What Mormons Believe--according to a Former BYU Professor

[amadeus]

I thought I would insert a few comments and/or verses here in support of your answers. As you and others know, I am not a Mormon.

- The "planet" thing is a gross mischaracterization. LDS Christians believe that in the eternities that Christ's disciples will become fully like Him, through His power.

"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." John 17:20-23

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." I John 3:2

- Believing that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the most correct church and other folks have some manner of things wrong: yes. Likewise does every other person in the world think their beliefs are the most correct and other people diagreeing means they got something wrong.

Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts." Prov 21:2

How are you defining "Biblical"?

If define "Biblical" as something that is in accordance to the Bible and God's Truth. It's not limited to what is inscribed just in whatever number of books your particular Bible has nor any human's interpretation of it.

I believe that even the strongest of sola scriptura or sola biblia believers go along with this even though some would deny it.

But I am well aware that other people define "Biblical" as meaning "in agreement with my particular Protestant and Creedal beliefs".

Even so!

 

[4Jesus]

That's a good point, for those who are sola scriptura/sola biblia, what we read currently that aren't manuscripts, are translations upon translation upon transliteration upon translation/transliteration. There's bound to be error and mistakes in words and language used, if you can prove the exact original meaning as one understands it.

I agree, Jesus is the Word and to be looked on first. Scriptures/"the" Bible secondly. But sometimes that's all we have when interacting with others, which is why it's necessary to know, to communicate with each other - otherwise the written scriptures wouldn't even be necessary (we could each hear Jesus telepathically or within then just nod at each other )

 

[Jane_Doe22]

That's a good point, for those who are sola scriptura/sola biblia, what we read currently that aren't manuscripts, are translations upon translation upon transliteration upon translation/transliteration. There's bound to be error and mistakes in words and language used, if you can prove the exact original meaning as one understands it.

I agree, Jesus is the Word and to be looked on first. Scriptures/"the" Bible secondly. But sometimes that's all we have when interacting with others, which is why it's necessary to know, to communicate with each other - otherwise the written scriptures wouldn't even be necessary (we could each hear Jesus telepathically or within then just nod at each other )

Even with the oldest manuscripts and working strictly within sola scriptura Protestantism, you'll still find huge disagreements about beliefs. Example: Calvinism and Armininsim.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Even with the oldest manuscripts and working strictly within sola scriptura Protestantism, you'll still find huge disagreements about beliefs. Example: Calvinism and Armininsim.

Most disagreements about beliefs among Protestants are not as huge as you may think. As I explained before, different denominations stress various facets of Bible doctrine, but all within the parameters of the Bible, not going outside the Bible.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Most disagreements about beliefs among Protestants are not as huge as you may think. As I explained before, different denominations stress various facets of Bible doctrine, but all within the parameters of the Bible, not going outside the Bible.

On that we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[aspen]

This from someone who belongs to the Catholic Cult. Amazing.

Not quite....
You are Protestant
It was your leaders who broke from Catholicism
So, indeed, it is your church that is most certainly a Catholic cult

Come back home to Rome, my friend!

 

[Prayer Warrior]

On that we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Amen, sister, I agree with you 100% about this!

 

[amadeus]

Ah, yes, never alone!

Any given night, I may be awake in the middle of the night. It seems to go in cycles with me. I just haven't figured out the cycles.

This is how mine is... sporadic may be a good word to describe the frequency...LOL

 

[brakelite]

- People having lived as spirits before mortal birth & believing Jeremiah 1:5 literally is indeed LDS Christian doctrine and a central one. I very much believe this.

This is the only scripture reference you offered in explanation of your beliefs, and one that can be easily explained without forming doctrines that teach pre existent life. The doctrine your church teaches regarding life before physical birth gives rise to numerous other questions, the answers to which get more and more bizarre. For example... is it true therefore that those spirits were the result of a union between God and a wife?

