Questions about Mormon religion

[Nessie]

So could you explain to me where mormons get the doctrine of

Men who live holy end up getting their own planet and becoming Gods (just like they say God did)

Women have to be called by their husbands to go to heaven (or, not heaven, but the planet), and are referred to as "second-class citizens" (a mormon girl was once told this... she said to a mormon guy, "I feel like a second class citizen..." he looked at her befuzzled and said, "What do you mean? You are a second-class citizen." -Taken from a book written by a former mormon).

Jesus and Satan are brothers, and the only reason Jesus is held in higher esteem in because God gave Him and Satan a competition to see who could save more people. Supposedly Jesus won.

What's with the holy underwear?

 

[gallykid08]

wrong...black priests were not allowed to be ordained until 1978, which means Joseph Smith didn't ordain them, because he died in 1844.

read the book of mormon...and the scriptures saying that those with darker skin are cursed. i believe its 2 Nephi 5:20-24, another verse in Jacob 3:8, and so on.

i know many people try to make up excuses and other translations..but in the early book of mormon and among the early leaders many things were racist...unfortunetly i'm home from college and not on my laptop where i have all my info...but i can try to find it.

of course...it wasnt just mormons..and i'm sure not ALL were racist. and many early americans were racist as well and there was the whole rise of eugenics in america for a long time etc.


forgot to add...

if Joseph Smith was NOT racist whats up with this??

he was quoting in saying: "He [Cain] become the father of an inferior race." (The Way of Perfection, p. 101)

there are other things too. i'm going to have to try to bring everything up onto my laptop...

 

[Doc T]

wrong...black priests were not allowed to be ordained until 1978, which means Joseph Smith didn't ordain them, because he died in 1844.

That would be incorrect. Elijah Abel, an African American, on March 1836 was ordained an Elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. From the evidence we have we believe he was ordained by Joseph Smith.

Doc

~

 

[A New Dawn]

wrong...black priests were not allowed to be ordained until 1978, which means Joseph Smith didn't ordain them, because he died in 1844.

read the book of mormon...and the scriptures saying that those with darker skin are cursed. i believe its 2 Nephi 5:20-24, another verse in Jacob 3:8, and so on.

i know many people try to make up excuses and other translations..but in the early book of mormon and among the early leaders many things were racist...unfortunetly i'm home from college and not on my laptop where i have all my info...but i can try to find it.

of course...it wasnt just mormons..and i'm sure not ALL were racist. and many early americans were racist as well and there was the whole rise of eugenics in america for a long time etc.


forgot to add...

if Joseph Smith was NOT racist whats up with this??

he was quoting in saying: "He [Cain] become the father of an inferior race." (The Way of Perfection, p. 101)

there are other things too. i'm going to have to try to bring everything up onto my laptop...

Please don't continue to post inaccurate things when corrected.

The Book of Abraham: the Negro's Place in the Church of the 1830's

Chandler received about $2,400 from the Smith family and a few of their friends [for some ancient papyri]. Joseph soon began to create what he called an "Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar" based on his impressions of the papyri inscriptions. This work formed the basis of the text of the Book of Abraham, which Joseph published in 1842. Inferences drawn from its teachings (Abraham 1:23-27) denied priesthood ordination to Negroes after publication of the work. [However] The church periodical had earlier listed Elijah Abel, a Negro, among the elders of the church at Kirtland in 1836. (33)

The related issue of Negro slavery in the US was one of many issues starting to split the nation into contending sections. The chasm, as old as the nation itself, centered in larger economic and political forces. The question often involved the right of states to defy federal power and policies. Missourians in 1833 had accused the church of abolitionist leanings and of meddling with their slaves. These charges figured heavily in the forced removal of church members from Jackson County at the end of 1833.

A year later church leaders therefore considered seriously the place of African-Americans in church and in society. The need for this assessment was especially pressing because the church was expanding into slave-holding areas of the nation. The General Assembly of August, 1835, in canonizing the D&C, voted to include in the book the following statement

... we do not believe it right to interfere with bond-servants, neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them, contrary to the will and wish of their masters, nor to meddle with, or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in this life, thereby jeopardizing the lives of men: such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust, and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude.​

The major purpose of this statement was to prove to the public that the church was not about to stir up trouble over the slavery issue.

(note 33: Messenger and Advocate vol. 2. no. 9 (June 1836): 335)

source: Richard Howard, The Church Through The Years, volume 1, pp 219-220

 

[EricEliason]

Blacks were always allowed to be members, and Mormons were among the first to be against slavery, being against it right from the get go.

