Mormonism and the Trinity

[zerinus]

The LDS church teaches that the church of the Devil is the evil and worldly organizations that pervert the pure and perfect gospel of Jesus, and fights against the Lamb of God.

Wrong! I never cease to be amused by people who seem to think they know what I believe better than I do. In LDS theology, â??church of the devilâ? is never identified with any particular â??organization(s),â? but with certain type of people. It is always identified on an individual basis, not organizational basis. You become part of the church of the devil on the basis of how you behave, not what church of organization you belong to. I had already quoted you 1 Nephi 10:16 which identifies the church of the devil as those who â??fight against Zion,â? regardless of what their affiliation might be. In the story of the First Vision, the Lord did not identify any particular organization as evil, or church of the devil, but certain individuals:

JS-History 1

:

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those

professors

were all corrupt; that: â??they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereofâ?.

The â??corruptionâ? belonged to the professors, not to all the individuals that belonged to those â??organizationsâ?. There is no such thing as an organization without its members. A church that doesnâ??t have any members doesnâ??t exist. Section 10 of the Doctrine and Covenants was received before the LDS Church had been organized. Notice how in it the Lord identifies the righteous members of those churches as His church:

D&C 10

:

53 And for this cause have I said: If this generation harden not their hearts, I will establish my church among them.

54 Now I do not say this to destroy my church [which already exists], but I say this to build up my church [which already exists];

55 Therefore, whosoever belongeth to my church [which already exists] need not fear, for such shall inherit the kingdom of heaven.

56 But it is they who do not fear me, neither keep my commandments but build up churches unto themselves to get gain [i.e. the â??professors,â? the ministers, the activists], yea, and all those that do wickedly and build up the kingdom of the devilâ??yea, verily, verily, I say unto you, that it is they that I will disturb, and cause to tremble and shake to the center.

Notice how the emphasis is always on individuals, not on churches or organizations. The same organization may contain both members of Godâ??s true Church, as well as those who â??build up the kingdom of the devilâ?. You decide on which church you belong toâ??the church of God or the church of the devilâ??by how you behave, not by which denomination you are a member of.

In D&C 18:20 the Lord counsels Church members to â??Contend against no church, save it be the church of the devilâ?. If all churches constituted the church of the devil, what then are those churches which are not the church of the devil, against whom we are not supposed to contend? So there is a difference between the church of the devil and all other churches. The â??church of the devilâ? consists purely of the wicked people of the earthâ??but especially of those who â??fight against Zionâ?. Its members are found everywhere, including among the Mormons. You decide which church you belong to by how you behave, not by your denominational affiliation.

So if other church's teach creeds that are abominations before God, as the POGP teaches, then by the LDS church's definition all other church's are the church of the Devil.

See above. There is no such thing as a church devoid of its members. If half of its members are virtuous and the other half are wicked, they are not all equal in the sight of God just because they all belong to the same church. Only the wicked ones are of the church of the devil. It is true, however, that the Lord tends to identify the leadership and the activists in those church for particular censure, because they are the ones who are often the flag-bearers of those who â??build up churches unto themselves to get gain,â? and who â??build up the kingdom of the devil,â? and who, consequently, are most vocal in â??fighting against Zionâ?.

This is what the church teaches the Church of the Devil is.

It does? Amazing! And how come you think you know what I believe better than I do?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It does? Amazing! And how come you think you know what I believe better than I do?

I was going to write something but at the risk of Markk not getting it I will hold my fingers.

[clairc829]

I was going to write something but at the risk of Markk not getting it I will hold my fingers.

Wise reaction Mark does not appear to be interested in learning, only in telling what we believe. Which isn't close to what I believe.

[Greg Smith]

Now, Blair, note two things here: (1) I don't deny them import of your question, sans further possible qualification. (2) But, secondly, note that you are

White as fair, balanced, respectful in regards to Mormonism?

I disagree.

Now, Blair, note two things here: (1) I don't deny them import of your question, sans further possible qualification. (2) But, secondly, note that you are not quoting anything I've written here.

