Reader comments
Theology: LDS god is in harmony with the Bible
395 comments | Read story
James | 11:39 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
As I see it, the problem with LDS doctrine is not that they don't believe
in the Christ, it is that often they don't follow His teachings or those of
the New Testament writers. Examples are eternal marriage, food and drink,
requirement that members marry etc. When Mormon doctrine and the Bible
confict, the Mormon's will say, oh the Bible wasn't translated
correctly, bringing a blanket condemnation on the Bible, without really
specifying where it is not translated right. It amounts to a cop out.
As to Mitt Romney, I think he is a fine person, but I would fear that his Mormon upbringing would cause him to be too ridged when dealing with foreign nations. His speech was very patriotic and nationalistic, and that sort of thinking has caused our leaders to fail to appreciate the viewpoints of other countries' peoples.
As to Mitt Romney, I think he is a fine person, but I would fear that his Mormon upbringing would cause him to be too ridged when dealing with foreign nations. His speech was very patriotic and nationalistic, and that sort of thinking has caused our leaders to fail to appreciate the viewpoints of other countries' peoples.
LDS woman | 11:39 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I agree with Brother Card. They will never understand. I still don't get it
why evangelicals are so concerned about our beliefs. Why do they invest so much
money and time in propaganda? And it's not only here in the USA. Back in my
south american country, I dated an evangelical for two years and then one day he
showed up with some literature and said "if you don't drop being a
mormon, I won't date you anymore". All I asked him was to listen to
the missionaries and find out by himself by praying to God. And he was almost
convinced until he went to his Pastor with his new ideas. That was the end. To
all non-lds, just pray with a sincere heart and you will know. Anybody on this
earth could deceive but God won't. Go to the source of everything. But do
it as James said: with a sincere desire and an open heart.
Comments continue below
Perspective of After-life | 11:42 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
As much as we all claim to know about God and life after death, whether
you're a Protestant, Catholic, or LDS, we still know very little. Much of
the debate of religion deals with differences in matters we truly won't
fully understand until life after death - which really has nothing to do with
the present. Christ was good to all people - primarily because he saw them as
people and not some object of his imagination.
Anonymous | 11:44 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I was watching a program on the Trinity Broadcasting Network. It depicted a
radio talk show host who seemed to be an atheist. A caller came on the show who
said he was Jesus. The host was asking him some very brash questions about evil
in the world. Then the host began to question the Trinity, closing his line with
"It just doesn't make sense to me." The caller claiming to be
"Jesus" answered, "Maybe it's not supposed to make sense to
you."
To Hardy | 11:48 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Just fyi, science does not point to there being no God. In fact, many brilliant
scientists' faith in God or a higher being only deepens the more they study
and learn. After completing the universal laws, Newton spent the rest of his
life working on theology. He also said that anyone who believes in the Bible
cannot possibly believe that the Nicene Creed is true as well! What a smart
man!
I'm Sadden! | 11:55 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I've watched Mitt Romney's speech yesterday and I felt that he did an
excellent job of standing up for what he believes in while respecting others of
all different faiths! I got chills when he said."No candidate should become
the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the
prayers of the people of all faiths." I am sadden by the responses of some
of you that are claiming to be true Mormons or biblical Christians, but yet, you
are attacking those whom you believe to be traditional Christians in the same
way Mormons have been attacked. If you are a true Christian remember this: The
word of God is living and active. It is sharper than any double-edged sword, and
can pierce deep enough to separate soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It
exposes even the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)
Today, God's Word can be read by more people than ever before! And although the WORDS in these many translations are different, the MESSAGE is the same! God did not give his Word to only one group of people; he gave it to everyone!
Today, God's Word can be read by more people than ever before! And although the WORDS in these many translations are different, the MESSAGE is the same! God did not give his Word to only one group of people; he gave it to everyone!
Bocas Brain | 12:09 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Why does it matter whether there is one God or five gods or all three in one
or God is a He or a She ? Are YOU going to be different in some way or would
live your life another way ?
willie | 12:12 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
all of this spinning of LDS beliefs and der Mittster's beliefs is making me
dizzy. I feel like I'm watching Whirling Dervishes. When you guys get a
final copy of your program, it should be interesting, though just as confusing
as it is now.
Fredd | 12:14 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
To hey fredd: Please don't pity me. I said theology is one thing while
sciences like antropology and archeology are another. Your words are spiteful
and unchristian. Sometimes science is right and sometimes wrong. I choose to
use my judgement to determine which. In my judgement the civilizations
described in the BoM and described by your prophets would have left significant
physical evidence. That's all I'm saying. I will not respond to your
"belief system" comments as my reply would be impolite.
What Should We Believe... | 12:14 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
To "Rational Perspective":
This is evidence that we are free to believe whatever we want to. If we try to "prove" to the world if something is true by our own interpretation of the Bible, we will fail. As men, we simply don't have the knowledge, even based on history, to fully understand truth by a simply studying the Bible, no matter how smart we think we are. This detail is exactly what led Joseph Smith into the grove.
The only way to find truth is the source of all truth, that is, as we seek guidance and direction from God through prayer. This requires faith, humility, true desire, patience, etc., but, in the end, is the only way we can know for sure. I don't rely on men, no matter how much education they have, to know if something that really matters, like the nature of God, is really how it is or not. I would implore any one truly and honestly seeking for this truth to find a quiet place, kneel on your knees, and ask God himself. This is the only way.