- Anything about the Father's past is a speculative topic, and not remotely a central belief. You'll find LDS Christians all over the spectrum of beliefs on this (including many who haven't even thought about it). To approach this subject requires a lot of pre-discussion about God, LDS Christians not accepting Creedal philosophy, and the role of prophets, that LDS Christians don't believe in automatic infallibility, etc.

Now, and for the remainder of your answer, you speak of what 'LDS Christians' believe. I don't want to know what the majority, or minority, of what your members believe...I want to know what your church actually teaches on that particular subject. While what the members may believe can be subjective, doctrine as is written in your 'scriptures' is not. Your members may believe different variants of the doctrine...I want to know where they all sourced it from.

- The "planet" thing is a gross mischaracterization. LDS Christians believe that in the eternities that Christ's disciples will become fully like Him, through His power.

Again... What does the church teach as doctrine... Not what some members believe. If it is a mischaracterisation then what is the true teaching?

- Outward symbols are contextual, just like any other teaching tool, used to convey a certain message to a particular student body. The tool isn't remotely the actual message.

I'm sure it isn't. Yet the tool is still compulsory... It is still seen as having sacred value without whichi presume one will not advance to the divine state one is seeking without her tool right?

- Baptisms for the dead takes a lot of clarification what is actually meant-- you'd be amazed how many people think it involves corpses or that "makes Frank a Mormon". But once clarified on what is actually going on, very much believed.

I don't doubt there is a lot of confusion over it. No surprise there. What is not confusing is that your church carries out baptisms for dead people who lived lives of flagrant disobedience and debauchery... Never sought forgiveness of sin.... Had no desire for righteous living... No heart for God... And were quite content with their lot. Baptism for anyone absent... Let alone dead... Is a flagrant denial of what baptism means and what it represents.

- Believing that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the most correct church and other folks have some manner of things wrong: yes. Likewise does every other person in the world think their beliefs are the most correct and other people diagreeing means they got something wrong.

Most Christian denominations differ on their interpretation of scripture... Even Catholicism has scripture... And the Protestant beef with them is their claim to be the only true authority in interpreting scripture, and their acceptance of tradition in interpretation.
But the LDS by your own admission doesn't even consider the Bible it's sole source of authority... Your church has added several other books which have equally been acquired and accepted as scripture. So when you say you are the most correct, the most correct of what? The most correct of churches that accept several different works of literature as scripture? Of course you are. You are the ONLY church that accepts those particular books as scripture. But are you the most correct of churches that accept the Bible as it's only authority? Sorry, but you don't even come into that category. So your argument doesn't wash.

How are you defining "Biblical"?

If define "Biblical" as something that is in accordance to the Bible and God's Truth.

biblical means in accordance and not in contradiction to biblical truth. One can do or believe in all manner of things which are not taught in scripture... Like believing we inherit planets and procreate more little Jane Does with numerous wives... Not taught in scripture but it is in contradiction to scripture. So. Unbiblical. Same with preincarnation.

 

[aspen]

This is the only scripture reference you offered in explanation of your beliefs, and one that can be easily explained without forming doctrines that teach pre existent life. The doctrine your church teaches regarding life before physical birth gives rise to numerous other questions, the answers to which get more and more bizarre. For example... is it true therefore that those spirits were the result of a union between God and a wife?


Now, and for the remainder of your answer, you speak of what 'LDS Christians' believe. I don't want to know what the majority, or minority, of what your members believe...I want to know what your church actually teaches on that particular subject. While what the members may believe can be subjective, doctrine as is written in your 'scriptures' is not. Your members may believe different variants of the doctrine...I want to know where they all sourced it from.

Again... What does the church teach as doctrine... Not what some members believe. If it is a mischaracterisation then what is the true teaching?

I'm sure it isn't. Yet the tool is still compulsory... It is still seen as having sacred value without whichi presume one will not advance to the divine state one is seeking without her tool right?


I don't doubt there is a lot of confusion over it. No surprise there. What is not confusing is that your church carries out baptisms for dead people who lived lives of flagrant disobedience and debauchery... Never sought forgiveness of sin.... Had no desire for righteous living... No heart for God... And were quite content with their lot. Baptism for anyone absent... Let alone dead... Is a flagrant denial of what baptism means and what it represents.

