LDS and other churchs

[Katzpur]

LDS vs. Christian (Evangelicals anyway...)


LDS: God was once a man who attained the station of godhood (King Follett Sermon [or KFD]).

Christian: God has always been God (Psalm. 90:2).

***

LDS: "Full" Salvation, or Eternal Life is defined as attaining godhood yourself and populating new worlds which you create (KFD).

Christian: Eternal Life is being one with God and living with Him for the rest of eternity. There will be rewards and new opportunities to serve (Revelation 21). "Before me [God] no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me" (Isaiah 43:10).

***

LDS: Salvation is therefore something which you achieve by obedience to the Law with God's Help.

Christian: Salvation is something God does to you through faith. Obedience is the grateful response (Romans 3).

***

These are the three biggest differences in my view. Also implicit in these differences is a different view of revelation. The LDS teach that new revelation can override the old, whereas the Christians will (or would) only accept that which compliments the old, and nothing that contradicts it.

The LDS faith starts with a negative declaration: "All other churches are false, the Gospel must be restored." The Christian faith starts with the positive declaration: "The scriptures prophesied the Messiah, He has come and He has risen." Both statements are taken on faith, but which is more sound?

With the Christian faith you need only believe that God told us what He was going to do and did it. With LDS faith you have believe that the death of 12 good men, the laziness and corruption of others, and perhaps even the schemes of the Devil were enough to undo what God had done to the point where a whole new fresh start was needed. I don't have that kind of faith.

I just love your "Christian" attitude. How about you stick to telling us what you believe and let the Latter-day Saints explain LDS doctrine. You obvious have a pretty warped concept of what we believe. I guess maybe your source of information may have been a tad biased. You didn't even use one official source of doctrine, but you probably didn't even know that. Would you go to a Muslim for the most accurate information on Judaism or visa versa? I wouldn't. If I wanted to really understand the teachings of Judaism, I'd ask a Jew. Likewise, if I were a non-Mormon who wanted to know the truth about what the Latter-day Saints believe, I'd steer clear of people whose agenda is to misrepresent our faith.

 

[Katzpur]

What about the magic underpants? Don't you guys believe in magic underpants?

What kind of a person goes around asking total strangers about their underpants?

 

[Katzpur]

They sell "salvation" in exchange for giving wealth, loyalty and obedience to the church.

That is absolute b***s***.

 

[Father Heathen]

That is absolute b***s***.

I'm talking about all large churches and organized religions. Where do you think their wealth and political influence comes from?

 

[Katzpur]

You are side stepping the issue. Do you, or do you not believe that a Christian like me believes in a different kind of God than you do?

A different kind of God? What kind of God do you believe in, and where does the Bible support your kind of God?

LDS God starts as a man and advances to Godhood.
Xtian God is always God, comes to earth as a man while remaining God.

Wrong. We believe the words of John 1:1-3 every bit as much as you do.

John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

I know in LDS teaching that there are different levels of Salvation. But isn't the "Fullnes of Salvation" defined as Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom, and Exaltation being Godhood and eternal progression as well as procreation?

Yes. So what's your point? The Bible doesn't say that, so it's false?

I am not saying that LDS do not also believe in the Resurrection. The point is that before you can accept the LDS faith as legitimate you must believe that all other christian faiths are false (similar to Islam where it is also taught that the Christians and Jews corupted the Bible, so the Koran was needed). Otherwise there is no need for a Restoration, Book of Mormon, a Prophet or any LDS Church.

Do you believe that the teachings of all Christian churches are true? If the answer is "yes," how do you reconcile the contradictions between them? Should I name a few to get you started?

After the negative, then comes the positive assertions (which we tend to agree on). Christianity didn't start with "Judaism is false," just "He is risen." See the difference?

Our perspective is not as you present it. Our perspective is that, over the many centuries since Christ lived, certain doctrines were lost or misunderstood. We believe that these doctrines have been restored, that's all. We don't think of all other churches as being "false"; we think of them as having a certain amount of truth, but believe we can add to the truths they have. Do you see the difference? If you don't, we can take it from there, but it seems pretty obvious to me that no two of all the thousands of Christian denominations in the world can both be teaching 100% true doctrines if any of those doctrines contradict each other.

I'm not talking about "how do you get saved" formulas here. This goes back to the negative and positive starting points for the two different faiths. With the LDS faith you have to believe in a total Apostacy of the Church, occurring shortly after the deaths of the 12 (again, without which there is no need for the Mormon faith).

Unless you're a Catholic, you believe in an apostasy, too. If there had been no apostasy, there would have been no need for the Protestant Reformation.

 

[Katzpur]

I'm talking about all large churches and organized religions. Where do you think their wealth and political influence comes from?