Also, American Indians may have been cursed in the Book of Mormon, but the curse was also removed from them at other times. 3 Ne 2:15. In the end, I don't think they were cursed except in the sense that we're all cursed from sin, they were just roughly the same way as when they were discovered in 1492. A non-racial way to look at it is that we're all cursed from sin and they were just cursed in a specific way. A lot of the white/asian people in the Book of Mormon also got curses upon themselves, just not necessarily skin curses.

Joseph Smith may have been racist if that quote is true, but that doesn't mean the Church was racist. He was against slavery. That was just him speaking as a man like everyone else and not as a prophet, unless he was speaking as a prophet, but to do that he would have to have said it in the name of Jesus Christ. Yes I'm aware of Deut 18:22 and I think it makes sense.

As for becoming God, there's a thread of debate at http://www.christianforums.com/t1493765-can-man-become-god.html .

As for women, that Mormon who left the Church was told wrong. In our second to last Conference talk, our President gave a long talk on respecting women because a lot of Mormons had misconceptions about it. The talk said women deserved total respect. I realize now that they have a higher calling than the priesthood. I think they carry the spirit better. They are better in a lot of ways. We need them.

I don't know about the only reason God favored Jesus being because he gathered more souls. Jesus and Satan are brothers, but then, we're all brothers and sisters.

The holy underwear saved me from being unclean once. The CEO of the Marriot hotel said that once he caught on fire but it didn't pass his holy garments, which was a miracle. The holy garments are spiritual protection from sin when used properly. They have to be made in an authorized pattern.

 

[AMMON]

http://www.carm.org/mormon.htm - Alot of info on Mormonism.
http://www.myfortress.org/DEBATE_MORMON.html - Ditto
http://www.xmission.com/~research/about/index.htm - Mormon Origins
http://www.centerplace.org/history/ch/vol3.htm - Mormon History
http://scriptures.lds.org/ - Mormon Scriptures: Book of Mormon, Doctrine of Great Price & Doctrine of Covenants - They also consider the Bible to be Scripture but they consider it to be the least of these. With this Mormon Scripture website you can verify the claims that some of the other sites make, that are listed above.

Christianity believes, based on the Bible, that Jesus Christ was never created, has always existed and is in fact the Creator.

Mormonism believes that Jesus Christ was created, the physical son of God and his wife and the brother of Satan.

Oh Heavens!! All of these sites, but, the last, are NOT indicative of official beliefs of the Church at all. BTW, it is NOT "The Mormon Church," as plainly stated on the official church website, but it IS "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." Accurate information about said church is found at its official website, which the so-called Christians in here prohibit us from providing, because it promotes the truth about a religion they consider unorthodox. Do a google search for "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," and find the official church website (hint, ends in ".org" not ".com").

 

[gallykid08]

here's some more...if the book of mormon is so true, why has it been changed? it was revised in 1981, compare verses 1 Nephi 11:21; 19:20; 20:1 and Alma 29:4 among the old and the new. i read that there was over 3000 changes to the book of mormon.

and what about Galatians 1:6-9? it says:
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! according to the bible that angel who supposedly came to Joseph Smith is accursed.

contradictions...

Book of mormon says that Jesus was born after a physical union between Mary and God. but the bible says that Mary was a virgin.

the bible says that each man is to have ONE wife, but polygamy is a doctrine of mormonism.

the bible says that jesus would be born in bethlehem (Micah 5:2) but the book of mormon says that jesus would be born in Jerusalem (alma 7:10)

Jeremiah 39:6 states that all of King Zedekiah's sons were killed. the book of mormon claims that one son escaped and came to Mulek. (Helma 6:10, and Helma 8:21)

the OT states that the firsborn of a flock should be given to the lord as a tithe, and the sacrifice should have been picked from the remaining animals (Exodus 13:12 and Deut. 12:6). the book of mormon claims that the Nephites were following the law of moses, when in fact they broke it by sacrificing the firstborn (Mosiah 2:3)

The OT says that only the descendants of Levi could be priests (Numbers 3:9-10) however the book of mormon says that descendants of the tribe of Manassah (alma 10:3) would be made priests (2 Nephi 5:26)

NT says that followers of christ were first called christians in Antioch after paul's ministry there (Acts 11:26) but the book of mormon claims that there were people called christians as early as 74 B.C (Alma 46:15)
now how is that possible?

so...your claim that there is no contradictions is also false

 

[gallykid08]

back to the racism bit...

then explain the scriptures. explain why joseph smith said what he said.

which has the higher authority? the bible? the book of mormon? or what people have said in books and articles and meetings?

 

[EricEliason]

I would be glad to answer your questions when I have time.

 

[A New Dawn]

from gallykid08

contradictions...