This is evidence that we are free to believe whatever we want to. If we try to "prove" to the world if something is true by our own interpretation of the Bible, we will fail. As men, we simply don't have the knowledge, even based on history, to fully understand truth by a simply studying the Bible, no matter how smart we think we are. This detail is exactly what led Joseph Smith into the grove.
The only way to find truth is the source of all truth, that is, as we seek guidance and direction from God through prayer. This requires faith, humility, true desire, patience, etc., but, in the end, is the only way we can know for sure. I don't rely on men, no matter how much education they have, to know if something that really matters, like the nature of God, is really how it is or not. I would implore any one truly and honestly seeking for this truth to find a quiet place, kneel on your knees, and ask God himself. This is the only way.
Want to read - - | 12:15 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Why does the DN use the print format where the lines touch and make it VERY hard
to read. Please use accceptable spacing.
In LOVE!! | 12:16 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I am truly sadden by some of the responses posted on here. One thing we all have
to remember as Christians,"When you quote the Word, you know you're
right! When you preach Jesus, you know you're right! You don't even
have to worry about whether they're accepting it or not.--It's the
truth, whether they receive it or not! When you're giving others the Word,
sharing the Scripture, preaching the Word, you're getting out something
that cannot fail. Not one Word shall fall to the ground, wasted! The Lord has
promised that His Word will accomplish the purpose He sent it to! (Isaiah
55:10,11)" Remember to do so in LOVE!
Father ,Son | 12:25 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
One can be a a father and a son at the same time...
I have a father and I am a son to that father...At the same time I have a son...That makes me a father.
Why the problem with that concept?
As far as the one god scriptures...Taken out of context and not realizing who is speaking in the OT.
1.Jesus prays to his Father...Not himself. The HG is sent and testifies of the Father and the Son but not Himself.
2.All three members of the Godhead are refered to at Jesus's baptism, and manifest themselves separately.
3.Jehovah(Jesus)refers to himself as the Saviour before he had been cruified. Foreordination.
4.Jesus is promised all the Father has-Thrones, dominions, perfection(See sermon on the mount about perfection), ascends to his Father and our Father-His God and our God,etc.
5.The god of the OT/NT mentions body parts in reference to himself. Face,mouth,tounge,hands, feet, hair, back, right hand, left hand(Must mean has a middle),he wears a crown so he has a head,etc. God has other emotions besides Love-anger, jealousy,etc.
The ancient christian church took heat for believing Jesus was a God. Jews used to use their scriptured to "prove" their doctrines too.
I have a father and I am a son to that father...At the same time I have a son...That makes me a father.
Why the problem with that concept?
As far as the one god scriptures...Taken out of context and not realizing who is speaking in the OT.
1.Jesus prays to his Father...Not himself. The HG is sent and testifies of the Father and the Son but not Himself.
2.All three members of the Godhead are refered to at Jesus's baptism, and manifest themselves separately.
3.Jehovah(Jesus)refers to himself as the Saviour before he had been cruified. Foreordination.
4.Jesus is promised all the Father has-Thrones, dominions, perfection(See sermon on the mount about perfection), ascends to his Father and our Father-His God and our God,etc.
5.The god of the OT/NT mentions body parts in reference to himself. Face,mouth,tounge,hands, feet, hair, back, right hand, left hand(Must mean has a middle),he wears a crown so he has a head,etc. God has other emotions besides Love-anger, jealousy,etc.
The ancient christian church took heat for believing Jesus was a God. Jews used to use their scriptured to "prove" their doctrines too.
To "Wicked Nephite" | 12:35 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"Wicked Nephite"...
Yes, you are correct in saying that if an investigator of the LDS Church wants to get "both sides of the story" they can talk to you and other former members of the Church. However, to learn geometry, it is not a requisite, nor a good idea, that I talk to those who don't understand it. Wouldn't it be better for ALL of us, in the pursuit of truth, to make the final determination of what is "true" and "false" by asking the source of all truth, even God? You asked the following in your post, quote: "But if my perspective of the LDS faith would be considered incomplete, how is a faithful follower's testimony any better?". The answer? Because they they still have one. I wish you the best on regaining yours.
Yes, you are correct in saying that if an investigator of the LDS Church wants to get "both sides of the story" they can talk to you and other former members of the Church. However, to learn geometry, it is not a requisite, nor a good idea, that I talk to those who don't understand it. Wouldn't it be better for ALL of us, in the pursuit of truth, to make the final determination of what is "true" and "false" by asking the source of all truth, even God? You asked the following in your post, quote: "But if my perspective of the LDS faith would be considered incomplete, how is a faithful follower's testimony any better?". The answer? Because they they still have one. I wish you the best on regaining yours.
UTWoodsman | 12:40 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Back to Ms. Riordan's comments: "Unfortunately, that's a
completely incorrect characterization of the traditional Christian concept of
the Holy Trinity, which actually is much more close to the LDS concept of
"Godhead" than most LDS realize."
Granted, there is some divergence amongst "traditional Christians," but Scott's description is spot on with the one I memorized umpteen years ago from the Westminster (Presbyterian) Shorter Catechism:
"Q. How many persons are there in the Godhead?
A. There are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory."
From the LDS "Guide to the Scriptures":
"There are three separate persons in the Godhead: God, the Eternal Father; his Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost. We believe in each of them (A of F 1: 1). From latter-day revelation we learn that the Father and the Son have tangible bodies of flesh and bone and that the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit, without flesh and bone (D&C 130: 22-23). These three persons are one in perfect unity and harmony of purpose and doctrine."