I can't believe I almost forgot White's famous What's With The Dudes At The Door? a book apparently written to protect Christian Youth from the danger of The Cults.

I find it particularly funny, since the language is trying to be hip, but it's about as hip and contemporary (and as "edgy") as those breakfast cereal commercials that use electric guitars with feedback and kids on skateboards to prove how "radical" or "awesome" or "cowabunga" they really are. In other words, the sort of "cool" that 30something white guys in PR departments dream up, but makes anyone under 25 roll their eyes.

I refuse to believe that Christian Youth are this, well, square.

Anyway, there's a nice list of some of White's balanced, fair, and respectful remarks in an on-line (I cannot, I must confess, claim to have read this opus of Mr. White's, but if anyone will send me a copy I would be glad to!):

"[Cults] follow fake faiths. Goofed-up gospels." (p.12) "...they don't know the real God of Christianity." (p.12)

"...deadly snakes...the ones that wrap around your neck, that drop from trees, that gnaw you to nothing. Or murder you with one fang." (p.12)

"That doesn't mean that cults don't slither in the grass...[or] make their bites any less spiritually deadly." (p.13)

"...weirdo cults...on the news - the ones that more or less kidnap people and vacuum out their brains." (p.13)

"[speaking of cults at your door] But they also sound like vacuum cleaner salesmen - the harmless vroom-vroom-get-the-dirt-out-of-your-carpet kind, not the hazardous brain-suctioning kind. If that's what you think, think again - while you still possess your brain." (p.13)

"Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are the two largest counterfeit Christian groups in the world." (p.14)

"What cults teach, spiritually speaking, is an eternal enchilada short of a Tex-Mex combo." (p.17)

"...their beliefs can't be called Christian." (p. 26)

"Cults bring spiritual death to those who cling to their misshaped gods." (p.36)

"...those guys had a spiritual death ray fixed on your forehead." (p.42)

"...grossly moldy Heresy Hotdish." (p.45)

"The scariest cults browbeat you and give you a cyanide-punch gargle. The smoothest cults deceive you with sweetness - a toothy little bit country, little bit rock 'n roll," (p. 50)

"Cults abuse and misuse Bible teachings..." (p.67)

"...Mormons...the cultists you're most likely to run into." (p.74)

"It sounds wacko..." (p.88)

"No one can stop cultic groups from offering funky versions of God." (p.111)

"However weird or wonderful they may look on the outside, cults are all spiritually deadly. They swallow you whole. They digest you down to the bone and then dispose of your soul." (p.132)

"That's the shot you need to kill the faith-eating bacteria of the cults." (p. 141)

On-line here: http://www.fairlds.org/Reviews/Rvw01012.html

All this, and I'm supposed to be impressed because James White doesn't like the street screechers making anti-Mormons look like raving loons? Is there anything that they say that's worse than this little litany? I've seen a lot of the photos, and this list is far more offensive: especially because its being offered to children/youth, who are presumably more vulnerable to thinking this kind of rhetoric and attitude toward those not of their faith is both "christian" and "acceptable."

Here's hoping someone complained to White's "supervising church."

I think SOMEONE has drunk the "cyanide punch gargle" in the above material. But, I don't think it's the Mormons....

Greg

[Daniel Peterson]

I'd forgotten about many of those wonderful comments, Greg. Thanks for supplying the list.

I feel so terribly awful, by comparison, for having called Mr. White "Dr. Dr." on account of his two claimed doctorates (i.e., totally out of the blue).

How odious! How juvenile! How vicious! How horrible! And especially in view of the kindly, charitable way he always treats us and our faith.

[Greg Smith]

I feel so terribly awful, by comparison, for having called Mr. White "Dr. Dr." on account of his two claimed doctorates (i.e., totally out of the blue).

How odious! How juvenile! How vicious! How horrible! And especially in view of the kindly, charitable way he always treats us and our faith.

I'm afraid the secret is now out:

I, on the other hand, look like He-Man.

Greg: by the Power of Numbskulls.....

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I'm afraid the secret is now out:

I, on the other hand, look like He-Man.

Greg: by the Power of Numbskulls.....