Book of mormon says that Jesus was born after a physical union between Mary and God. but the bible says that Mary was a virgin.
not true

the bible says that each man is to have ONE wife, but polygamy is a doctrine of mormonism.
not a teaching of the Book of Mormon

the bible says that jesus would be born in bethlehem (Micah 5:2) but the book of mormon says that jesus would be born in Jerusalem (alma 7:10)
there was not city of Bethlehem when Nephi left for the new world, so they could not have known about it. But Jesus was born in the land of Jerusalem.

Jeremiah 39:6 states that all of King Zedekiah's sons were killed. the book of mormon claims that one son escaped and came to Mulek. (Helma 6:10, and Helma 8:21)

the OT states that the firsborn of a flock should be given to the lord as a tithe, and the sacrifice should have been picked from the remaining animals (Exodus 13:12 and Deut. 12:6). the book of mormon claims that the Nephites were following the law of moses, when in fact they broke it by sacrificing the firstborn (Mosiah 2:3)
huh? how do you given anything to the Lord exdept as a sacrifice?

The OT says that only the descendants of Levi could be priests (Numbers 3:9-10) however the book of mormon says that descendants of the tribe of Manassah (alma 10:3) would be made priests (2 Nephi 5:26)
there were others who were not of Levi that were priests -- oh, say, Jesus, for example

NT says that followers of christ were first called christians in Antioch after paul's ministry there (Acts 11:26) but the book of mormon claims that there were people called christians as early as 74 B.C (Alma 46:15)
now how is that possible?
because they had Christ revealed to them and they believed on Him even before He was born

so...your claim that there is no contradictions is also false
no, I don't think so

 

[A New Dawn]

back to the racism bit...

then explain the scriptures. explain why joseph smith said what he said.

which has the higher authority? the bible? the book of mormon? or what people have said in books and articles and meetings?

The Bible condones slavery.

 

[gallykid08]

"NT says that followers of christ were first called christians in Antioch after paul's ministry there (Acts 11:26) but the book of mormon claims that there were people called christians as early as 74 B.C (Alma 46:15)
now how is that possible?
because they had Christ revealed to them and they believed on Him even before He was born"

it's still a contradiction. the bible says one thing...book of mormon says another. which one is right?


"the OT states that the firsborn of a flock should be given to the lord as a tithe, and the sacrifice should have been picked from the remaining animals (Exodus 13:12 and Deut. 12:6). the book of mormon claims that the Nephites were following the law of moses, when in fact they broke it by sacrificing the firstborn (Mosiah 2:3)
huh? how do you given anything to the Lord exdept as a sacrifice?"
according to the old covenant and the law of moses...they were supposed to set the firstborn of a flock aside as a 'tithe' then choose their sacrifice from the remainder. the book of mormon claims that the nephites were following the law of moses...when in fact they broke the law of moses.

"The OT says that only the descendants of Levi could be priests (Numbers 3:9-10) however the book of mormon says that descendants of the tribe of Manassah (alma 10:3) would be made priests (2 Nephi 5:26)
there were others who were not of Levi that were priests -- oh, say, Jesus, for example"

Jesus wasnt a priest. he did not serve as a priest. in fact, most priests rejected him.

 

[gallykid08]

The Bible condones slavery.

that depends on how you look at it.

and that doesnt answer my question. which is the higher authority? the bible, book of mormon, or what people say in articles or meetings?

 

[AMMON]

I am a very curious person who makes it a point to learn everything i can of all religions i can find. i think it helps with deciding exactly what i believe. right now im trying to learn as much as i can about Mormons, i know nothing of there history or of there beliefs outside of the Bible. can anyone help me out ang give me a link to a site or give a good outline of how mormon beliefs differ from general christianity? thank you

Know this: at least 90% of what has been said in this thread by posters who are not current, active members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (incorrectly nicknamed "The Mormon Church") (and exempting Jenda) is either totally inaccurate, horribly distorted, or brutally taken out of context. The number of misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and outright mistruths herein truly shock me! I strongly advise you to take what you’ve read with a large grain of salt and seek the official teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from sources such as the official church website or official publications of said church, such as True to the Faith: A Gospel Reference (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 2004).

This is supposed to be a Christian forum, and Christians are not supposed to bear false witness against their neighbors! And that includes restating mistruths that one has heard or read from sources other than official sources of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Indeed, if you wanted to learn about the United States of America, would you go ask a group of Islamic Terrorists to teach you? Do you think they'd be a bit biased? Such is the same as learning about a church from websites and individuals that battle against said church! Indeed, I am utterly amazed at the disdainful conduct by the so-called Christians who have made herein numerous brazen, nasty, incorrect statements regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

[gallykid08]

Know this: at least 90% of what has been said in this thread by posters who are not current, active members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (incorrectly nicknamed "The Mormon Church") (and exempting Jenda) is either totally inaccurate, horribly distorted, or brutally taken out of context. The number of misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and outright mistruths herein truly shock me! I strongly advise you to take what you’ve read with a large grain of salt and seek the official teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from sources such as the official church website or official publications of said church, such as True to the Faith: A Gospel Reference (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 2004).