Doesn't sound close to me....
Granted, there is some divergence amongst "traditional Christians," but Scott's description is spot on with the one I memorized umpteen years ago from the Westminster (Presbyterian) Shorter Catechism:
"Q. How many persons are there in the Godhead?
A. There are three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory."
From the LDS "Guide to the Scriptures":
"There are three separate persons in the Godhead: God, the Eternal Father; his Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost. We believe in each of them (A of F 1: 1). From latter-day revelation we learn that the Father and the Son have tangible bodies of flesh and bone and that the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit, without flesh and bone (D&C 130: 22-23). These three persons are one in perfect unity and harmony of purpose and doctrine."
Doesn't sound close to me....
Thomas | 12:41 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Mark at 9:08 -- Your thinking on the Trinity is actually the Modalist, or
Sabellian, heresy. It is not classical Trinitarian at all.
I've noticed that many, many lay Protestants get this point wrong.
As a result, many Mormons understandably think that this is actually the doctrine of the Trinity, and reject it. A case in point is the article in December's Ensign magazine, in which a Dutch woman relates her conversion to Mormonism as arising from confusion over how Jesus and the Father could be the same person.
They're not. Classical Trinitarianism teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinct, individual persons, who nevertheless constitute one God. That's what's meant by the Nicene concept that the persons of Godhead constitute one "essence," with the essence, or entity, being "God."
Many Mormons aren't aware that they also believe that there is only one "God." (See D&C 21.) Thus, in at least one sense, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost -- though they are individual beings -- also constitute, together, a single entity called "God." (Just as the other lawyers in my firm, though individuals, also constitute, together, the single entity of the firm.)
Straw men abound here.
I've noticed that many, many lay Protestants get this point wrong.
As a result, many Mormons understandably think that this is actually the doctrine of the Trinity, and reject it. A case in point is the article in December's Ensign magazine, in which a Dutch woman relates her conversion to Mormonism as arising from confusion over how Jesus and the Father could be the same person.
They're not. Classical Trinitarianism teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinct, individual persons, who nevertheless constitute one God. That's what's meant by the Nicene concept that the persons of Godhead constitute one "essence," with the essence, or entity, being "God."
Many Mormons aren't aware that they also believe that there is only one "God." (See D&C 21.) Thus, in at least one sense, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost -- though they are individual beings -- also constitute, together, a single entity called "God." (Just as the other lawyers in my firm, though individuals, also constitute, together, the single entity of the firm.)
Straw men abound here.
Dean | 12:45 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Very well stated. There are times that I wish that couplet about as god once
was etc..had never been uttered. It over simplified a very complex concept and
is used to beat Mormons over the head with. Becomining more God-like is
exultation. Becoming "little gods" sounds polytheastic.
I think this article is very well written, I especially like the geometry analogy.
By the way..about the turtles...they go all the way down.
I think this article is very well written, I especially like the geometry analogy.
By the way..about the turtles...they go all the way down.
Paul | 12:49 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I have read anti-Mormon literature that erroniously claims that Mormons believe
in a God that is not all powerful, as he cannot forgive murder. (Not true.)
Isn't it interesting how Evengelic Christians (and many other brands) believe God is all powerful but lacks the power to explain what he is so we humans can understand it.
God Certainly has that power.
In John 8: 17 and 18 Christ himself tells us that he and his Father are two men.
Isn't it interesting how Evengelic Christians (and many other brands) believe God is all powerful but lacks the power to explain what he is so we humans can understand it.
God Certainly has that power.
In John 8: 17 and 18 Christ himself tells us that he and his Father are two men.
Anonymous | 12:55 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Joseph Smith quoted these verses from the non-JST version of the KJV:
Revelations 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto GOD AND HIS FATHER; to him be glory and ddominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Jesus, God the Father, and God the Father's Father are mentioned.
He was speaking to the inerrant Bible folks he knows are in the crowd showing the idea of multiple Gods is taught in the NT Christianity doctrines.
Ironically showing his sense of humor...He mentions in the King Folliet Discourse that he feels that this is one of the verses mistranlated in the Bible.
Revelations 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto GOD AND HIS FATHER; to him be glory and ddominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Jesus, God the Father, and God the Father's Father are mentioned.
He was speaking to the inerrant Bible folks he knows are in the crowd showing the idea of multiple Gods is taught in the NT Christianity doctrines.
Ironically showing his sense of humor...He mentions in the King Folliet Discourse that he feels that this is one of the verses mistranlated in the Bible.
Reality | 12:56 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I have read a lot of comments implying the Necene Creed is confusing even to
practicing Christians who use that as a guide to their beliefs. I believe this
is true. But as LDS we should have the humility to acknowledge that there is an
awful lot in our own history, doctrine, amd beliefs (some of which this author
tried to explain in his article) that are very confusing for others to
understand - including it seems at times our own members and leaders.
Thomas | 12:57 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Mormons' real disagreement with "traditional" Christianity
doesn't involve the Nicene Creed. The different interpretations of the
Trinity are mostly semantic, involving speculations as to the precise
metaphysical way in which the persons of the Trinity (or members of the Godhead)
constitute one God while maintaining their individuality.
The bottom line, on which both Mormons and other Christians would agree, is that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have some kind of individual existence -- and also that they have some kind of unified existence as "one God." (See, again, D&C 21 and John ch. 17.) Beyond that, we're in angels-on-pinheads territory -- as most well-educated Christian theologians would readily agree.
