Comments about ‘LDS Christianity: Differences that matter’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Nov. 27 2011 11:39 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

Vanka,

Say for a moment that no one addressed your points.

You did say this...

"We can only suppose a former Dean of Religious Education understand this fact and, therefore, he must have done it deliberately."

And that is most certainly an accusation. You accuse without any substance or reasonable argument. The only support you give is that "we can only suppose". You can't suppose ANYTHING about the intentions of another human being.

While you often criticize the LDS Church, claiming inconsistencies, and so on.

I don't really care what anyone claims about their own beliefs, or about objectivity... but the feelings, experiences, or ideas of another human being exist within the subjective. That inherently and self-evidently is something that you nor I can examine, make claim regarding, or even discuss intelligibly.

Even if every statement I made included "let the catholic church fall and be destroyed" would that inherently mean that I am anti-catholic and all statements reflect an intend to attack the catholic church? While the likelihood, by inductive reason, would say that it is most probable- there is no deductive or provable way to reveal such intent. Therefore, such judgement rarely offers anything productive.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

The differences matter to people trying to control society according to their own religion.

Midway
Salt Lake City, UT

@JHA0033
"Would love to hear your thoughts!"

Just another anti-Mormon production. No thanks.

m.g. scott
LAYTON, UT

John Kateel on the first page did make an interesting point that has merit. In England, where I was a missionary, the law says that all weddings have to be public events. So what the LDS Church does is have the couple married in the Chapel by the Bishop in a public ceremony, then the couple goes to the Temple to be sealed. The result is that all family and friends can see the couple married regardless of membership or temple status. I really think that would be good for the church to allow here or anywhere. I think that part member families may be very negative toward the Church by being excluded from marriages that they cannot attend. And I'm assuming it isn't doctrine that the couple couldn't get married and sealed seperately or how could the Church justify the double standard for countrys like England? I think it should be an allowable choice for a marrying couple to make.

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

Vanka
The Greek philosophy corruption myth is a popular one among LDS apologists, but it is not an accurate representation of history, philosophy, reality, or religion.

LDS4
Sorry, but a quick search of google and even YouTube will provide MANY non-LDS who recognize the role of Greek philosophy in the development in historic Christianity. Many of those admitting it are other trinitarians who believe that God used the Greeks to help setlle the issues.

I noticed that you failed to answer my question about the difference between "eternally begotten" and "proceeding forth". i'd love to know. please reference scripture. Thanks.

lds4gaymarriage
Salt Lake City, UT

m.g. scott
I really think that would be good for the church to allow here or anywhere. I think that part member families may be very negative toward the Church by being excluded from marriages that they cannot attend. And I'm assuming it isn't doctrine that the couple couldn't get married and sealed seperately or how could the Church justify the double standard for countrys like England? I think it should be an allowable choice for a marrying couple to make.

LDS4
You are correct. I think that the US and Canada are the only places where LEGAL marriages are done in the temple. All other places require the LEGAL marriage be done in public. Non-LDS family don't want to go into the temple. They want to see their loved one married, even if it's in a Cultural Hall. There is NO doctrinal requirement for the 1 year probation penalty requiring couples to wait the year if not initially married in the temple. It's a POLICY. It harms member missionary work and fractures families. I have a hard time believing it's from God.

Those marrying people with non-LDS family should wait the year to avoid contention.

The Vanka
Provo, UT

lds4gaymarriage wrote:

"Sorry, but a quick search of google and even YouTube will provide MANY non-LDS who recognize the role of Greek philosophy in the development in historic Christianity. Many of those admitting it are other trinitarians who believe that God used the Greeks to help setlle the issues."

"I noticed that you failed to answer my question about the difference between "eternally begotten" and "proceeding forth". i'd love to know. please reference scripture. Thanks."

I did not say Greek philosophy did not play a role. I said it was not "corrupting" and the cause of "false" doctrine in Christianity. Please read my original comment and address the implications for the "false doctrine" and "corruption" of Joseph Smith's "revelations" if you take your mythical stand seriously. You can't have it both ways.

As for your question about "eternally begotten" and "proceeding forth," hopefully you realize I am an atheist. I couldn't care less how believers try to justify the ontological, metaphysical, and epistemological absurdities of their fictions. But if I have enough comments and words left, I will use my Greek prowess to take a swing at it.

donn
layton, UT

@LDS4,"eternally begotten" and "proceeding forth". i'd love to know. please reference scripture. Google filique.This is a Christian debate.