This is supposed to be a Christian forum, and Christians are not supposed to bear false witness against their neighbors! And that includes restating mistruths that one has heard or read from sources other than official sources of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Indeed, if you wanted to learn about the United States of America, would you go ask a group of Islamic Terrorists to teach you? Do you think they'd be a bit biased? Such is the same as learning about a church from websites and individuals that battle against said church! Indeed, I am utterly amazed at the disdainful conduct by the so-called Christians who have made herein numerous brazen, nasty, incorrect statements regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

any site that is about a certain belief is often as biased as those who go against them.

and i dont see you proving me wrong.

and i know i tend to be extremely blunt...so i'm sorry if i come off the wrong way.

 

[EricEliason]

Please don't give me too many more, since I am trying to write my thesis.

Those corrections are minor errors that were found, that were probably made by the scribe.

As for the Galatians verse you've failed to show that the angel taught a Church contrary to the Bible. In fact the Bible and Book of Mormon are extensively cross-referenced in our Church, and we have more footnotes on the Bible than anyone.

The Book of Mormon doesn't say that.

Polygamy is like killing. Thou shalt not kill, but there are times when there are exceptions, like when God tells you to kill. Polygamy was for the purpose of increasing our numbers fast.

Saying Jesus was born at Jerusalem is fine. It's like saying I grew up in Los Angeles when I grew up in Anaheim. That's how they wrote them.

The Old Testament doesn't say all the sons of Zedekiah were slain, just that sons of Zedekiah were slain.

I don't know about the firstlings dillema. That will take some time.

With the tribe of Levi, they became high priests which is like being adopted into the tribe of Levi.

The New Testament people didn't know about the Book of Mormon people.

So except for this one,

the OT states that the firsborn of a flock should be given to the lord as a tithe, and the sacrifice should have been picked from the remaining animals (Exodus 13:12 and Deut. 12:6). the book of mormon claims that the Nephites were following the law of moses, when in fact they broke it by sacrificing the firstborn (Mosiah 2:3),

I don't feel that you have found any contradictions.

 

[EricEliason]

Weren't you supposed to sacrifice the firstborn also? If not, and it belonged to the Lord, what did you do with it? Put it in a farm with a sign that said, "Lord's" and let it multiply?

 

[AMMON]

and i dont see you proving me wrong.

I don't need to prove you wrong because it's clear that you have not done your homework and are, correspondingly, incredibly naive as to the official beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. YOU need to do your research by going to official sites of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, rather than just sites that have the singular purpose of defaming said church, which sites are clearly not going to present both sides of the story. Once you've done comprehensive research (i.e., read BOTH sides of the issue), then, perhaps, we can have a civilized discussion.

 

[gallykid08]

eww...thesis papers sorry about that...semester is over here, so i'm off for a few weeks until fly to MD to work.

"As for the Galatians verse you've failed to show that the angel taught a Church contrary to the Bible. In fact the Bible and Book of Mormon are extensively cross-referenced in our Church, and we have more footnotes on the Bible than anyone."

can you clarify a bit?

and is it possible to be adopted into the tribe of levi and to become a priest? for some reason i'm thinking its not...gonna have to look into that.

about the commandement...that's against murder of innocents mostly. war is justified as long as it's a "just war" as some people call it...that basically means it cant be a war for revenge, but to stop anything that is unjust (genocides such as the holocaust etc). thats another issue...some christians believe any war at all is wrong.

 

[gallykid08]

I don't need to prove you wrong because it's clear that you have not done your homework and are, correspondingly, incredibly naive as to the official beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. YOU need to do your research by going to official sites of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, rather than just sites that have the singular purpose of defaming said church, which sites are clearly not going to present both sides of the story. Once you've done comprehensive research (i.e., read BOTH sides of the issue), then, perhaps, we can have a civilized discussion.

mm...

who said i go to sites that try to ''defame'' the LDS church? and i do read BOTH sides to the issue...that's what i always do. and if i go to and LDS site that is the same as going to an anti LDS site. they would both be biased in one way or another. and if i find a contradiction between one side of the issue and the other it means i need to look deeper.

i know i dont know everything. and neither do you. learning is a lifelong process.

if people dont prove me wrong it often means they cant

and just because i am not LDS and havent come to the same conclusions as you doesnt make me necassarily wrong. the same could be said for you or anyone. ''you dont believe the same as me so that means you're dumb and havent done research'' i've heard that from the mouths of many people...it's kind of stupid because that excuse could be used from all points of view.