The point of the Nicene Creed was to rebut the idea that Jesus was less than fully divine. Mormons and Christians agree that Christ is fully God.
Mormons' real beef is with the Westminster Confession, which declares, unbiblically, that God (which includes Christ) is without body, parts, or passions. Mormons ask -- reasonably -- what Christ did with his resurrected body: "A spirit hath not flesh and bone, as ye see me have. Now give me some of that fish."
The bottom line, on which both Mormons and other Christians would agree, is that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have some kind of individual existence -- and also that they have some kind of unified existence as "one God." (See, again, D&C 21 and John ch. 17.) Beyond that, we're in angels-on-pinheads territory -- as most well-educated Christian theologians would readily agree.
The point of the Nicene Creed was to rebut the idea that Jesus was less than fully divine. Mormons and Christians agree that Christ is fully God.
Mormons' real beef is with the Westminster Confession, which declares, unbiblically, that God (which includes Christ) is without body, parts, or passions. Mormons ask -- reasonably -- what Christ did with his resurrected body: "A spirit hath not flesh and bone, as ye see me have. Now give me some of that fish."
Thomas | 1:03 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
To make a long story short, Westminster Confession-believing Protestants can
believe that God is a spirit and a spirit only, or they can believe that Christ
is God. They can't believe both.
That's because Christ expressly denied that he was a mere spirit, after his resurrection: "A spirit hath not flesh and bone, as ye see me have." He then ate a fish and a honeycomb, to emphasize the point.
If Christ = not mere spirit, and Christ = God, then God = not mere spirit.
Alternatively, if Christ = not mere spirit, and God = mere spirit, then Christ = not God.
One or the other, folks.
That's because Christ expressly denied that he was a mere spirit, after his resurrection: "A spirit hath not flesh and bone, as ye see me have." He then ate a fish and a honeycomb, to emphasize the point.
If Christ = not mere spirit, and Christ = God, then God = not mere spirit.
Alternatively, if Christ = not mere spirit, and God = mere spirit, then Christ = not God.
One or the other, folks.
Kathy Riordan | 1:06 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The Catholic Church, and most mainstream Protestant churches, believe that the
Holy Trinity consists of three divine persons who are separate and distinct from
each other, all of whom are fully God. The difference is that they do not
characterize this as "three Gods" as would be the case in LDS
theology, but "one God." This is not three persons in one body, as
some have also incorrectly characterized it (including Elder Ballard of the LDS
Church in a related article in the Deseret News), or three aspects of the same
being, as that is considered "modalism," which was a heresy of the
early Christian church.
It's helpful in understanding to realize that when non-LDS traditional Christianity uses the term "God," it most closely correlates with the LDS use of the term "Godhead." So if a Latter-day Saint hears a trinitarian say "one God," that does not mean there are not three distinct divine persons. It means "one Godhead."
Joseph Smith expressed traditional Christian belief in the trinity well when he wrote in Doctrine and Covenants 20:28:
"Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal. Amen."
It's helpful in understanding to realize that when non-LDS traditional Christianity uses the term "God," it most closely correlates with the LDS use of the term "Godhead." So if a Latter-day Saint hears a trinitarian say "one God," that does not mean there are not three distinct divine persons. It means "one Godhead."
Joseph Smith expressed traditional Christian belief in the trinity well when he wrote in Doctrine and Covenants 20:28:
"Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal. Amen."
Thomas | 1:08 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Sorry, I can't stop myself. People ought to review Elder Holland's
statement of Mormon doctrine of the Godhead/Trinity one or two Ensigns back, in
which he declared that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are "one" in
every sense except physical unity. (That goes a *long* way past the old
"one in purpose" shorthand.)
Sometimes I wonder if it's not just Protestants who exaggerate the differences between Mormon and other Christian understandings of the Trinity, but that the LDS Church does as well. We *need* there to be some signficant differences between us and other Christians -- otherwise, why all the fuss and bother of cranking up a Restoration? Thus we run away from classical Trinitarianism as fast as we can -- mischaracterizing its actual teachings right and left (to be fair, most lay Protestants don't get it right, either) -- despite the fact that for anyone who doesn't have *way* too much time on his hands for metaphysical finessing, the differences aren't very pronounced at all.
Sometimes I wonder if it's not just Protestants who exaggerate the differences between Mormon and other Christian understandings of the Trinity, but that the LDS Church does as well. We *need* there to be some signficant differences between us and other Christians -- otherwise, why all the fuss and bother of cranking up a Restoration? Thus we run away from classical Trinitarianism as fast as we can -- mischaracterizing its actual teachings right and left (to be fair, most lay Protestants don't get it right, either) -- despite the fact that for anyone who doesn't have *way* too much time on his hands for metaphysical finessing, the differences aren't very pronounced at all.
Another to Ms Riordan | 1:10 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Kathy,
I think you illustrate Mr. Card's point quite succintly when he says
"...they don't.
Or, rather, their theologians don't. Most ordinary Christians ignore the creeds"
Mr. Card has very effectively illustrated the beliefs set forth in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, the foundations of "Traditional Christianity". This IS what is taught and believed in most theological seminaries, as I have come to understand by speaking with numerous students, priests, and ministers from such.
But, as Mr. Card states, and as you illustrate, most ordinary Christians don't buy it. They have worked out their own belief which correlates much more closely with what the Bible actually teaches.
