Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The major heresy of Mormonism is summed up in its central theological axiom, the doctrine of Eternal Progression.
"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the One who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel - which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" Galatians 1:6-8
Actually, the Mormons believe that Jesus Christ must be believed in to be saved, so I doubt you have any idea what your talking about. Neither does anyone else in this thread trying to say the Mormons are wrong.
That's right. Some of them are; some of them are not. That should have been made absolutely clear on at least three occasions. If a sermon or writing has been canonized (i.e. declared doctrinal), it would be found in one of our "Standard Works." It's very simple, really. Look for the primary source. If it's from The Holy Bible, The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, or the Pearl of Great Price, it's LDS doctrine. If it's from some other source, it's somebody's interpretation (could be correct, could be incorrect) of LDS doctrine. If it's not an actual quote, but a paraphrase, don't trust its accuracy.
Then the very people who wrote the Book Of Mormon and other mormon books actually taught something different, - a poor interpretation. The reason why I find this hard to believe is the fact that it would mean that Smith and Young failed to interpret THEIR OWN WORDS.
Then the very people who wrote the Book Of Mormon and other mormon books actually taught something different, - a poor interpretation. The reason why I find this hard to believe is the fact that it would mean that Smith and Young failed to interpret THEIR OWN WORDS.
From what I have read, there is an issue of context that you seem to be leaving out.
I suppose it is possible that mis-interpretation of the original founders words have led to this statement on the LDS website
Quote:
Gordon B. Hinckley, prior President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1995-2008), said:
“We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. We, of course, accept Jesus Christ as our Leader, our King, our Savior...the dominant figure in the history of the world, the only perfect Man who ever walked the earth, the living Son of the living God. He is our Savior and our Redeemer through whose atoning sacrifice has come the opportunity of eternal life. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pray and worship in the name of Jesus Christ. He is the center of our faith and the head of our Church. The Book of Mormon is Another Testament of Jesus Christ and witnesses of His divinity, His life, and His Atonement.”
I guess, if mis interpretation leads Mormons to believe the above, then what really is there to argue against?
From what I have read, there is an issue of context that you seem to be leaving out.
I suppose it is possible that mis-interpretation of the original founders words have led to this statement on the LDS website
I guess, if mis interpretation leads Mormons to believe the above, then what really is there to argue against?
Smith and Young didn't understand the context? We are talking about comments and sermons of Smith and Young themselves, so I don't know how they coud have mis-interprepted their own teachings.
Smith and Young didn't understand the context? We are talking about comments and sermons of Smith and Young themselves, so I don't know how they coud have mis-interprepted their own teachings.
Well, all I have heard is people saying what they said meant, when ignoring the multi-verse context which has been explained.
Also, it is asserted by the critics that when they say people can become gods they are talking being God the Father, being another one and I find no evidence that the context is anything but a lower case "g" god that is in alignment and submission with God the Father the God of gods.
But like I said, if what the leaders originally meant has been mis interpreted down to a Mormon believing in Jesus Christ as Saviour as the LDS central teaching, then boy, what a blessing huh?
But like I said, if what the leadrs originally meant has been mis interpreted down to a Mormon believing in Jesus Christ as Saviour as the LDS central teaching, then boy, what a blessing huh?
That is not the issue. The issue is that their sermons are being dismissed as "non-doctrine", and the explanation is that they misinterprepted the correct teaching. But THEY wrote the teaching, so how can they not understand it. It seems rather clear that the mormon church has stepped in to decide what is "doctrine" and what is not, and what they teach today is not what the authors of the Book Of Mormon taught.
This is how they have been taught to defend the mormon faith. Anything that is inconvenient is dismissed as 'non-doctrine' even if is comes from the founders of their faith.
Were you taught that Jesus was not your Saviour, but that there is a Jesus not in the holy bible they were telling you to serve?
Well, one thing I learned is that the Jesus of the Book of Mormon is not the same Jesus described in the Bible based on His relationship to Lucifer, His ministry and His 3 days in the Americas, among many others.
Quote:
Were you taught that the supreme God of gods had a beginning and once did not exist?
You know what is taught regarding that issue.
Quote:
Are you saying you were taught that you would become GOD the Father?
I was taught that yes, I could become like Him through eternal progression, although I would never reach the point that He is at.
And I also know why you're asking these questions: to dispute them by saying that they are not taught in the mormon church today or ever. However, I was taught church doctrines by very learned men and no matter what you say, I will not waver from my statements or position regarding these issues and others. The mormon church has been spending a great deal of time backpedaling on many doctrines that folks outside of the church find heretical in order to more closely align themselves with the fundamental Christian community. Not you or anyone else from the chuch are going to sway me or fool me into believing anything other than what I already know and understand about the mormon church...period.
That is not the issue. The issue is that their sermons are being dismissed as "non-doctrine", and the explanation is that they misinterprepted the correct teaching. But THEY wrote the teaching, so how can they not understand it. It seems rather clear that the mormon church has stepped in to decide what is "doctrine" and what is not, and what they teach today is not what the authors of the Book Of Mormon taught.
This is how they have been taught to defend the mormon faith. Anything that is inconvenient is dismissed as 'non-doctrine' even if is comes from the founders of their faith.
Like I said, it's pretty strange that the Mormons churches official stance is opposite what you are saying may be true.
As Katzpur has explained, the emphasis may be a matter of context or that some ideas are insignificant in the light of Jesus being our Saviour.
What I see mostly is an assertion that certain beliefs make them a false religion and negate the idea of Jesus being their Saviour as the core teaching.
From what I have read, the multi-verse outlook simply puts many founders words in a context that explains the perspective. None of those beliefs, however different from Christianity, changes that Mormons believe Jesus is their Saviour and that they are not saved by any other means.
The argument that it is a differnt Jesus is false because they will point out that it is the Jesus in scripture, the Son of GOD big "G" the Father.
So Mormons believe in multiple Gods, so can Christians based upon scripture.
The issue is if the context of their beliefs places any of that ahead of GOD the Father, the surpreme creator that all existance is subject to.
For whatever reason I am at a loss to understand...
It is simple, I reject the idea that Mormons are believing in something that departs from the central idea of Christianity that Jesus is our Saviour and that you must believe in Jesus.
All of these critical threads try to cast that light, there is no evidence that it does any of that. So if the thread title is true, of what nature is it true, does it make them unbelievers? Or just people who believe something different than someone else, yet retain a core belief that is the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