I make it a practice to speak only for my own faith, and not for "all large churches and organized religions." Some may be guilty of what you've accused them of, but you've made a blanket statement that you can't possibly prove. Of course their wealth comes from the contributions of their membership. That's no indication that they're "selling salvation." What they do with their wealth is far more important than how much wealth they have.

 

[raibeart]

I make it a practice to speak only for my own faith, and not for "all large churches and organized religions." Some may be guilty of what you've accused them of, but you've made a blanket statement that you can't possibly prove. Of course their wealth comes from the contributions of their membership. That's no indication that they're "selling salvation." What they do with their wealth is far more important than how much wealth they have.

Actually, there are churches that do "sell" salvation. A perfect example would be the Iglesia Ni Cristo, which require you to offer not only every Sunday, but also every "thanksgiving" (different form of thanksgiving then we think of in America.) Many churches actually require you to "offer" a good majority of your income.This for one is why I left the Iglesia Ni Cristo.

 

[ChristineES]

I don't know about any other faiths, but in mine-- you must repent of your sins, ask God (or Jesus) into your life, and as a symbol of that you get baptized. The baptism isn't what saves you, it is God that saves you.

 

[jonny]

So that's a "yes" on the magic underpants, right?

No. I think that's a "we're not going to bother discussing something like that with you when you start the conversation with the tone you chose."

 

[Katzpur]

So that's a "yes" on the magic underpants, right?

What on earth led you to that conclusion?

 

[inquirer_Jn1717]

Whoo... Katzpur, I am not your enemy! :bow:

But I do know what I'm talking about. Yes, I do talk to Mormons I meet, especially the missionaries, and I read as much as I can get my hands on (both "pro" LDS and "anti.") Below are some quotes supporting what I've said about what the LDS Church teaches, but unfortunately this website will not yet allow me to post the links to show you the full text (I haven't reached 15 posts yet).

Joseph Smith, King Follett Sermon, April 7, 1844:

“The scriptures inform us that ‘This is life eternal that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.’…”
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man…”
“We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea…”
“…He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth…”
“…and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves… the same as all gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead…”
“…[you] shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power…”
“The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal with God himself…”
“God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself. …”
“The first principles of man are self-existent with God.”

Gospel Principles, page 9:

Because we are made in his image (see Moses 6:9), we know that God has a body that looks like ours. His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones (see D&C 130:22). God’s body, however, is perfected and glorified, with a glory beyond all description.
God is perfect. He is a God of love, mercy, charity, truth, power, faith, knowledge, and judgment. He has all power. He knows all things. He is full of goodness.
All good things come from God. Everything that he does is to help his children become like him—a god. He has said, “Behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39).

As a Christian I cannot accept any of these statements as truth. Yes, I believe that God is perfect and is Love and so on, but on the whole they simply fly in the face of Scripture. I would have to accept that the Scriptures had been thoroughly corrupted to accept what the LDS Church teaches. But the manuscript evidence going as far back as c.100 A.D. (or 100 B.C. for the OT), while littered with errors, shows no doctrinal changes.

There is no scripture that would support the idea that God is human (no matter how exalted), or that there was ever a time when he was not God, or that humans are also self-existent, or that we ought to be about becoming Gods ourselves. But if you were unaware that your church teaches these things then you need to wake up. I've already cited scripture supporting what I've said in the previous post.

 

[inquirer_Jn1717]

Inquirer:
LDS God starts as a man and advances to Godhood.
Xtian God is always God, comes to earth as a man while remaining God.

Katzpur:

Wrong. We believe the words of John 1:1-3 every bit as much as you do.

John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Are you aware of the Joseph Smith translation of this verse?

"In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God" -John 1:1, JST.

 

[jonny]

I don't think that contradicts any point that Kathryn was trying to make. In fact, it supports her point.

 

[Charity]

Oh my Gosh! Katz, here we go again.............:thud:

 

[inquirer_Jn1717]

Do you believe that the teachings of all Christian churches are true? If the answer is "yes," how do you reconcile the contradictions between them? Should I name a few to get you started?

No, I do not believe every other church teaches everything correctly and that LDS are the only ones who have it wrong. I don't reconcile the contradictions between a charismatic, catholic, baptist, or lutheran--they are all right and wrong on different things, but united on certain core doctrines (which LDS depart from).

Our perspective is not as you present it. Our perspective is that, over the many centuries since Christ lived, certain doctrines were lost or misunderstood. We believe that these doctrines have been restored, that's all. We don't think of all other churches as being "false"; we think of them as having a certain amount of truth, but believe we can add to the truths they have. Do you see the difference? If you don't, we can take it from there, but it seems pretty obvious to me that no two of all the thousands of Christian denominations in the world can both be teaching 100% true doctrines if any of those doctrines contradict each other.

