*Sigh* We've been over this many times--
Your statement about the Nicene Creed is false as the it extrapolates beyond scripture in it's statement about God's substance, hence extra-scriptural.
Your statement about the LDS Articles of Faith is also false as we do view them as part of scripture.

 

[NYCGuy]

*Sigh* We've been over this many times--
Your statement about the Nicene Creed is false as the it extrapolates beyond scripture in it's statement about God's substance, hence extra-scriptural.
Your statement about the LDS Articles of Faith is also false as we do view them as part of scripture.

Do Mormons believe that God's word is limited to what is written down (i.e. scripture)?

 

[Peter1000]

It would be helpful if you could respond to what I actually said. I specifically stated that Mormons believe that Jesus is the literal spirit son of Heavenly Father and His spouse, Heavenly Mother. Please read posts carefully prior to responding.

None of the Canonical scriptures of the Mormon Church has reference to a 'Heavenly Mother'. So from a scriptural standpoint, it is not taught.
However, there are prophets and apostles and other members of the church who have expressed their own personal opinions that behind the scenes, guarded by scriptural silence to protect the integrity of a 'Heavenly Mother', there is a 'Heavenly Mother'.

When we have lessons on the Godhead, the idea of Heavenly Mother being a part of that Godhead is never brought up or debated. When we study 'the spirit of man', there usually is discussion, because someone always has a personal opinion that there is a Heavenly Mother, involved in how the spirits of all men were organized. We believe the spirit has always existed, they are eternal, but my personal belief is that it takes a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother to organize that spirit with all of its capacities to progress.

Colossians 1:15 and Revelations 3:14 tell us that Jesus was the first 'creation' of God. The word 'creation' is perhaps not the best word to use in this case because 'creation' to you has come to mean 'out of nothing', which is a false premise. The spirit of Jesus has always existed, it is co-eternal with God the Father. But it is through a process that we are not privy to that God the Father and Heavenly Mother bring to pass the full capacity of the spirit and its intelligence and give it what is neccesary to progress. Jesus was the first of this spirit organization. Lucifer was one of the first, if not the second. That is why we Mormons do not deny that Jesus and lucifer were one time very close brothers and very close to the throne of God. Obviously, lucifer went sideways and caused a war in heaven, and Jesus remained faithful and the rest is history.

You are right, most of the time I do not get this deep into the discussion on the first discussion about the Godhead. You have to learn line upon line, and precept upon precept, in order to come to understand the wonders of the history of God and mankind.

I have taught hundreds of people this way, and hundreds have accepted the gospel and are good members of the church. They have accepted the process of understanding the true nature of the Godhead and the true nature of man, and they love it when it is all layed out for them. Some do not, and reject it immediately, some accept and later when their pastors tell them what they think is the truth, they turn away. Some stay true and stalwart to the end.

Huh? Who believes that Jesus shares his body with 2 other Persons? Not me, and not Trinitarians.

Explain to me then, how you can have 1 God in 3 Persons? or 3 Persons in 1 God?? If that is not the case let me know. The Triune God is 3 in 1 or 1 in 3.
Try to explain how you think the Triune God is made up of?

As well, I don't think any Christian here is attempting to show equivalence or agreement between us and Mormons, which defeats your attempt here. And finally, if you are attempting to critique our beliefs, best you actually state what we actually believe, and not your caricature. It doesn't help your case.

I will let you try to articulate how you think the Triune God can be 1 God in 3 Persons or 3 Persons in 1 God. Thanks.

 

[Peter1000]

When I read this and compare it to Scripture, it doesn't jibe in my mind.

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Matthew 11:11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Matthew 18:4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 9:48 Then he said to them, “Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest.”

Seems mormonism is all about making themselves better to achieve better status and being "the most". Christianity, and the kingdom of heaven as described in Scripture, are all about humbling themselves and being the "least".

Jesus the best example of the human being, for these reasons:
1) He was the most powerful human that ever lived on the earth.
2) He was the most intelligent human that ever lived on the earth.
3) He was the most articulate person to ever speak on the earth.
4) He was the most knowledgeable person that ever lived on the earth.
5) He was the most kind....
6) He was the most humble...
7) He was the most.....

Jesus is the example, we want to be like Jesus in all aspects of what Jesus was the most of. Do you agree? But let's start with the humble, and kind, and meek, which leads to righteousness, and holiness, which leads to knowledgeable, intelligent, and powerful.