I think you illustrate Mr. Card's point quite succintly when he says
"...they don't.
Or, rather, their theologians don't. Most ordinary Christians ignore the creeds"
Mr. Card has very effectively illustrated the beliefs set forth in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, the foundations of "Traditional Christianity". This IS what is taught and believed in most theological seminaries, as I have come to understand by speaking with numerous students, priests, and ministers from such.
But, as Mr. Card states, and as you illustrate, most ordinary Christians don't buy it. They have worked out their own belief which correlates much more closely with what the Bible actually teaches.
Mitt | 1:13 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"Brother" Romney will make a fine vice-president to Dr. Ron Paul.
It's funny... | 1:13 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I remember a missionary came over to my house to spread the gospel and because I
wasn't LDS,he automatically assumed that I was Baptist and my belief and
spiritual guidance was as such. I explained to the missionary that I wasn't
Baptist, but I am a Christian. I refuse to be labeled under any denomination. He
assumed that I didn't have any knowledge of God the Father, Christ the Son,
and the Holy Ghost. He was so surprised at how much I already knew, He even
mentioned that it I would be perfect if i only accepted the Book of Mormon. I
say all of this to say..we should search ourselves before we can condemn or
judge another. After all we are supposed to be Christian!
Ernie | 1:14 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I am sick and tired of people saying that Mormons are not Christian. Their
charch is named after Christ, they preach about the divinity of Christ, they
take the sacrament in the name of Christ, they are baptized in the name of
Christ, the book of Mormon is another testament of Christ, they strive to be
like Christ, they recognize the atonement of Christ is the only way they can
return to the Father, etc. ect. Now that being said, for those of you so called
Christians who say Mormons are not Christians, turn your incriminating finger
towards yourselves! Mormons on a whole put more Christ in their works and daily
lives than most of you do. In fact based on what I have seen living in many
states and never in Utah, Mormons may be the only Christians! Those of you who
want to disclude Mormons from the society of Christians are not Christlike in
nature and I would now categorize you as Niceans or Trinitarians but not
Christians. It takes more than talk to be a Christian.
From Wicked Nephite | 1:16 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
First, to those who would compare believers in Mormonism to believers in
geometry, wake up. Geometry's validity is based on the ability to prove
each theory. Mormonism's validity depends on members' abilities to
avoid/ignore every disproof that comes up.
Second, am I the only one disconcerted by Mitt's double standard of calling the doctrinal questions of constituents an Unconstitutional litmus test and then pandering to Evangelical constituents by testifying of his faith in Jesus?
Third, where was his religious tolerance last week when said he would not give a cabinet position to a qualified Muslim?
Second, am I the only one disconcerted by Mitt's double standard of calling the doctrinal questions of constituents an Unconstitutional litmus test and then pandering to Evangelical constituents by testifying of his faith in Jesus?
Third, where was his religious tolerance last week when said he would not give a cabinet position to a qualified Muslim?
HUH? | 1:22 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
James | 11:39 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"As I see it...it is that often they don't follow His teachings or those of the New Testament writers. Examples are eternal marriage...When Mormon doctrine and the Bible confict, the Mormon's will say, oh the Bible wasn't translated correctly, bringing a blanket condemnation on the Bible, without really specifying where it is not translated right. It amounts to a cop out."
We follow the teachings of principles in the Bible. Honesty, Sabbath Day, etc.
We believe the Bible...However, there are errors and all you have to do is read non-LDS scholars some cited in this very thread. I don't even read greek and I found an obvious one in my studies...Not doctrinal, but definately scribal.
Eternal marraige? Ponder this...Adam and Eve were married before the fall. They couldn't die unless they partook of the forbidden fruit. So essentially their's was an eternal marraige.
"As I see it...it is that often they don't follow His teachings or those of the New Testament writers. Examples are eternal marriage...When Mormon doctrine and the Bible confict, the Mormon's will say, oh the Bible wasn't translated correctly, bringing a blanket condemnation on the Bible, without really specifying where it is not translated right. It amounts to a cop out."
We follow the teachings of principles in the Bible. Honesty, Sabbath Day, etc.
We believe the Bible...However, there are errors and all you have to do is read non-LDS scholars some cited in this very thread. I don't even read greek and I found an obvious one in my studies...Not doctrinal, but definately scribal.
Eternal marraige? Ponder this...Adam and Eve were married before the fall. They couldn't die unless they partook of the forbidden fruit. So essentially their's was an eternal marraige.
John Q. Public | 1:24 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Gee Orson thanks for clearing that up. After all what can 2000 years of study,
practice, and tradition tell us about the nature of God, that a mormon sci-fi
writer cannot. Look this is real simple. If you are a Christian than you
accept the creeds (i.e., Nicene and Aposltes) as a comprehensive summation of
your faith. If you do not, then you are not following the Christian faith.
rain on the parade | 1:26 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Interesting that all this comes from a well known "science fiction"
writer. After seeing his body of work, it's no wonder he believes in this
type of folk lore and magic.
Then why do they argue? | 1:40 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Thomas | 12:41 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"The bottom line, on which both Mormons and other Christians would agree, is that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have some kind of individual existence -- and also that they have some kind of unified existence as "one God." (See, again, D&C 21 and John ch. 17.) Beyond that, we're in angels-on-pinheads territory -- as most well-educated Christian theologians would readily agree."
Which Theologians?
Not the evangelicals...It's the professors of these very religions that take exception to our belief in the nature of God among other things and "innoculate" their members against LDS teachings to say we don't believe in the same Jesus so we aren't Christians...