Unless you're a Catholic, you believe in an apostasy, too. If there had been no apostasy, there would have been no need for the Protestant Reformation.

No, I don't have to believe that Catholics are apostates. The reformers said worse things about the Catholics, and especially the Pope. But despite all the differences, the Catholics that I know believe the same gospel and God.

However Joseph Smith's first vision says a little more than "we think of them as having a certain amount of truth, but believe we can add to the truths they have"...

"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong...all the their creeds are an abomination in his sight..." Joseph Smith History 1:19, Pearl of Great Price.

 

[inquirer_Jn1717]

I don't think that contradicts any point that Kathryn was trying to make. In fact, it supports her point.

how so?

 

[Father Heathen]

Some people prefer the comic book version of Batman, while others prefer the movie version of Batman, but they're still both Batman.

 

[inquirer_Jn1717]

Oh my Gosh! Katz, here we go again.............:thud:

you too huh?

 

[Katzpur]

Whoo... Katzpur, I am not your enemy! :bow:

Well thanks for the heads up. Sometimes it can be awfully darned hard to tell.

But I do know what I'm talking about. Yes, I do talk to Mormons I meet, especially the missionaries, and I read as much as I can get my hands on (both "pro" LDS and "anti.") Below are some quotes supporting what I've said about what the LDS Church teaches, but unfortunately this website will not yet allow me to post the links to show you the full text (I haven't reached 15 posts yet).

Go ahead and quote from the King Follett Discourse if it makes you happy. Just be aware that it is not doctrinally binding on the members of the Church.

As a Christian I cannot accept any of these statements as truth. Yes, I believe that God is perfect and is Love and so on, but on the whole they simply fly in the face of Scripture.

Could you be more specific?

I would have to accept that the Scriptures had been thoroughly corrupted to accept what the LDS Church teaches. But the manuscript evidence going as far back as c.100 A.D. (or 100 B.C. for the OT), while littered with errors, shows no doctrinal changes.

If we believed that the scriptures (i.e. the Bible) had been "thoroughly corrupted," we wouldn't use them as extensively as we do. I don't believe they are full of "doctrinal changes" either. As a matter of fact, I believe I can support LDS doctrine as well using the Bible alone as you can support your church's doctrines. It's not so much that the Bible is "littered with errors" as it is with the way in which its message has been interpreted. The gospel of Jesus Christ has been reduced to what the LDS would describe as "the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture."

There is no scripture that would support the idea that God is human (no matter how exalted), or that there was ever a time when he was not God, or that humans are also self-existent, or that we ought to be about becoming Gods ourselves. But if you were unaware that your church teaches these things then you need to wake up. I've already cited scripture supporting what I've said in the previous post.

I have been a member of my Church for close to 60 years, and can assure you that my understanding of what its doctrines are exceeds your by far. Properly understood, none of LDS doctrine contradicts what the Bible teaches, even though someone with a limited understanding of it may believe it does. Any time you would care to explore some of these specific doctrines in greater depth, I am open to the challenge.

 

[Katzpur]

No, I don't have to believe that Catholics are apostates. The reformers said worse things about the Catholics, and especially the Pope. But despite all the differences, the Catholics that I know believe the same gospel and God.

It's not a matter of what the Reformers said about Catholics. It's a matter of doctrinal differences that are, in some cases, pretty significant. If your church teaches the same gospel as the Roman Catholic Church and as the 30,000+ other Christian denominations in the world today, why do those many, many denominations even exist? They are NOT "the same gospel" and you ought to know it. They all teach that Jesus Christ is the Savior sent to atone for our sins -- not that that's a minor point. Nevertheless, once you get past that point, you start seeing the differences. I could name well over a dozen doctrines upon which Catholics and Protestants can't agree, among them whether salvation is by faith in Christ alone or faith in Christ as evidenced by the believer's works.

However Joseph Smith's first vision says a little more than "we think of them as having a certain amount of truth, but believe we can add to the truths they have"...

Yes, it does. But you have to consider the context in which it came to be. We do believe that "the Creeds" are an abomination in the sight of God. I'm not going to pussyfoot around that. We don't believe the men who wrote them were inspired by God. They may or may not have been well-meaning and sincere; unfortunately, that doesn't mean their words were divinely mandated or approved. That is not to say that we believe that we're the only "real" Christians. We are far more accepting of other Christian denominations than most of them are of us. How many LDS-sponsored anti-Baptist, anti-Lutheran or anti-Catholic websites are there out there on the internet as opposed to anti-Mormon sites? How often do you find Latter-day Saints picketing the dedication of a new Methodist Church? How often do the Latter-day Saints show anti-anybody-else movies to "educate" its members? Sometimes it really irks me to be told I'm not a Christian, but most of the time, I'm getting to where I think, "Why would I want to be associated with such judgmental, self-righteous people?"