Christians,Jews and Muslims believe that God created all that exists ex- nihilo (out of nothing). Mormonism is quite different in its cosmology, claiming that God fashioned the universe out of preexisting material. God is eternal in some forms of LDS theology, but so is preexisting matter, including the material used by God to create human beings.
Mormonism has more in common with ancient pagan religions and ancient Greek philosophy(polytheism) than it does with the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim belief in creation ex nihilo.
The issue of creation relates to other significant world view issues, such as the source of moral values, the problem of evil, and Gods power. It is important to note that ones belief in creation has significant consequences and, in the case of Mormonism, the solutions are inadequate.
For instance, is the Mormon God too weak to create ex nihilo? If so, then is he less than omnipotent? In contrast, the Christian explanations of creation ex nihilo, the fall, and redemption offer better explanations of the observable universe and of moral values.

m.g. scott
LAYTON, UT

@LDS4

I think that is the point. It is a policy which, as we know, change from time to time. It would be different if it were considered revelation. As a policy I don't understand why the Church requires the one year wait here whereas it doesn't in other countries. I'd like to know. Anyone who has the reasoning behind it please comment. My feelings are that the Church misses golden missionary opportunities in America by doing this. I could imagine the Bishop or someone talking to the non-members at the wedding about how after this "till death do you part" marriage ceremony, the couple is then in the next day or so going to go to this beautiful temple to be sealed "for time and all eternity". With maybe a picture of the temple on display. I think many people who'd never heard much about Mormons would be interested to look further.

JM
Lehi, UT

From my conversations with my fellow Christians Ive learned that we arent that different. True, the philosophers corrupting influence entered, quite early long before Jesus (note Pharisees to Jesus John10 etc, Paul on science and those who have not BOTH Father and Son, Alexandrians etc to Stephens vision of BOTH) and philosophers were trying to make God into one of Platos Forms long before Chris. Many early Fathers understood Biblical Christianity at first, and asserted that Father and Son were separate, men could be called gods, and God is anthropomorphic etc, but they eventually came to worship the God of the Philosophers as Tertullian admits:
Plato: The Divine, The One, The Form.
Xenophanes: One God, unborn, eternal, infinite, not movingbeyond imagination.
Empedocles: does not possess limbs, is an inexpressible Spirit.
Non-Biblical philosophers ideas were adopted by Schools and led to conflict over Christ. Some caved to the scientific arguments and mocking and conformed, and then lost some truths about Jesus.
Still , we share many beliefs: both accept doctrines and texts in addition to the Bible (Nicene creed (although the Coptic Pope penned it, and Copts were heretical after Chalcedon), some Baptists believe God has a body continued

Oldguy
Kearns, UT

Can someone explain why Mormons, who believe in Christ, deserve to be called "Christians" while members of local fundamentalist LDS churches, who believe in the Book of Mormon, do NOT deserve to be called "Mormons?"

?
SLC, UT

(Part 1 of 2)

Donn: Not sure what your trouble is with Alma 7:10. "He shall be born of Mary...who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God."

Compare this to Matthew 1:18, 20. "...She was found with child of the Holy Ghost." "...For that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." Luke 1:35, "...The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

Joseph Fielding Smiths quote in Doctrines of Salvation, 1:19 is about the "Reorganites claim that he was begotten of the Holy Ghost." To which, President Smith is quoted saying, "They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost" and for which he "challenged the statement" above.

"Our Father in Heaven is the Father of Jesus Christ, both in the spirit and in the flesh. Our Savior is the Firstborn in the spirit, the Only Begotten in the flesh." 1:18

?
SLC, UT

(Part 2 of 2)

Not sure what the problem is with the statement in Journal of Discourses 8:115? Brigham Young was reflecting on the thought that "The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood - was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers."

Not sure whats wrong with believing we can become like God. Psalms 82:6 "Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Romans 8:16-17, "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ..."

Merry Christmas!

?
SLC, UT

Brokenclay:

2 Nephi 25:23, "...it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do."
Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace ye are saved through faith; and not of yourselves: it is the gift of God."

Could it be that "through faith" is part of "after all we can do?"