Most Christian denominations differ on their interpretation of scripture... Even Catholicism has scripture... And the Protestant beef with them is their claim to be the only true authority in interpreting scripture, and their acceptance of tradition in interpretation.
But the LDS by your own admission doesn't even consider the Bible it's sole source of authority... Your church has added several other books which have equally been acquired and accepted as scripture. So when you say you are the most correct, the most correct of what? The most correct of churches that accept several different works of literature as scripture? Of course you are. You are the ONLY church that accepts those particular books as scripture. But are you the most correct of churches that accept the Bible as it's only authority? Sorry, but you don't even come into that category. So your argument doesn't wash.
biblical means in accordance and not in contradiction to biblical truth. One can do or believe in all manner of things which are not taught in scripture... Like believing we inherit planets and procreate more little Jane Does with numerous wives... Not taught in scripture but it is in contradiction to scripture. So. Unbiblical. Same with preincarnation.

Um...Ellen White

 

[Jane_Doe22]

This is the only scripture reference you offered in explanation of your beliefs, and one that can be easily explained without forming doctrines that teach pre existent life. The doctrine your church teaches regarding life before physical birth gives rise to numerous other questions, the answers to which get more and more bizarre. For example... is it true therefore that those spirits were the result of a union between God and a wife?

Not in any way you're thinking of with a birth canal, lots of screaming, and a person coming to be that didn't exist at all 12 month before hand.

Now, and for the remainder of your answer, you speak of what 'LDS Christians' believe. I don't want to know what the majority, or minority, of what your members believe...I want to know what your church actually teaches on that particular subject. While what the members may believe can be subjective, doctrine as is written in your 'scriptures' is not. Your members may believe different variants of the doctrine...I want to know where they all sourced it from.

There isn't a single scriptural / autoreactive statement on the subject. LDS Christian readily acknowledge that we don't know everything about God and His ways. This subject isn't taught at all in any official authoritative capacity.

There's a grand total of two original speculative quotes on matter, which don't hold any "thus saith the Lord" wait. The wide variety of different views is the totality of the subject. And none of those views are what a Creedal Christiana would be thinking here, because LDS Christians don't subscribe to the Creeds.

Again... What does the church teach as doctrine... Not what some members believe. If it is a mischaracterisation then what is the true teaching?

Addressing the planet thing again:
"...These limitations make it easy for images of salvation to become cartoonish when represented in popular culture. For example, scriptural expressions of the deep peace and overwhelming joy of salvation are often reproduced in the well-known image of humans sitting on their own clouds and playing harps after death. Latter-day Saints’ doctrine of exaltation is often similarly reduced in media to a cartoonish image of people receiving their own planets.… "

Source: Becoming Like God Emphasis mine. ​

The same link talks extensively about actual LDS beliefs here. The short of it is that LDS Christian believe that disciples of Christ become like / one with Him and the Father. John 17 is a beautiful chapter, talking about that oneness.

I don't doubt there is a lot of confusion over it. No surprise there. What is not confusing is that your church carries out baptisms for dead people who lived lives of flagrant disobedience and debauchery... Never sought forgiveness of sin.... Had no desire for righteous living... No heart for God... And were quite content with their lot. Baptism for anyone absent... Let alone dead... Is a flagrant denial of what baptism means and what it represents.

You're missing the critical part beliefs LDS Christians do believe that a soul who's body has deceased still has a living soul that can embrace Christ.

I don't know what you belief in what happens to folks that lived & died without ever hearing about Christ is.[/QUOTE]

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I don't doubt there is a lot of confusion over it. No surprise there. What is not confusing is that your church carries out baptisms for dead people who lived lives of flagrant disobedience and debauchery... Never sought forgiveness of sin.... Had no desire for righteous living... No heart for God... And were quite content with their lot. Baptism for anyone absent... Let alone dead... Is a flagrant denial of what baptism means and what it represents.

