Why should I believe in your religion and faith?

[Katzpur]

You have great conviction about the Mormon religion! But does passion and sincerity make something true?

Of course not. Not any more than numbers. Truth exists independently of how we feel and how many of us feel it.

I find it interesting that you chose Matthew 16:15-17 to use to support your faith. Are you aware that the Roman Catholic Faith uses Matthew 16:15-18 to support their faith too...Peter being the rock that Christ built His church. Both churches uses the Apostle Peter to support two mutually exclusive conclusions...

That's true, they do. I am familiar with the Catholic Church's stance on what Christ meant when He said that "the gates of Hell would not prevail" against His Church. We believe that, too, but we don't interpret it the same way they do. Obviously. By the way, would you mind commenting on Paul's prophesy that there would be a "falling away" of the Church as well as a "restitution of all things" prior to Christ's Second Coming? Do you think he knew what he was talking about, particularly when considered along with the quote from Matthew 16?

Since the Mormon Church uses both the Christian Bible and the Book of Mormon as revelation from God, which book is used as authoritative when the two books conflict?

The two never conflict, so there is never an issue of which one is authoritative. The entire purpose of the Book of Mormon is to serve as yet another witness to the divinity and saving power of Jesus Christ and to testify that the message of the Bible is true. It teaches that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God and the sole means by which we can obtain remission of our sins, and it does so from the first page to the last. This may not be a great analogy, but take it for what it's worth. Does a good college biology textbook contradict a good high school biology textbook? I don't think it does, although it would undoubtedly contain certain information absent in the high school textbook. If it contains additional information which does not conflict with what is in the high school text, can you think of a good reason not to use it?

It seems the Mormon Faith is based on two things to make it true, as you wrote before.

1. The original church is apostate.
2. God chose Joseph Smith to restore the apostate church.

Yes, that's essentially my position.

I'm not sure if you tried to write why the Mormon Church is the one true church as compared to the Roman Catholic Church, or Orthodox Church. It is my understanding that the Book of Mormon is more authoritative than the Christian Bible. Doesn't that position make the Mormon claim to be based on circular reasoning, since the Book of Mormon is taught to be authoritative over all other books. This seems strange since the book is less than 200 years old.

Well, I hope I cleared your misunderstanding up in my first paragraph. The Bible and the Book of Mormon are equally authoritative since they originate from the same source. You seem to believe that the Book of Mormon is less than 200 years old. While it is true that it was published less than 200 years ago, believers are convinced that it was translated from an ancient text. I'm not sure how that makes our reasoning circular, but if that's how you see it, so be it.

Are you familiar with the Roman Catholic revelation called sacred tradition. I believe the Roman Catholic religion is based on the Christian Bible and sacred tradition. They seems to share the same circular reasoning that the Mormon Church teaches, but the source added to the Christian Bible are different. For the Mormon it's the Bible and Book of Mormon. For the Roman Catholic, it's the Bible and sacred tradition.

Yes, I know all about sacred tradition. This is not the same thing as "revelation," however. Revelation involves communication between Heaven and Earth. The Catholic Church teaches, on one hand, that "public revelation" (i.e. revelation between God and His Church) ceased with the deaths of the Apostles. (Interestingly, they got that part right. It did cease for quite a number of years. ) On the other hand, though, they teach that the Holy Ghost directed the Council of Nicea in formulating a creed that would forever afterwards define "God" for Christianity. Personally, I don't think you can have it both ways. Either revelation ceased or it didn't. And with respect to tradition, there is nothing wrong with tradition, as long as it is based upon true doctrine. It's when it is based upon the philosophies of men that it becomes a problem.

I have also seen a pattern of religious institutions teaching that correct interpretation of the Christian Bible can only be found from within the institution claiming to be the one true church. Do you see how that removes objective reasoning? I think if a person buys into the idea that the one true church has the authority to tell what is true, than that person looses all possibility to examine the teaching from the institution claiming to be the one true church. It seems the Mormon Church is very similar to the Roman Catholic Church in that regards.

Yes, we are. The opposite point of view gets you nowhere, though, and seems to me to promote the pluralism you're trying to get away from. If there is one "true Church," then it does hold the authority of which you speak. If there isn't, then we might as well each just pick the one that makes us feel most warm and fuzzy.

Hmmm. Nice pictures. I like the one of the Temple better.