Titus 3:5-7, "...According to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." Compare to John 3:5, "...Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." So then, along with faith we must also be baptized and have received the gift of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

To be saved at all is a gift from God and it is by His grace that we are redeemed from physical death to be resurrected and to be redeemed from spiritual death (sin) through faith on Him who is able to save, repentance, and to be baptized and receive the Holy Ghost.

Merry Christmas!

JoeMormon
Lehi, UT

Continued...some accepted Christians believe God Jesus lived on earth, still has His body etc, LDS agree; LDS believe in salvation by grace through faith, but mainstream Christians did, and some still believe in Temple works (Armenians, Copts etc) and Baptism works (even for infants) and going up in Church and accepting Jesus works etc; LDS believe apostles/prophets such as Peter Joseph Smith etc receive revelation and are inspired but fallible humans, other Christians believe the creeds, Pope, etc are infallible, etc etc

For more on Greek influence search Greek Philosophers on Maxwell, FAIR etc (check articles referenced JM comment pg3 and: Restoring the Ancient Church; Creatio ex nihilo (nihilo is Gnostic idea that makes God responsible for all evil etc, some non-LDS scholars even say Mohammed studied with Gnostics, who believed in the exnihilo, Companionless, undying, unborn, incorporeal God)) etc etc.however, as we can see here, its not easy to find truth by study alone, but by faith also..but, even without faith, writing in Greek or KJV language is quite different than teaching for doctrine the philosophies of men.but keep studying yall Critics : ) ill keep lovin

OldGuy see pg3 CounterIntelligence on FLDS

GoodThinking
LAS VEGAS, NV

Did anyone notice that the photographs connected with this has three books, the Qu'ran, the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, and the Book of Mormon? Where did the Qu'ran come from in this story? And, why the NRSV? Neither one of those are Church approved, yet the Deseret News used it as support for thier story.

Ghost Writer
GILBERT, AZ

Great article. Most of these types of societal disagreements are simply differnt people looking at life through different lenses.

ThinksIThink
SEATTLE, WA

I think its fair for people to have their own standards. The LDS Church has standards for who can enter its temple. If you cannot get in, you're doing something right.

BonkersTheClown
GRAYSLAKE, IL

Puzzling. They say we are not Christian for failing to accept old non-Biblical traditions. Yet if the acceptance of non-Biblical tradition is so important, then the Protestant Reformation was the greatest catastrophe in Christian history. How dare Luther, Calvin and others reject hundreds of long-standing traditional Christian doctrines?

But if questioning traditional teachings and rejecting the non-Biblical ones is right, why do Evangelical Christians put the Nicean Trinity into a special category? The category: "Non-Biblical Traditions that must never be questioned." Why can the Trinity NEVER be questioned?? The Protestant Reformation was quite happy to question everything else. What exempts the Nicean Trinity?

When Evangelical Christians say, "Mormons aren't Christians" what they are really doing (without realizing it) is hypocrisy. A Christian is supposed to, "Take the Bible as your guide and reject the unauthorized doctrines invented by humankind." But at the same time, "You can never doubt nor reject the post-Biblical teaching of the Trinity. On this matter and this matter only, the Council of Nicea is infallible and unquestionable." So you must question and doubt, but you can never question and doubt.

BonkersTheClown
GRAYSLAKE, IL

It's puzzling. They say we are not Christian for failing to accept longstanding non-Biblical traditions. Yet if the acceptance of non-Biblical tradition is so important, then the Protestant Reformation was the greatest catastrophe in Christian history. How dare Luther, Calvin and others reject hundreds of long-standing traditional Christian doctrines?

But if questioning traditional teachings and rejecting the non-Biblical ones (aka Protestantism) is right, why do Evangelical Christians put the Trinity in a special category: "Non-Biblical Traditions that can never be questioned." Why can the Trinity NEVER be questioned?? The Protestant Reformation questions almost everything else. Why not the Trinty?

When Evangelical Christians say, "Mormons aren't Christians" what they unwitting hypocrites. Apparently, a true Christian is supposed to, "Take the Bible as your guide and reject the unauthorized doctrines invented by humankind." But at the same time, "You can never reject the post-Biblical teaching of the Trinity. On this issue the Council of Nicea is infallible. To question it is damnable heresy." So while you must question and doubt, but you can never question and doubt. Makes no sense to me.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments