User talk:69.234.195.3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Mormons

I saw your edit on the Mormonism page; which rumors were you asking about? I would be more than happy to be of any assistance I can be. --Storm Rider (talk) 21:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mormonism rumors

I've heard lots of rumors about Mormonism. One rumor is that Mormons practice polygamy. That doesn't affect the debate either way, as polygamy is allowed in Christianity, but the polygamists can't become deacons, and the Bible appears to say that monogamy is better. Another rumor is that Mormons believe that the mark of Cain was dark skin. If the rumor was true, it would make it hard for Mormons to say they are Christian because such a belief is not in accord with Galatians 3:28. I also heard rumors that wife-swapping occurs in Mormon circles. If the rumor were true, Mormons couldn't be Christians because such a practice goes against the 7th Commandment. (Exodus 20:14) However, if the rumors were false, Mormons could still easily be Christian. I've also heard rumors that Mormons believe that they can become like god. If the rumor is true, it would be hard for Mormonism to be Christian because Christ said "35But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels." I've even heard rumors they believe the Jesus Christ came to the Americas and that Mormons are waiting for Christ's third coming, not his second. (Luke 20: 35-36) Finally, I heard a rumor that Joseph Smith was a Freemason. I don't know whether it would affect whether Mormonism was Christian because I don't know much about Freemasonry, but I've heard rumors that Freemasonry is Satanic. Which of these rumors are true, and which of these aren't? It is because of these rumors that I am not sure if Mormonism is Christian. --69.234.195.3 (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's take them as you have asked them:

  1. Latter-day Saints practiced polygamy until 1890 when it was stopped. Since that time any member practicing polygamy is excommunicated from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
  2. Mark of Cain - there have been some LDS theologians who have taken the position you have offered and others that have not. Gal 3:28 does not seem to support your premise i.e. there is nothing about the mark of Cain in it or anything about being a true Christian means believing a specific set of doctrines including this one.
  3. LDS believe and follow the law of chastity, which is not man or woman will participate in sexual relations before being married and after marriage any sexual relations with anyone other than one's spouse is considered adultery. Wife swapping would be pure rumor.
  4. being a god - You might want to review Theosis. The bible says that we are joint-heirs with Christ. If the Bible is true a joint-heir means inheriting the same thing as Jesus does. LDS assume that means we will be one with Christ and the Father.
  5. Jesus in America - The Book of Mormon is a history of the Lord's dealings with the some of the peoples of this continent whereas the Bible is a record of God's dealings with the peoples in and around Jerusalem. The Book of Mormon recounts how Jesus visited this continent after his crucifixion. That visit would not be considered the second coming; remember when he comes the second time he will come in all glory and all will bow and acknowledge him as Savior and Lord.
  6. Joseph Smith was a Freemason for a short period of time (about 45 days if I recall correctly); it would not be appropriate to think of him as a long-time member or even active member, but rather a someone who participated for a short time and moved on.

Definition of Christian: one who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. LDS believe that Jesus was the only Begotten Son of the Father, born of the virgin Mary, lived a perfect life, was crucified for our sins, rose the third day, returned to the Father and will one day return again. LDS believe that one must be born of water (baptism) and the Spirit (Gift of the Holy Spirit); it is only through Jesus Christ that one can be saved. LDS also believe that faith without works is dead. LDS believe these things denote and define the major beliefs of Christianity. All other beliefs are secondary. No individual belief is so great that its belief negates the saving power of Jesus Christ i.e. If you believe the major things stated above, you cannot believe some individual doctrine that is so powerful that Jesus is prevented from saving you. I hope I have been of assistance to you. Cheers. --Storm Rider (talk) 23:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to look into the thing about becoming a God (I'm not sure that one is Biblical) but otherwise Mormonism seems to be another sect, just like Catholicism, Protestantism, and Orthodoxy. To respond to your claim that the Mark of Cain doctrine would not contradict Galatians 3:28, it states that: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." This basically means that all Christians are equals. This means we are all equals in Christ, no matter whether or not we are white, black, yellow, brown, red, gray, blue, or green. The Mark of Cain doctrine says that darker skinned people are inferior. --69.234.195.3 (talk) 00:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
LDS doctrine does not say what the mark of Cain was except that it was sufficient to identify the person as such and to make others aware not to harm the individual. Some have postulated that it is a black skins and, as I have said above, others have said otherwise. It has alsobeen applied to those who mock God and reject his teachings. All the children of God are equal in his sight; there is not one valued more than the other.
I am curious, define joint-heir with CHrist? What do you think a joint heir is? Also, what do you think these scriptures mean: Psalms 82:6, Isaiah 41:23, and John 10:34. These are in both the Old and New Testament; it is very hard to say the concept of being gods is not Biblical. Many, if not most, of the early church fathers taught the concept. More importantly, Jesus taught it. I look forward to your thoughts. --Storm Rider (talk) 01:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
You are correct in stating that we are joint-heirs with Christ. The question is, are we joint-heirs of God's position, or are we heirs of God's blessings? That's what I hope to find out. Psalm 82:6 does say "ye are gods" but Psalm 82:7 says "But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes." Since gods are immortal, I don't think they meant literal gods. Isaiah 41:23 does say that "Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together." However, we must look at the context. Isaiah 41:21-24: “Present your case,” says the LORD. “Set forth your arguments,” says Jacob’s King. 22 “Bring in your idols to tell us what is going to happen. Tell us what the former things were, so that we may consider them and know their final outcome. Or declare to us the things to come, 23 tell us what the future holds, so we may know that you are gods. Do something, whether good or bad, so that we will be dismayed and filled with fear. 24But you are less than nothing and your works are utterly worthless; he who chooses you is detestable." I think that the king is asking them to show that they are gods, not declaring "ye are gods." However, this is only my guess. I had trouble figuring out what John 10:34 means.

The context of Psalms makes the verse not applicable to the present topic and should not be used to support the proposition of the other verses. For LDS when we read that we are joint-heirs with Jesus we take him at his word. What cannot be said is that the position is not Biblical. One may argue that we will be joint-heirs, but not fully an heir. However, that position is not supported by scripture; it adds to what the verse states. LDS would say that an heir inherits all that the Father has. It does not say we become the Father, but he recognizes us as joint-heirs with Christ. It would be hard for me to believe that Jesus would inherit something "less" given that he is the Son of God. St. Athanasius of Alexandria wrote, “God became human so humans would become gods” St. Maximus the Confessor wrote, "A sure warrant for looking forward with hope to deification of human nature is provided by the incarnation of God, which makes man god to the same degree as God Himself became man." and "let us become the image of the one whole God, bearing nothing earthly in ourselves, so that we may consort with God and become gods, receiving from God our existence as gods." These are just two of the patristic fathers that taught this position; many, many others taught the same thing. The teaching seemed to fall out of favor by the 8th and 9th centuries; it did not die out, just was not a focus in the west. The Eastern Orthodox continued to teach it. The bottom line is that attempting to judge LDS as nonChristian because of this belief is not supported by scripture; you might interpret the scriptures differently, but you cannot say it is not Biblical. --Storm Rider (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