Brakelite, you make some very good points. Here's what Lynn Wilder explains about her experience with baptisms for the dead.

The following excerpt is from Unveiling Grace: the Story of How We Found Our Way out of the Mormon Church by Dr. Lynn Wilder:

Each time we returned to the temple after that initial visit, we received the same ordinances by proxy for someone who was dead. In other words, we went through the temple ordinances in place of a person who was dead, in their name, so he or she could accept or reject the ordinances of baptism, washing and anointing, the endowment, and marriage sealing wherever they were in the afterlife (paradise or spirit prison). This was their chance to hear and accept the Mormon gospel, in case they had not heard it while alive, so they could progress to the highest rung of the celestial kingdom. I could bring names of my dead ancestors who needed their work done, or the temple would provide me with names from lists submitted by people doing genealogy.​

Wilder, Lynn K.. Unveiling Grace (pp. 73-74). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
​

 

[brakelite]

Um...Ellen White

Yes, revealed many things not recorded in scripture... But nothing that was contrary to scripture. And certainly nothing by way of DOCTRINES. All doctrine is based on scripture alone... Not on the writings of EG White.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Most Christian denominations differ on their interpretation of scripture... Even Catholicism has scripture... And the Protestant beef with them is their claim to be the only true authority in interpreting scripture, and their acceptance of tradition in interpretation.
But the LDS by your own admission doesn't even consider the Bible it's sole source of authority... Your church has added several other books which have equally been acquired and accepted as scripture. So when you say you are the most correct, the most correct of what? The most correct of churches that accept several different works of literature as scripture? Of course you are. You are the ONLY church that accepts those particular books as scripture. But are you the most correct of churches that accept the Bible as it's only authority? Sorry, but you don't even come into that category. So your argument doesn't wash.

For LDS Christian, the highest authority is God Himself. Not any book, Creeds, or man's thoughts. God.

biblical means in accordance and not in contradiction to biblical truth. One can do or believe in all manner of things which are not taught in scripture... Like believing we inherit planets and procreate more little Jane Does with numerous wives... Not taught in scripture but it is in contradiction to scripture. So. Unbiblical. Same with preincarnation.

That is your interpretation.​

 

[brakelite]

Not in any way you're thinking of with a birth canal, lots of screaming, and a person coming to be that didn't exist at all 12 month before hand.

Introducing a straw man is a great deflection. Question. What was God before He was God?

 

[brakelite]

For LDS Christian, the highest authority is God Himself. Not any book, Creeds, or man's thoughts. God.

That is your interpretation.​

You have doctrines based on speculation. That does not make God your authority. It makes you your own authority.

 

[aspen]

Yes, revealed many things not recorded in scripture... But nothing that was contrary to scripture. And certainly nothing by way of DOCTRINES. All doctrine is based on scripture alone... Not on the writings of EG White.

Please
Continuing revelation is a no-no and you know it
No difference between Ellen and Joseph

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Introducing a straw man is a great deflection.

It's not a deflection, it's addressing what I've found most Creedal Christians are thinking when they ask that question. And no, nothing like that.

Question. What was God before He was God?

By "God" here you are referring to the Father specifically. I just addressed the subject of the Father's past:

There isn't a single scriptural / autoreactive statement on the subject. LDS Christian readily acknowledge that we don't know everything about God and His ways. This subject isn't taught at all in any official authoritative capacity.

There's a grand total of two original speculative quotes on matter, which don't hold any "thus saith the Lord" wait. The wide variety of different views is the totality of the subject. And none of those views are what a Creedal Christiana would be thinking here, because LDS Christians don't subscribe to the Creeds.

 

[aspen]

One person condemning another for following a false prophet
Because their prophets don’t agree

I will get my popcorn

 

[Jane_Doe22]

You have doctrines based on speculation. That does not make God your authority. It makes you your own authority.

For an LDS Christian, somethings are indeed Thus Saith the Lord. Why does an indicviaul believe that? Because they asked God.

Other subjects do ahve specualtion in them, and hence why I highlight when that's the case.