I've talked to enough and gone to their websites, read enough of their posts...
The Nicene creed in and of itself doesn't go as far as the creeds that followed it, but it went quite a ways.
Christian "Orthodoxy" if there was really such a thing is what matters.
"The bottom line, on which both Mormons and other Christians would agree, is that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have some kind of individual existence -- and also that they have some kind of unified existence as "one God." (See, again, D&C 21 and John ch. 17.) Beyond that, we're in angels-on-pinheads territory -- as most well-educated Christian theologians would readily agree."
Which Theologians?
Not the evangelicals...It's the professors of these very religions that take exception to our belief in the nature of God among other things and "innoculate" their members against LDS teachings to say we don't believe in the same Jesus so we aren't Christians...
I've talked to enough and gone to their websites, read enough of their posts...
The Nicene creed in and of itself doesn't go as far as the creeds that followed it, but it went quite a ways.
Christian "Orthodoxy" if there was really such a thing is what matters.
Oregon Ute | 1:45 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Hey Orson! Damned by your own words? "how many people have you known who
are truly perfect of heart, desiring nothing but to serve God and their fellow
humans? I've known a few. But I'm most definitely not one of them.
I'm in the category called "sinners," and I have a pretty good
notion that most of us are."
I don't think so. Christians know that there are no, zero, nada, zilch humans w/ a truly perfect heart and that ALL not most of us are sinners. Thanks for illustrating just how Mormons are not Christian.
I don't think so. Christians know that there are no, zero, nada, zilch humans w/ a truly perfect heart and that ALL not most of us are sinners. Thanks for illustrating just how Mormons are not Christian.
It's getting old | 1:51 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Ya know, I read a lot of these posts and there a lot of complaints about how
mormons are being persecuted for their beliefs and other religions are not. I
believe that it's because of your intense marketing strategy. IE: your
missionary program. If you weren't so eager to push your beliefs on others,
people might leave you alone. How many of you have ever had somebody knock on
your door and ask you to become catholic? If you put yourselves out there like
that, you're going to face some criticism.
Anonymous | 1:55 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
All religion is nonsense. Fairy Tales. -People- just make it up. No more
valid as ultimate truth than Aesop's fables.
One religion says you can't go to heaven if you eat pork. Another says pork's fine just don't drive on Tuesday afternoon's. It's all ridiculous...
I would vote for Mitt because he is a competent leader.
One religion says you can't go to heaven if you eat pork. Another says pork's fine just don't drive on Tuesday afternoon's. It's all ridiculous...
I would vote for Mitt because he is a competent leader.
Contest | 1:55 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This is the beauty of organized religions. They all attempt to trivialize,
errrrrrrrrrrrrrr, explain something immense and incomprehensible to us in
childish ways. You can wrap the explanations in pseudo-science or
pseudo-intellectualism, but it's all meant for the children we are in
trying to understand the immensity of it all. Why get so hung up on the details
that each of our 'stories' has developed to the point of lunacy.
How about a simpler approach - to just trust that we are spiritual beings, that in some sense we exist after this earth, we either add to or subtract to the essence of what is right and good - our shared experience and consciousness. Most religions of any sizeable following agree on these simple truths and all the other details are ridiculous. Know it and trust it and quit having a peeing contest over who's overindulgent version is better than whose. Grow up children.
How about a simpler approach - to just trust that we are spiritual beings, that in some sense we exist after this earth, we either add to or subtract to the essence of what is right and good - our shared experience and consciousness. Most religions of any sizeable following agree on these simple truths and all the other details are ridiculous. Know it and trust it and quit having a peeing contest over who's overindulgent version is better than whose. Grow up children.
Doug Korth | 1:59 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
What I don't understand is, if I go to traditional cristian and ask what is
a traditional christian belief of the trinity or any belief is, am I not than
qualified to tell others what a traditional christian's belief is as long
as I do not deviate from his view?
Anonymous | 2:00 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The LDS religion is a folk religion that will never be accepted by the
mainstream.
Mormon people best stay to themselves and keep their secrets in the closet.
Mormon people best stay to themselves and keep their secrets in the closet.
Anonymous | 2:17 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Of all the Republican candidates, Romney is the one I can stomach the least. He
reminds me the most of GWB -- the empty suit whose very emptiness is his appeal.
Justin L. Powell | 2:27 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
(Sorry - Had trouble posting- this is continued from above) - Someone asked for
a treatise on the Trinity - if you really would like to explore the traditional
Christian view of the trinity. I would highly recommend "On the
Trinity" by Augustine.
Finally, one last point. Mr. Card argues that the LDS "physical" God is really what most "TC"'s picture as God. That is simply false and unsupportable. Most Christians, even if they are a bit fuzzy on the theological and ontological details will confess that God is Spirit and that he is Omnipresent (that is, he is present everywhere all at the same time). That is the part of the beauty of the Christian message - God is a personal God that is here, present with us and can be known by us - he is not some distant creator who is over "there" but a God that can be known because he is here.
(Oh...I noticed on more thing. If you would like to read why Mr. Card's "filoque" argument is taken out of context, feel free to see "The Christological Controversy" bu Richard A. Norris).
Thanks for you time, God bless and Merry Christmas!