If things are taken out of context, there is greater room for misinterpretation. For example, atheists criticize Christianity by claiming that we are Antisemitic. Although Antisemitism is wrong and goes against Galatians 3:28, so-called "Christians" (I have doubts believing these Anti-Semites truly ARE Christians) would back antisemitism by calling Jews "Christ-killers". However, these people don't mention that Jesus, Virgin Mary, Joseph, and the Disciples were all Jews, and that not all Jews took part in convincing the Romans to crucify Jesus. In fact, when Jesus returned from the dead, he first appeared to two Jewish ladies, and they were happy to see him. In addition, they forget that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) Another example would be the story of Cain. "This punishment is more than I can bear!" If we left out the part where Cain murdered Abel, people might think that Cain's punishment was too harsh. The context is important to understanding that verse.--69.234.181.45 (talk) 18:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I think you miss my point; the scripture in Psalms has nothing to do with the topic. Do you see a relationship between Psalms and the verse regarding being joint-heirs? --Storm Rider (talk) 18:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I thought you were saying that the context of Psalms didn't matter. To get back on topic, the question is, joint-heirs of what? Joint-heirs of everything (including his position), or merely joint-heirs of God's blessings upon us? For example, I don't get to inherit my father's position as a purebred Caucasian because my mother is Asian. If I were to have a pure Caucasian half-sibling, we would be equal heirs of my father's property, but not of his ethnic composition. We can think of being Christ joint-heirs in a similar way. Since Christ is God, he is going to get a position as a God. But since we are not, we will merely get a fair share of God's blessings.I'm not saying this to be racist, but to merely create an analogy. --69.234.181.45 (talk) 18:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Let's just stick to the topic for now, which began as are the "rumors" true and if Mormons may not be Christian because they hold beliefs that are contrary to the Bible. My objective is not to identify the true rumors and not to prove the truth of the LDS position, but only to show you that the beliefs are Biblcal. In this topic I believe I have shown you that the beliefs are Biblical or that they were not created from nonBiblical sources. We may interpret the scripture differently, but you cannot say that it is impossible to have an interpretation given the scripture.
To reply specifically to your statement above LDS believe that Jesus is the only Begotten Son of the Father. LDS believe that God the Father and the Son are two separate beings. This contradicts the position held by all Christians that follow the Nicene Creed created in 325 AD that stated that the Father and the Son are one. LDS believe they are one in purpose, but separate beings. This is the old argument on the Trinity and its provenance. Although I understand where most Christians get this belief from scripture; it seems they also have to overlook all the scriptures that would conflict with it. Again, the issue is can the Bible support a belief. --Storm Rider (talk) 19:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
To reply to what you say about the belief that we can become God being supported by the Bible, I suppose it is, but only when the Bible is taken out of context. As for the Trinity it's difficult to understand. They are three persons, but are one God. But then, I can't understand how God made the world. I know he spoke, and it was done, but how does it work? We can comprehend the inner workings of machines and plants and animals, but we are unable to understand the inner workings of God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.211.216 (talk) 16:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

(newindent) You are speaking about the principle of being able to learn a doctrine, but not being able to understand it. That is the interesting thing about the Bible, its interpretation is left open to each of us to be guided by the Spirit. However, it is not acceptable to say being a joint-heir is somehow taken out of context just because you disagree with its interpretation. As for me, I will believe that we are joint-heirs with Christ and I choose not to limit that inheritance in any manner. It is interesting that the early church fathers taught this principle; you can not get much clearer than St. Athanasius of Alexandria saying, “God became human so humans would become gods”. As I stated above, he is not the first nor the last. So many of the early leaders of the Christian movement acknowledged this teaching. One thing that should be understood is the LDS believe that just because God will make us joint-heirs through Christ does not mean we believe that we will ever be equal to God the Father; throughout eternity he will always be our God and Jesus will be our eternal Savior. --Storm Rider (talk) 07:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

For Athanasius, I'll have to take your word for it, as the article doesn't contain info on whether he said God wanted us to become like him or not. You say that he will always be our God. How would that be if we were to become a god? Of course, Jesus would still be our eternal Savior because he is the one who saved us from our sins. It is a very confusing topic.
Hello Anon, I read your new addition today. What is interesting about polygamy is that it is not condemned. My personal take on it is that it is not for everyone. Notice that only prophets and kings were polygamists in the Bible and not just anyone. Regardless, no LDS practices polygamy today. If they do, they are immediately excommunicated. When the church ordained polygamy in its early days only 3 to 20% of the members were asked to participate. It was not something for everyone. Interesting topic, but certainly not one that Christians or Jews can condemn the LDS people for practicing unless they also deny some of he greatest prophets of the Old Testament. --Storm Rider (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
That's true. The Bible also says to have respect for authority, and polygamy is condemned by the laws of many countries today. While polygamy isn't condemned, it appears to cause problems. Sarai kicked out Hagar, and Rachel and Leah were obvious rivals. David had so many wives he couldn't keep an eye on his kids, and that had negative results as well. Since monogamists can become deacons but polygamists can not, it seems to suggest one wife is better also. Like I said before, polygamy isn't condemned, but it isn't encouraged either.