By the way, Hunter, I know you haven't come to any conclusions yet as to what direction you're intending to take, but if I haven't said enough by now to at least make you want to pursue Mormonism further, with a completely open mind to what it claims to be, I would appreciate it if you would just tell me now. I'd rather part friends with our conversation at a standstill instead of continuing to spend as much time trying to "sell" my religion as I have the last few days. You seem to be a sincere person and I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for sooner or later. I guess what I'm saying is that I feel as if you've pretty much already made up your mind that when it comes to absolute truth, Mormonism is not where it's at. If that's the case, I would suggest that you just tell me and let your search take you elsewhere. No hard feelings. You've been a real gentleman and I've enjoyed talking to you.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Of course not. Not any more than numbers. Truth exists independently of how we feel and how many of us feel it.

That's true, they do. I am familiar with the Catholic Church's stance on what Christ meant when He said that "the gates of Hell would not prevail" against His Church. We believe that, too, but we don't interpret it the same way they do. Obviously. By the way, would you mind commenting on Paul's prophesy that there would be a "falling away" of the Church as well as a "restitution of all things" prior to Christ's Second Coming? Do you think he knew what he was talking about, particularly when considered along with the quote from Matthew 16?

The two never conflict, so there is never an issue of which one is authoritative. The entire purpose of the Book of Mormon is to serve as yet another witness to the divinity and saving power of Jesus Christ and to testify that the message of the Bible is true. It teaches that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God and the sole means by which we can obtain remission of our sins, and it does so from the first page to the last. This may not be a great analogy, but take it for what it's worth. Does a good college biology textbook contradict a good high school biology textbook? I don't think it does, although it would undoubtedly contain certain information absent in the high school textbook. If it contains additional information which does not conflict with what is in the high school text, can you think of a good reason not to use it?

Yes, that's essentially my position.

Well, I hope I cleared your misunderstanding up in my first paragraph. The Bible and the Book of Mormon are equally authoritative since they originate from the same source. You seem to believe that the Book of Mormon is less than 200 years old. While it is true that it was published less than 200 years ago, believers are convinced that it was translated from an ancient text. I'm not sure how that makes our reasoning circular, but if that's how you see it, so be it.

Yes, I know all about sacred tradition. This is not the same thing as "revelation," however. Revelation involves communication between Heaven and Earth. The Catholic Church teaches, on one hand, that "public revelation" (i.e. revelation between God and His Church) ceased with the deaths of the Apostles. (Interestingly, they got that part right. It did cease for quite a number of years. ) On the other hand, though, they teach that the Holy Ghost directed the Council of Nicea in formulating a creed that would forever afterwards define "God" for Christianity. Personally, I don't think you can have it both ways. Either revelation ceased or it didn't. And with respect to tradition, there is nothing wrong with tradition, as long as it is based upon true doctrine. It's when it is based upon the philosophies of men that it becomes a problem.

Yes, we are. The opposite point of view gets you nowhere, though, and seems to me to promote the pluralism you're trying to get away from. If there is one "true Church," then it does hold the authority of which you speak. If there isn't, then we might as well each just pick the one that makes us feel most warm and fuzzy.

Hmmm. Nice pictures. I like the one of the Temple better.

By the way, Hunter, I know you haven't come to any conclusions yet as to what direction you're intending to take, but if I haven't said enough by now to at least make you want to pursue Mormonism further, with a completely open mind to what it claims to be, I would appreciate it if you would just tell me now. I'd rather part friends with our conversation at a standstill instead of continuing to spend as much time trying to "sell" my religion as I have the last few days. You seem to be a sincere person and I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for sooner or later. I guess what I'm saying is that I feel as if you've pretty much already made up your mind that when it comes to absolute truth, Mormonism is not where it's at. If that's the case, I would suggest that you just tell me and let your search take you elsewhere. No hard feelings. You've been a real gentleman and I've enjoyed talking to you.

HI Katzpur,

I would ask that you would not dust off your sandals too quickly, unless you feel that your faith is being shaken just a tiny bit. I think you could use a little testing because of your lifetime LDS background, living in Salt Lake City. It seems through your personal experience, you were almost destined to be a Mormon. As I mentioned before, I know some wonderful Mormon families. They all seem to have a genealogy link to Joseph Smith, or other historical leaders from the Mormon church. Do you or your husband have a genealogy link to Joseph Smith, or other historical leaders from the Mormon Church? I would like to ask more theological questions about the Mormon Faith, if that would be possible. I do enjoy discussing things with you. I hope you didn't think I would convert to Mormonism in a few days. You had the advantage of being raised in the Mormon Faith since birth. When did you really embrace the Mormon Faith; did it take years? I request that you pray for patience with your discussions with me, and will not take the easy way out and flee. I am asking for you to invest the time and energy on my behalf for the sake of truth. We are like-minded in our definiton of truth. I'm willing to follow that path of absolute truth.