Finally, one last point. Mr. Card argues that the LDS "physical" God is really what most "TC"'s picture as God. That is simply false and unsupportable. Most Christians, even if they are a bit fuzzy on the theological and ontological details will confess that God is Spirit and that he is Omnipresent (that is, he is present everywhere all at the same time). That is the part of the beauty of the Christian message - God is a personal God that is here, present with us and can be known by us - he is not some distant creator who is over "there" but a God that can be known because he is here.
(Oh...I noticed on more thing. If you would like to read why Mr. Card's "filoque" argument is taken out of context, feel free to see "The Christological Controversy" bu Richard A. Norris).
Thanks for you time, God bless and Merry Christmas!
Hmmm... | 2:38 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Though many may like Card's diatribe and even agree with him, such
agreement is based solely on the glib manner in which he has presented his
thesis.
A close and thorough review of his assertions however show that he plainly does not understand what he's talking about and even worse, has made huge mistakes in his assertions.
Plato is not the basis of the Christian pholosophy as it came to evolve and be defined. Aristotle is that person. So, Card's thesis immediately collapses on that point alone.
His assertion of the parallelity of the Trinity doctrine is perposterous and is no more plausible to a Biblical Christian than that a gasoline engine can run on water.
Again, Mormons interpret the Bible and its teachings very differently, from what Biblical Christians interpret the Bible. Very differently!
That interpretation is so different that the Mormon church consistently turns down invitations to participate in Biblical Christian enclaves where Biblical teachings are discussed and the meanings thereof decided upon. These enclaves are very democratic and quire scholarly as well, which is something Mormons undoubtedly have a problems with since they would be in the minority where Biblical teachings and doctrine are concerned.
A close and thorough review of his assertions however show that he plainly does not understand what he's talking about and even worse, has made huge mistakes in his assertions.
Plato is not the basis of the Christian pholosophy as it came to evolve and be defined. Aristotle is that person. So, Card's thesis immediately collapses on that point alone.
His assertion of the parallelity of the Trinity doctrine is perposterous and is no more plausible to a Biblical Christian than that a gasoline engine can run on water.
Again, Mormons interpret the Bible and its teachings very differently, from what Biblical Christians interpret the Bible. Very differently!
That interpretation is so different that the Mormon church consistently turns down invitations to participate in Biblical Christian enclaves where Biblical teachings are discussed and the meanings thereof decided upon. These enclaves are very democratic and quire scholarly as well, which is something Mormons undoubtedly have a problems with since they would be in the minority where Biblical teachings and doctrine are concerned.
Retired Chaplain | 2:41 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
As a retired USAF Chaplain of 26 years, with both a Ph.D. in Political Science
and a Masters of Divinity, I can say that Mitt Romney was right on the money of
what a Mormon candidate needed to say, just as JFK's speech was what was
needed then. Why our national memory is so short, that JFK's speech
couldn't suffice, I just don't know.
It is every scholars' frustration that the majority of people rely on heresy instead of personal investigation and research. In fact, most Christians do not read the scriptures that they have. Most do not know, or care to know, how their scriptures came into being, or that the Bible is essentially just a compendium of the most popular, most available, and surviving writings of the Jews and early Christians. It did not just magically appear from heaven--it is an edited compilation from a myriad of Greek and Hebrew sources. The Apocrypha, the Gnostic Gospels, the Naghammadi Codex and writings, and Dead Sea Scrolls clearly attest to the wide breadth scriptural works from which biblical works were selected.
It is every scholars' frustration that the majority of people rely on heresy instead of personal investigation and research. In fact, most Christians do not read the scriptures that they have. Most do not know, or care to know, how their scriptures came into being, or that the Bible is essentially just a compendium of the most popular, most available, and surviving writings of the Jews and early Christians. It did not just magically appear from heaven--it is an edited compilation from a myriad of Greek and Hebrew sources. The Apocrypha, the Gnostic Gospels, the Naghammadi Codex and writings, and Dead Sea Scrolls clearly attest to the wide breadth scriptural works from which biblical works were selected.
To Contest | 2:55 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Concerning your "simpler approach" Sounds like an easy way out. If it
feels good do it. Most of our society is doing just what you espose. We ignore
the details. Details like thou shall not kill, or steal, or covet, or
fornicate. Little details like using abortion as a means of birth control or
committing child abuse etc. etc.
I have a question for you. Forty years ago if you asked a sample of Americans if they took part and believed in "organized religion" would there be a higher percentage saying yes than today? Sure there would be. What is the differences in our society today, now that we are less inclined to be part of "organized religion"? People go to shopping malls, colleges and schools and shoot innocents, abortion clinics dot the landscape, people sue each other over hot coffee, gangs and gang culture rule the list goes on and on. I think it is interesting how you use complex terms like "pseudo-science or pseudo-intellectualism" to categorize organized religion and then call for a more "simpler approach". In the end, I think it is the details that are important and its the details that have been lost.
I have a question for you. Forty years ago if you asked a sample of Americans if they took part and believed in "organized religion" would there be a higher percentage saying yes than today? Sure there would be. What is the differences in our society today, now that we are less inclined to be part of "organized religion"? People go to shopping malls, colleges and schools and shoot innocents, abortion clinics dot the landscape, people sue each other over hot coffee, gangs and gang culture rule the list goes on and on. I think it is interesting how you use complex terms like "pseudo-science or pseudo-intellectualism" to categorize organized religion and then call for a more "simpler approach". In the end, I think it is the details that are important and its the details that have been lost.
inaccurate on all levels | 3:02 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This essay is completely, on all levels, inaccurate. I agree, it sounded like an
apology of our religion. I believe we can become Gods.