 

[NYCGuy]

None of the Canonical scriptures of the Mormon Church has reference to a 'Heavenly Mother'. So from a scriptural standpoint, it is not taught.
However, there are prophets and apostles and other members of the church who have expressed their own personal opinions that behind the scenes, guarded by scriptural silence to protect the integrity of a 'Heavenly Mother', there is a 'Heavenly Mother'.

When we have lessons on the Godhead, the idea of Heavenly Mother being a part of that Godhead is never brought up or debated. When we study 'the spirit of man', there usually is discussion, because someone always has a personal opinion that there is a Heavenly Mother, involved in how the spirits of all men were organized. We believe the spirit has always existed, they are eternal, but my personal belief is that it takes a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother to organize that spirit with all of its capacities to progress.

Colossians 1:15 and Revelations 3:14 tell us that Jesus was the first 'creation' of God. The word 'creation' is perhaps not the best word to use in this case because 'creation' to you has come to mean 'out of nothing', which is a false premise. The spirit of Jesus has always existed, it is co-eternal with God the Father. But it is through a process that we are not privy to that God the Father and Heavenly Mother bring to pass the full capacity of the spirit and its intelligence and give it what is neccesary to progress. Jesus was the first of this spirit organization. Lucifer was one of the first, if not the second. That is why we Mormons do not deny that Jesus and lucifer were one time very close brothers and very close to the throne of God. Obviously, lucifer went sideways and caused a war in heaven, and Jesus remained faithful and the rest is history.

You are right, most of the time I do not get this deep into the discussion on the first discussion about the Godhead. You have to learn line upon line, and precept upon precept, in order to come to understand the wonders of the history of God and mankind.

I have taught hundreds of people this way, and hundreds have accepted the gospel and are good members of the church. They have accepted the process of understanding the true nature of the Godhead and the true nature of man, and they love it when it is all layed out for them. Some do not, and reject it immediately, some accept and later when their pastors tell them what they think is the truth, they turn away. Some stay true and stalwart to the end.

I'm not sure what you mean by from a scriptural standpoint Heavenly Mother isn't taught (unless simply that there is no explicit statement on Heavenly Mother in Mormon scriptures). On many occasions, Mormons have referenced God creating man in His image, male and female, as an implicit reference to Heavenly Mother (including on this forum).

I am also not sure what you mean by Heavenly Mother being a personal belief, personal opinion, taught by apostles, prophets and other members. The fact is that this idea is taught in numerous official LDS church publications. One only needs to search LDS.org for "heavenly parents" to see that fact. Reference to "heavenly parents" (i.e. Heavenly Father and His spouse, Heavenly Mother) is made in official church manuals, magazines (including many in those aimed at children), The Family: A Proclamation to the World, and in General Conference talks by Mormon prophets and apostles. So, I'm not sure what you mean by "behind the scenes" when the idea of "heavenly parents" is taught very explicitly by the Mormon church.

Explain to me then, how you can have 1 God in 3 Persons? or 3 Persons in 1 God?? If that is not the case let me know. The Triune God is 3 in 1 or 1 in 3.
Try to explain how you think the Triune God is made up of?



I will let you try to articulate how you think the Triune God can be 1 God in 3 Persons or 3 Persons in 1 God. Thanks.

This has been done numerous times. Quite frankly not interested in going through this yet again. Suffice it to say that Trinitarians do not believe in the idea that Jesus shares His body with two other Persons. We believe there are three distinct Persons who are not each other. This has been stated many times on this forum, which is why your caricature is surprising.

 

[BigDaddy4]

Actually, the AoF's been included *in* scripture, so...

So... it is still a creed.

the definition of creed

 

[BigDaddy4]

*Sigh* We've been over this many times--
Your statement about the Nicene Creed is false as the it extrapolates beyond scripture in it's statement about God's substance, hence extra-scriptural.
Your statement about the LDS Articles of Faith is also false as we do view them as part of scripture.

Yes, we have been over this many times. And each time you have demonstrated you are unwilling to understand, especially about God's substance.

 

[BigDaddy4]

None of the Canonical scriptures of the Mormon Church has reference to a 'Heavenly Mother'. So from a scriptural standpoint, it is not taught.
However, there are prophets and apostles and other members of the church who have expressed their own personal opinions that behind the scenes, guarded by scriptural silence to protect the integrity of a 'Heavenly Mother', there is a 'Heavenly Mother'.

Not true. Your "official" lds.org website labels it as "doctrine". Is your church teaching false doctrine? Or teaching "personal opinions"?

"The doctrine of a Heavenly Mother is a cherished and distinctive belief among Latter-day Saints." Mother in Heaven

 

[BigDaddy4]

Jesus the best example of the human being, for these reasons:
1) He was the most powerful human that ever lived on the earth.
2) He was the most intelligent human that ever lived on the earth.
3) He was the most articulate person to ever speak on the earth.
4) He was the most knowledgeable person that ever lived on the earth.
5) He was the most kind....
6) He was the most humble...
7) He was the most.....

Jesus is the example, we want to be like Jesus in all aspects of what Jesus was the most of. Do you agree? But let's start with the humble, and kind, and meek, which leads to righteousness, and holiness, which leads to knowledgeable, intelligent, and powerful.

There's that lds lust for power...

 

[Traveling teacher]

Sounds like to me there is no debate....
Since it is obvious from these posts that they dont believe the NT to be fully inspired...
From there posts they question the inspiration revelation, pauls letters........
Anytime you exalt the book of mormon to equal status with the bible......
If we cant agree on which book God wrote
Might as well be reading the Koran as equal with the Bible
There is no foundation for a solid debate.......

 

[Jane_Doe]

Since it is obvious from these posts that they dont believe the NT to be fully inspired...

Did you not read the posts we wrote about how the New Testament *IS* inspired?

Anytime you exalt the book of mormon to equal status with the bible......

We put all scripture on the same status. Not to pick one book over another... would you raise Corinthians higher than Ephesians?

Might as well be reading the Koran as equal with the Bible

That's a complete straw man.

There is no foundation for a solid debate.......

If you would like to talk about things, then let's talk! I would gladly do so! But I can't converse with ridiculous straw mans or when my comments are ignored.

 

[Traveling teacher]

You are exalting the Book of Mormon to equal or greater status with the Bible...
YOu are exalting Joseph Smith to equal status with the apostles.......

That is the issue...
Thats why I said it is the same as Islam
THey say Mohamed was a prophet of God
THey claim the Koran to be inspired by God

The 2 questions are
1. Bible vs book of mormon
2. Joseph smith vs. authority of the apostles

I am saying joseph smith was not a prophet of God
And the book of mormon did not come from God
It is a simple debate.......that you can never get christians to agree with....

 

[Jane_Doe]

Writing from the LDS perspective--

You are exalting the Book of Mormon to equal or greater status with the Bible...

Equal. Scripture is the scripture. You don't raise Corinthians higher than Ephesians, for example.

YOu are exalting Joseph Smith to equal status with the apostles.......

Apostles are equal with other apostles, prophets with other prophets. You don't raise John higher than Paul, for example.

That is the issue...
Thats why I said it is the same as Islam
THey say Mohamed was a prophet of God
THey claim the Koran to be inspired by God

And there are no Muslims on this thread, so this is an irrelevant straw man. Just because LDS acknowledge the existence of some holy books and prophets (just as you do), doesn't mean either of us automatically accept any supposed book or prophet. There is a discernment process here.

The 2 questions are
1. Bible vs book of mormon
2. Joseph smith vs. authority of the apostles

Corinthians vs Ephesians
Peter vs Paul
(These are all very silly)

I am saying joseph smith was not a prophet of God
And the book of mormon did not come from God

And you are welcome to believe that and have you opinion. I disagree with that opinion, but still you can have it. But if we're both just going to state opinions, that just leaves us agree to disagree.

 

[NYCGuy]

Yes, we have been over this many times. And each time you have demonstrated you are unwilling to understand, especially about God's substance.

This is quite common amongst Mormons I've discussed this with on multiple forums. You define what you believe about the Trinity, and other Trinitarians find your explanation understandable, but many Mormons almost automatically respond with "you lost me". My theory is that it is because rejection of the Trinity (including rejecting it as convoluted and incomprehensible) is built into Mormon teaching, where supposedly, Smith's first vision demystified the Godhead (this is something stated by Mormons many times). So, they already begin with the premise that the orthodox Trinity is baffling and confusing, and this is why you get those responses.

Just my theory.

 

[Kiwi Christian]

Do you really want to add words to the bible??

Why not? Joe did with HIS translation of the Bible.

 

[Kiwi Christian]

"BTW, the bible has a definition of what a Christian is that should trump all other definitions. The bible says that: "....and the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." (Acts 11:26)"

Funny that you should quote the Bible for this one because Alma 46:13,15 totally CONTRADICTS the Bible as it is dated at 73 B.C.

So, which account is true and why?

 

[ewq1938]