For me, it would be easier to ask you difficult questions about your faith as compared to Mormon friends that I have, or to have the young Mormon missionaries visit my home. I have spoken to a few in the past, and find the missionaries to be coached very well. I personally believe the Mormon missionaries are really too young to know anything different than what they were taught as Mormon children. Most of them have not experience enough life, or have even tested the faith of their childhood. Here's the first question.

It appear you stated that the Bible never conflicts with the book of Mormon. I'm not sure if that's a true statement, because the Mormon site and missionaries teach that the church believes in the Christian Bible to the point it is correctly translated. So, who determines when a bible passage is not correctly translated? I also read that Joseph Smith tried to translate the Bible, but the Mormon Church chooses to use the King James Bible instead. It also seems that the Mormon Church calls the Book of Mormon as being more trustworthy than the Bible. So to say that the Bible and the Book of Mormon never conflicts cannot be an honest statement, since statements above have to be officially made. Do you think I have made a fair assessment and observation by stating that the Mormon Bible is considered more authoritative over the Christian Bible? If you remove the Mormon Bible from your religion, does the Mormon Church become just like any other traditional church? How do you refute Protestant Christians who teach that the Christian Bible is authoritative over religious men who claim authority over the Bible? I hope you are willing to invest additional time to honestly contemplate the questions before answering. I hope you are honest with yourself and not settle for answers that the Mormon Church has taught you to believe over the years. Finding the absolute truth has a cost attached to it.

Kathryn, it seems to me that the Bible verse below is apporpriate. Please let me explain. You were born and raised in a Mormon family. You live in Salt Lake City which is the headquarters of the Mormon Church. You also live in the state which consists of an extremly large number of LDS Christians in comparison to the other 49 states. Therefore, you have been saturated with the Mormon Faith through circumstances beyond your control. Maybe that is providential (big religious word...lol). Now within the Bible verse below, the verse appears to be saying..." will the absoulte truth proclaimed by the Mormon Church stand up to examination of others not raised in a similar circumstances?". I admire your conviction and love for the truth. Are you willing to continue with me on the journey to find absolute truth...wherever the road takes us? If the objective absolute truth is found in the Mormon Faith, don't you think God is directing you to help me find it? Remember, absolute truth is objective and remains...apart of what people believe.

Proverbs 18:17:
The first to present his case seems right,
till another comes forward and questions him.

Your friend,

Fish-Hunter

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

I want to explore spiritual things that cannot be seen.

Most commendable: I wish you good hunting!

Why is your particular religion or faith more truthful than another one?

It isn't.

I'm a Baha'i (pronounced "ba-HIGH"), and in the Baha'i view ALL the great religions are legitimate and God-sent, each a stage in a single ever-evolving faith, the Faith of God!

I quote from the Baha'i scriptures:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."

-- (The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, page 114)


And the scriptures of various religions both command search "Test the spirits" and promise we'll be rewarded if we do! ("Seek and ye shall find!") The fact that you already want to do this is an excellent sign!

Nor will I presume to tell you what religion you should be! In the Baha'i view, that's strictly YOUR decision, and one that no one else has the right to make for you. (This is in accord with our central principle we call Individual Investigation of Truth.)

So again, I wish you good hunting, and offer my warm regards!

Bruce

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Greetings!



Most commendable: I wish you good hunting!



It isn't.

I'm a Baha'i (pronounced "ba-HIGH"), and in the Baha'i view ALL the great religions are legitimate and God-sent, each a stage in a single ever-evolving faith, the Faith of God!

I quote from the Baha'i scriptures:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."

-- (The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, page 114)


And the scriptures of various religions both command search "Test the spirits" and promise we'll be rewarded if we do! ("Seek and ye shall find!") The fact that you already want to do this is an excellent sign!

Nor will I presume to tell you what religion you should be! In the Baha'i view, that's strictly YOUR decision, and one that no one else has the right to make for you. (This is in accord with our central principle we call Individual Investigation of Truth.)

So again, I wish you good hunting, and offer my warm regards!

Bruce

Thank you for the warm and kind posting. My experience on this religious forum site has been great. I want to thank everyone who has been willing to share with me. I look forward to reading additional views and wisdom shared by others. By the nature of the subject, I wouldn't be surprised if the discussions can get heated at times.

 

[sandandfoam]

I want to explore spiritual things that cannot be seen. The universe is too big to believe that spiritual things do not exist. There are so many religions and I don't know where to start. Why is your particular religion or faith more truthful than another one?

I think religions are just tools for understanding.
Which one is most truthful depends on the person considering them. I'm Irish and I find much in Celtic Christianity that resonates with me, it provides me with a good starting point. I'm prepared to take on things that seem true to me wherever I find them.
I don't expect to find the truth. But I enjoy looking for it.

 

[Katzpur]

HI Katzpur,

I would ask that you would not dust off your sandals too quickly, unless you feel that your faith is being shaken just a tiny bit.

You can't possibly be serious. What on earth would have prompted you to say a thing like that?

I think you could use a little testing because of your lifetime LDS background, living in Salt Lake City. It seems through your personal experience, you were almost destined to be a Mormon.

Don't you think that's a little bit presumptuous on your part? You really know very little about me. Had I been born into a non-LDS family and then converted to Mormonism, I suspect you'd be more willing to consider the possibility that my beliefs are a result of something besides blind faith.

Suppose I am born into an LDS family and remain LDS throughout my life. Let's say I have a daughter (we'll call her Ann) whom I raise LDS, but who eventually converts to Islam. She has a son (we'll call him Bob), and raises him as a Muslim. He ends up converting to the Baha'i Faith, marrying and having a daughter (we'll call her Christine). Christine is raised a Baha'i but converts to Mormonism. We've come full circle in four generations, but somehow Christine ends up being seen as open-minded enough to convert to a new religion while I'm obviously just a blind follower of what I've always been taught.

Sixteen or eighteen years ago, I heard for the first time the statement that Mormons aren't Christians. I was dumbfounded as to how anyone who had any knowledge of my faith at all could make such an ignorant remark. That's how my interest in LDS apologetics took root. For more than a third of my life, I have been studying the issues that critics of my faith throw out. I've been listening to their questions and searching for the answers. I have tried to objectively consider their perspective (when it's not so distorted as to be laughable) and not ignore any actual facts that they've brought to my attention. I've delved into the history of the Church and have examined its doctrines in far greater depth than I believe the average Latter-day Saint to have done. I have a fairly good-sized library of books written by both Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint authors on a wide variety of religious topics. So please don't imply that I'm a Mormon because I was "destined" to be one. Nobody is destined to be anything other than what he chooses to be. I can assure you that I have chosen my faith carefully.

As I mentioned before, I know some wonderful Mormon families. They all seem to have a genealogy link to Joseph Smith, or other historical leaders from the Mormon church. Do you or your husband have a genealogy link to Joseph Smith, or other historical leaders from the Mormon Church?

I come from a long line of Latter-day Saints, but am not a descendent of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young or any of the other early LDS Church leadership. My husband's parents were both converts to the faith. How odd that all of the LDS people you know have the lineage they do. I say that because nearly two-thirds of the Church's nearly 14 million members today are first-generation converts.

I would like to ask more theological questions about the Mormon Faith, if that would be possible. I do enjoy discussing things with you. I hope you didn't think I would convert to Mormonism in a few days.

By all means, ask away. I am confident that I can answer anything you may come up with. If I can't, I'll tell you that, too, and I'll ask one of the many other Latter-day Saints on the forum for their input. Each of us is more knowledgeable in one area than another. Of course I didn't expect you to convert to Mormonism in a few days. On the other hand, I didn't expect you to cross it off your list so quickly, either. And yes, it really does appear to me that you've done that. That's really no problem for me. I'm not here to convert anyone and, if you recall, I was a little hesitant at first to jump in and start trying to prove to you that my beliefs were any more true than anyone else's. It would be nice, though, if you would simply admit that your interest in Mormonism is nothing more than academic. There is nothing wrong with wanting to become more knowledgable about someone else's belief system, and I can think of no better resource than a practicing member of that faith. I just feel that it would be disingenuous of you to continue to try to put me in a position of feeling as if I have to provide you with evidence that my Church's beliefs are true. I'm much more confortable simply educating you on what we believe any why than I am try trying to convince you of anything.

You had the advantage of being raised in the Mormon Faith since birth. When did you really embrace the Mormon Faith; did it take years? I request that you pray for patience with your discussions with me, and will not take the easy way out and flee. I am asking for you to invest the time and energy on my behalf for the sake of truth. We are like-minded in our definiton of truth. I'm willing to follow that path of absolute truth.

I was relatively lukewarm in my conviction to Mormonism for the first forty years of my life (I am now 59). The strength of my convictions has grown since then by the process I described earlier in this post. I would be happy to continue our conversation, and hope to be able to answer your questions. I will not continue to operate under the mistaken assumption that you are even remotely interested in aligning yourself with the LDS Church. I'm just asking that you be honest with me and admit that.

For me, it would be easier to ask you difficult questions about your faith as compared to Mormon friends that I have, or to have the young Mormon missionaries visit my home. I have spoken to a few in the past, and find the missionaries to be coached very well. I personally believe the Mormon missionaries are really too young to know anything different than what they were taught as Mormon children. Most of them have not experience enough life, or have even tested the faith of their childhood.

That's understandable. Feel free to ask me anything you want. I promise that the information I give you will be as objective and untainted by my rose-colored glasses as you could expect to get from someone with such an "untested, sheltered past" as mine.

I'll get to your first question later. I'm on my lunch hour and must get back to work.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Hi Katzpur,

My last post really got the blood flowing...LOL! Take a deep breath, pray, wait...and then we will continue. My interest is only the truth.

Your friend,
Fish-Hunter

:bkcat: If they are not attacking you, that means they are not worried about you. ~ Katzpur ~

 

[Katzpur]

Hi, Fish-Hunter,

It appear you stated that the Bible never conflicts with the book of Mormon. I'm not sure if that's a true statement, because the Mormon site and missionaries teach that the church believes in the Christian Bible to the point it is correctly translated.

I see what you mean, but to me it's almost a moot point. I'm not sure how many different translations there actually are of the Bible, but I am aware of perhaps a dozen and a half currently in print and know that there are at least five or six used by the majority of English-speaking Christians. If there was a single "correct" translation, this obviously would not be the case. We're not alone in rejecting the notion that the Bible has been preserved and translated perfectly. Are you familiar with the Chicago Statement on Bible Inerrancy? If not, you should familiarize yourself with it. It's not all that different from our eighth Article of Faith -- aside from the fact that it is considerably longer. If you have a specific passage in mind, I would be willing to address your concerns, but in all honesty, my first inclination is to see this as nothing more than nitpicking.

So, who determines when a bible passage is not correctly translated? I also read that Joseph Smith tried to translate the Bible, but the Mormon Church chooses to use the King James Bible instead. It also seems that the Mormon Church calls the Book of Mormon as being more trustworthy than the Bible. So to say that the Bible and the Book of Mormon never conflicts cannot be an honest statement, since statements above have to be officially made.

Here, in Joseph Smith's words, is a statement which should clarify our position on the Bible: "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors. From sundry revelations which [have] been received, it [is] apparent that many points touching the salvation of men, [have] been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled." Joseph Smith claimed a divine mandate to create what he referred to as a "new translation" of the Bible. Technically speaking, what we Latter-day Saints refer to as "the Inspired Version" of the Bible is not a "translation" at all, since Joseph used only the King James Version as his text, seeking guidance from God about corrections that were needed. Here is a typical example of the difference between the two translations:

Here is what Luke 2:46-47 says in the KJV: "And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers."

Here is what Luke 2:46-47 says in Joseph Smith's translation: "And it came to pass, after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, and they were hearing him, and asking him questions. And all who heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers."

In the KJV, Jesus is asking the questions, hearing the answers and giving the answers. In the JST, the doctors were both asking the questions, and listening to the answers which Jesus gave.

Now, with regards to the Book of Mormon, allow me to quote from the cover page: "And now, if there are faults [in this book], they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ." That sounds to me like pretty much the same thing our Article of Faith says about the Bible: God does not make mistakes; men do. There were, in fact, a handful of minor errors in the first printing of the Book of Mormon, mostly because the manuscript was handwritten and was misread in the typesetting process. These have since been corrected. The only reason we believe the Book of Mormon to be more accurate than the Bible is that it has been transcribed once and only once. That is not the case with the Bible. According to a recent statement made by M. Russell Ballard, one of our Church's Apostles, "Brothers and sisters, I am sure many of you have had the experience of hearing people say that “Mormons are not Christians because they have their own Bible, the Book of Mormon.” To anyone harboring this misconception, we say that we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior and the author of our salvation and that we believe, revere, and love the Holy Bible."

You mentioned that "Joseph Smith tried to translate the Bible, but the Mormon Church chooses to use the King James Bible instead." You are correct that we use the King James Version of the Bible. You are not correct in your implied conclusion, that the Church decided that Joseph Smith's translation was less accurate. We do not own the copyright to the Joseph Smith Translation. It is owned by the Community of Christ, the largest of the many splinter groups which formed upon Joseph Smith's murder. The Church's edition of the King James Version does, however, contain footnotes from his translation. We use them in studying the Bible, but mostly just to gain additional understanding. In 59 years of regular church attendance, I cannot remember a single solitary instance in which I have heard the statement, "Now this verse is translated incorrectly. Here's what it should say." We don't pick the Bible apart. We study it and learn from it. We also study and learn from the Book of Mormon and the revealed truths given since the restoration of the gospel began.

Do you think I have made a fair assessment and observation by stating that the Mormon Bible is considered more authoritative over the Christian Bible?

I'm not sure what you mean by "the Mormon Bible." If you mean "the Joseph Smith Translation," yes, we believe it to be more correct than any other translation. If you mean "the Book of Mormon," I think I already addressed that in my previous post (where I compared a college textbook to a high school textbook).

If you remove the Mormon Bible from your religion, does the Mormon Church become just like any other traditional church?

Again, what's the "Mormon Bible"? If we remove the Book of Mormon from our religion, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ceases to exist.

How do you refute Protestant Christians who teach that the Christian Bible is authoritative over religious men who claim authority over the Bible?

The Christian Bible was written by authoritative men. If Protestant Christians believe the Bible to be the ultimate source of authority, I would have to agree with them to a certain extent. There is no one in their respective denominations who speaks with the same authority the writers of the Bible did. What I would probably ask them in return is by what authority do they presume to tell God He's through talking? Where or when has He ever said He has nothing more to say to us? Does He love us less than He loved His children anciently? Are we so sophisticated today that we have all the answers and no longer need His direct guidance? Or has He simply lost the ability to communicate with us?

I hope you are willing to invest additional time to honestly contemplate the questions before answering.

I did honestly contemplate your questions, Fish-Hunter. I hope that was reflected in my answers.

I hope you are honest with yourself and not settle for answers that the Mormon Church has taught you to believe over the years. Finding the absolute truth has a cost attached to it.

Why would I not be honest with myself? Tell me, would you not be the slightest bit insulted if I felt I had to remind you to be honest with yourself? I am no longer searching for the truth. As far as I'm concerned, I've found it. This is not to say that I have stopped learning or questioning or seeking. Mormonism teaches that we should be receptive to the truth, wherever we may find it.

Kathryn, it seems to me that the Bible verse below is apporpriate. Please let me explain. You were born and raised in a Mormon family. You live in Salt Lake City which is the headquarters of the Mormon Church. You also live in the state which consists of an extremly large number of LDS Christians in comparison to the other 49 states. Therefore, you have been saturated with the Mormon Faith through circumstances beyond your control. Maybe that is providential (big religious word...lol). Now within the Bible verse below, the verse appears to be saying..." will the absoulte truth proclaimed by the Mormon Church stand up to examination of others not raised in a similar circumstances?". I admire your conviction and love for the truth. Are you willing to continue with me on the journey to find absolute truth...wherever the road takes us?

Each of us is a product of his environment. The Church is growing worldwide because it can stand up to examination by people of all cultures, educational levels, and economic groups. And as I said before, my mind is never closed to the truth.

If the objective absolute truth is found in the Mormon Faith, don't you think God is directing you to help me find it? Remember, absolute truth is objective and remains...apart of what people believe.

All I can do is honestly answer your questions. If God is directing you to the truth, you will find it in spite of me.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Hi Katzpur,

Thank you for your detailed answers. I will read your complete answers later and will reflect what your have shared. I have two quick thoughts for you.

1. Can I buy a copy of Joseph Smith's translation?

2. Mormons are Christians too. Think about this...you have only shared the Mormon church with me, but you haven't tried to share the person of Jesus Christ. The centrality of Christianity is built upon the person of Jesus Christ, right?

 

[Katzpur]

1. Can I buy a copy of Joseph Smith's translation?

You might try this link: Deseret Book. When I searched that site, I got five hits. I own a copy of the third item listed, and can personally recommend it. I suspect the fifth item would be comparable since the editors/compilers are the same.

2. Mormons are Christians too. Think about this...you have only shared the Mormon church with me, but you haven't tried to share the person of Jesus Christ. The centrality of Christianity is built upon the person of Jesus Christ, right?

Absolutely. You've kept me busy on other topics, though. Any time you want to change directions, let me know.

 

[RedRain]

I'm not exactly sure why my posts are being ignored, it's not that I feel looked over, it's more that I don't think it's proper or right to ignore certain people or concepts. I'm not trying to be defensive, I don't feel personally slighted, I just think it is something you, Fish-Hunter, should think about.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

I'm not exactly sure why my posts are being ignored, it's not that I feel looked over, it's more that I don't think it's proper or right to ignore certain people or concepts. I'm not trying to be defensive, I don't feel personally slighted, I just think it is something you, Fish-Hunter, should think about.

The Swedenborgian Church-Tenets of Swedenborgianism
Summary of New Church Beliefs

RedRain,

You are absolutely right. I do apologize and I am not trying to intentionally ignore or offend you. There is so much to study and think about. Katzpur has currently caught my undivided attention. I do want to study and read your links to your faith in greater depth when time permits. I did do a cursory view of your links with your original posting. How large is your church? I never heard of it before. It must be big in Sweden...I'm just kidding. I read the Swedenborgian Church started in England in the 18th century. I also noted that Emanuel Swedenborg was actually born in Sweden. It seems Swedenborgian Christianity contrasted radically from mainstream Puritan Theology (Calvinism) of 19th century American Christianity. Swedenborg also was a strong believer in free will. Doesn't Mr Swedenborg's first name of Emanuel mean "God with us"..hmm, quite convenient when starting a new sect of Christianity.

I find Swedenborgian Christianity similar to Mormon Christianity in several ways. The Mormon church started with Joseph Smith in 1820 in upstate New York. The first Swedenborgian church in America also can be traced back in the early 1800's too. The Second Great Awakening in America occurred between the 1800 and 1830. All three religious movements appear to teach theology contrary to Puritan Theology of the First Great Awakening in America. It seems the Mormon Church movement relied on the teachings of Joseph Smith to move away from Puritan Theology rooted in protestantism. And the Swedenborgian Church relied on the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg. Both the Mormon Church and the Sweedenborgian Church rejected the idea that Scripture revelation (Christian Bible) was complete and sufficient truth from God. This is just fascinating to me! I guess the battle for authority to determine truth is dependent on what source someone determines as authoritative.

 

[uss_bigd]

It seems the Mormon Faith is based on two things to make it true, as you wrote before.
1. The original church is apostate.
2. God chose Joseph Smith to restore the apostate church.

This is wrong.

Joseph Smith couldnt have been sent by the same God that sent Christ. why? they contradict. and two contradicting concepts cannot be both true.

1 Tim 3:2 states

The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Joseph Smith who built his chruch after the time of christ did not follow a christian doctrine as stated in 1 Tim 3:2. why? research how many wives he had, and how the original doctrine of his church condoned to polygamy.

they will argue that God allowed polygamy in the OT. Joseph Smith did not live during the OT, he lived after the NT. hence, subject to the laws of the NT.

and as the book of hebrews stated. when the priesthood was changed the OT laws was made obsolete.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Hi uss-bigd,

Please share your faith with me.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

You might try this link: Deseret Book. When I searched that site, I got five hits. I own a copy of the third item listed, and can personally recommend it. I suspect the fifth item would be comparable since the editors/compilers are the same.

Absolutely. You've kept me busy on other topics, though. Any time you want to change directions, let me know.

Look what I found on LDS.org! Seek and you shall find...

JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION SELECTIONS FROM
THE JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE
AND
EXCERPTS TOO LENGTHY FOR INCLUSION IN FOOTNOTES

Following are selected portions of the Joseph Smith Translation of the King James Version of the Bible (JST). The Lord inspired the Prophet Joseph Smith to restore truths to the Bible text that had become lost or changed since the original words were written. These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding. The passages selected for the Guide should help improve your understanding of the scriptures regardless of the language into which they are translated.

Because the Lord revealed to Joseph certain truths that the original authors had once recorded, the Joseph Smith Translation is unlike any other Bible translation in the world. In this sense, the word translation is used in a broader and different way than usual, for Joseph’s translation was more revelation than literal translation from one language into another. For more information about the JST, see “Joseph Smith Translation (JST)” in the Guide to the Scriptures.

Joseph Smith Translation

 

[Katzpur]

Look what I found on LDS.org! Seek and you shall find...

JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION SELECTIONS FROM
THE JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE
AND
EXCERPTS TOO LENGTHY FOR INCLUSION IN FOOTNOTES

LOL! Good for you. I hadn't thought to direct you to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

LOL! Good for you. I hadn't thought to direct you to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Good morning Katzpur,

Did you read my post of 132? I edited it quite a bit. Do you agree or disagree with it? Why or why not? I stumbled onto my thoughts this morning because I wanted to study Swedenborgian Christianity due to the encouragement of Redrain.

 

[Draka]

Fish Hunter,

I was wondering, if in your search for "truth" you find yourself leaning specifically towards forms of Christianity alone as having the market cornered on that? You have barely given a blip of acknowledgement to religions outside of the Christian circle. While you asked me a question and I answered, and even furthered clarified my answer, you have not either read them, or not felt like they were worthy of response. If you are only interested in forms of Christianity please let us know so that other philosophies are not bothered to be explained here.

When viewed like that I don't think it can be said that any particular religion is "less accurate". If you and your friend stand in two different spots in a room and both admire the same painting on a wall, is either of your views "inaccurate"? No. You may stand in different positions, hold your heads differently, appreciate different things about the painting, you may even have differing opinions about what the painting represents or what the artist may have been trying to convey,BUT... neither view can be determined as "inaccurate". Merely different.

Much the same when "viewing" Deity. Several different religions may be viewing the same concept of deity, they just merely view it from different standpoints and with different traditions and practices they bring to the table. If you take this view of religion you realize it is not about what is "right" and "wrong", but more about what view you are most comfortable looking through. Whether you prefer standing to the left of the painting, outside, at 12 am, with the full-moon beaming upon you and candles lit all around you, OR kneeling to the right of the painting, at 8 am, holding a small statue in its likeness, with the sun streaming in on your back...you are still looking at the same painting...just in the way that feels best for you to view it in.

See, that's kind of what I am getting at/stressing. With the way I view Deity, the view that gods and goddesses are all manifestations of the Energy Source, then all gods and goddesses exist as equally as others. Allowing that all paths are just as valid for the ones pursuing them. So it is quite honest to say that your way is only for you, for you have found the particular path that your unique view gives you to follow.

At times in your life you may come to crossroads of sorts where, for some reason or another, you find yourself viewing things from a different standpoint. This is where conversions come in.

While I won't say that any religion is "wrong", I will say that some religions don't allow for the larger picture. That they may be very limited in where they can take their standpoints from and, therefore, may not be able to totally view the painting as it is really meant to be seen. Doesn't mean they don't see a bit of it though, they are just a little out of sight and have, perhaps, something blinding them to the whole picture.

As long as all gods and goddesses are all parts of the One Source, then all religions have some portion of the "truth", even if they fail to see the larger picture of the Source of their deities.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Fish Hunter,

I was wondering, if in your search for "truth" you find yourself leaning specifically towards forms of Christianity alone as having the market cornered on that? You have barely given a blip of acknowledgement to religions outside of the Christian circle. While you asked me a question and I answered, and even furthered clarified my answer, you have not either read them, or not felt like they were worthy of response. If you are only interested in forms of Christianity please let us know so that other philosophies are not bothered to be explained here.

I'm sorry Draka. It seems I started a thread that opened a can of worms. I really don't mean to ignore anyone. I am just interested in the truth. I do define truth as absolute. I am interested in all views that believe that truth is absolute. I hope that helps!

 

[Draka]

I'm sorry Draka. It seems I started a thread that opened a can of worms. I really don't mean to ignore anyone. I am just interested in the truth. I do define truth as absolute. I am interested in all views that believe that truth is absolute. I hope that helps!

That doesn't help at all really. What do you mean by "absolute"? That one particular religion out there today has it "nailed down"? That we, as mere humans, have the whole concept of deity described perfectly in one religion? That it is impossible for all beliefs to have a glimpse of the big picture of "truth". That one must be "right" and all other faiths are all sorely wrong?

What is not absolute about believing that the "truth" is so much larger than any one religion has covered?