It was a nice science fiction story though.
It was a nice science fiction story though.
Patrick | 3:11 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Great article, and props to Mitt for defending his faith yesterday and not
distancing himself. I am a proud Mormon and will never back away from that
title. He owes no apologies to anyone. We are who we are, and if others choose
to deny what we say we believe then that is their choice and shall be on their
heads at judgement. For all of the good that the Mormon church does in this
world, you would think we were living in hell already by the way we are treated.
At the very least I would hope all the people who received aid and support from
the Church around this country during times of crisis or disaster would lend
their vote. After all, they were supported by Mormons, they could return the
favor and support a Mormon.
Go Mitt!
Go Mitt!
jt | 3:14 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I was a catholic until i became born again. I will not mudsling or say the
mormons are wrong. I believe that only God knows who will be in heaven with
him. I have also felt the joy and tears of the Holy Spirit within me. Its the
highest high you could ever imagine. If you believe that Jesus died for your
sins and you accept him as your saviour. you will be saved. I do not know what
the mormons believe but I do know that two mormon missionaries came to my home
when I was not home and told my 18 year old special needs child that she was not
truly baptised because she was not baptised by a mormon elder. Also, when my
mother was hospitalized I was asked to leave the room when the elders came to
pray as they said I would interfere with Gods' blessing on her. Its sad
that so many people believe so many different things, but if we all agree that
Jesus died for us and try to be like him and ask forgiveness for our sins, we
will be with him and be forgiven, not perfect, forgiven.
Retired Chaplain | 3:17 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Early Christian ministers intentionally selected those writings that were
eventually included in the bible, and only those that supported their particular
theology or were easy to explain to non-Jews and pagans. If additional Mormon
scriptures and doctrines blow the minds of the average Evangelical, no
Evangelical should ever read the Naghammdi Codex, Dead Sea Scrolls, or Gnostic
Gospels because they not only corroborate Mormon theology, they explicate it in
advanced terms, theories, and concepts that would boggle even a Mormon
scriptural erudite (which should not be construed as an endorsement of the
veracity of these archaeological texts).
As far as the debate between TC's and biblical Christians over the nature of God... Every protestant, which includes Evangelicals, needs to understand what they are actually "Protesting." Beginning with Martin Luther, almost every Christian denomination began as splinter group, protesting the deviation of religious practices and beliefs from the doctrines found in the Bible.
As far as the debate between TC's and biblical Christians over the nature of God... Every protestant, which includes Evangelicals, needs to understand what they are actually "Protesting." Beginning with Martin Luther, almost every Christian denomination began as splinter group, protesting the deviation of religious practices and beliefs from the doctrines found in the Bible.
Hamblin | 3:20 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Fredd,
google "William J. Hamblin"
it may provide some answers for you regarding your anthropology and archeology concerns.
google "William J. Hamblin"
it may provide some answers for you regarding your anthropology and archeology concerns.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Orson Scott Card
Related content
- All-MWC football awards 5:57 a.m.
- Deseret News Ms. Volleyball 2009 5:48 a.m.
- 5A All-State volleyball teams 5:14 a.m.
- 4A All-State volleyball teams 5:14 a.m.
- 3A volleyball All-State teams 5:14 a.m.
- 2A All-State teams 5:14 a.m.
- 1A volleyball All-State teams 5:14 a.m.
- Teen girl killed in Kaysville crash 1:22 a.m.
- HIV study asks BYU biologist to help 12:57 a.m.
- Orem pair getting a rep for crime 12:56 a.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- Witness: Mitchell wanted attention
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- MWC '09 season in review
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Jazz win 6th in 7 games
- Jazz ready to be without Harpring
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
906 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime483
- Hall reprimanded by MWC404
- Max Hall issues apology387
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal349
- Utes won't respond to Hall276
- BYU says Hall incident resolved238
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game161
- BYU is champion of the state143
- Religion in politics is tiresome129
My husband was teaching his 6th-grade class in Salt Lake last year when...
Latest comments
so sorry to hear this terrible news..much sincer condolences to the her family.
Time for him to go. PAST time for him to go.
After reading many comments posted on several stories since the incident...
Hey, I was at that Pres. Holland devotional, too. It was the year after the...
Sometimes when we loose we win, but not in this case. Want a future?...
First Meeting Utah, 12—4 (1896) Last Meeting BYU,...
Max Hall's only mistake was hating the sinner instead of the sin. He...
Kind of refreshing isn't it, Lee.
I voted for Morgan for Vice Chair, and I think he would still be worth voting...
Advertisements
The problem is that these are literally thousands of "traditional christian" sects and even more different views among thier several pastors/leaders. So saying "this is what traditional christians believe" is a bit of an unfair generalization.
What you can say, however, is "it has been my expirience that many traditional christians believe", or better... "this is what the Nicene Creed, upon which many traditional christians form thier beliefs says..."
It indeed was my expirience on my mission that most "well-versed" evangelical chrisitans liked to compare the trinity to the three states of water or three parts of an egg, and stuck pretty closely to the Nicene "incomprehensible" compromise on the Nature of the God who is "everywhere and yet nowhere". However most evangelicals believe deeply (and correctly) that Jesus is indeed personal and knowable.
Anyway, lets not generalize or mudsling or be prideful, it is best for us to remember that there is just as much that we Mormons dont know, for if The father is ours (and Jesus's) Father, then who is his father... and so forth to enternity.