Both have some striking similarities, how ever I think one is more blue or purple than the other.

[Daniel Peterson]

Dang. I was hoping that nobody would ever put those two pictures of me side by side.

As to cksalmon, though:

I wonder if he's ever thought to rebuke Mr. White for one or two of the many really remarkable things that Mr. White has said about Mormons and Mormonism. If so, I'd love to see what he said, and how Mr. White responded.

cksalmon has certainly tried to make quite a big deal out of the ineffable horror of referring to someone who claims two doctorates as "Dr. Dr."

[Markk]

Hi Z, (Mola) (Clair)

Wrong! I never cease to be amused by people who seem to think they know what I believe better than I do.

When did I ever say "what you believe?" What I said very clearly is what the LDS church teaches, your history of LDS theology in this thread, from eternal progression to the definition of the "church of the Devil" is defenitly not what the church has taught. So again I never said you believe anything other than what you post on this site.

You Wrote:

In LDS theology, â??church of the devilâ? is never identified with any particular â??organization(s),

I didn't just make up what I wrote Z, it is a teaching on LDS.org

The church of the devil: Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God.

That is a direct pasted quote... http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search...l&do=Search ( edit)...It is in study helps under church of the devil.

Like I said before, given that the Christian organizations that were told through JS vision that their creeds (articles of faith, statements of faith) were an abomination, and the very clear teaching that all Christian organizations were/are in a complete state of apostasy, and on a side note your saying I belonged to an aposate church (many times) on this thread. There is really no way around that.

So the LDS church is very specific as to who belongs to the church of the Devil.

Kent Jackson wrote in the Ensign speaking of the apostasy of the Christian Church... (Dec.84)

The â??man of sin,â? generally equated with Satan, 7 would exalt himself over all that is divine and assume the place of God in the Church. Of historical and theological significance is the fact that in Paulâ??s prophecy the church structure survives. But God is not at its head, making that churchâ??following the appearance in it of Satanâ??no longer the church of God.

So again by the official definition the church gives, it is by "organizations" that the LDS church defines the church of the devil, not by "individuals" as you claim. So I am accurate in my statement that what the LDS church teaches on this issue.

Take care

Mark

John 1:12

[jwhitlock]

As you like, j.

It's not just "plausible," jwhitlock, but antecedently, in fact, necessary.

I hope to have done.

Non-answers.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Thanks, Greg. With that list in mind I hope CK will answer my question:

Do you believe White's interaction with Mormonism is generally forceful yet measured, balanced and respectful?

[Calm]

Here's hoping someone complained to White's "supervising church."

He is the director of the Ministry and from the website, it does not appear that there is any "supervising church" over/sponsoring him.

[jwhitlock]

He is the director of the Ministry and from the website, it does not appear that there is any "supervising church" over/sponsoring him.

Sure there is. It's described in I Ne 14.

[jwhitlock]

I find it interesting that because JW has been driven away from General Conference by other sincere preachers seeking to save Mormons from themselves, we must now assume that it is proof that he has some kind of benign respect for Mormons and Mormonism.

I'm having trouble making that connection, given the large amount of written evidence on his web site that indicates a very studied lack of respect for the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Hi Z, (Mola) (Clair)

When did I ever say "what you believe?" What I said very clearly is what the LDS church teaches, your history of LDS theology in this thread, from eternal progression to the definition of the "church of the Devil" is defenitly not what the church has taught. So again I never said you believe anything other than what you post on this site.

Take care

Mark

John 1:12

Whoa, could you skew it any more than you have? The LDS Church has never come out and said that the Baptist are the church of the devil, or any other group specifically. You have failed to post anything that has given your point of view any credence. Sorry. You are simply wrong again. Stop it.

IOW, what I beleive is what my church teaches. You are the one that thinks it is teaching something else.

[Markk]

Hi Mola,

The LDS Church has never come out and said that the Baptist are the church of the devil, or any other group specifically

.

The church of the devil: Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God.

The LDS church "specifically" teaches that "every" evil and worldly organization that perverts the true gospel of Christ. Given that the LDS church has taught that they alone are the only true form of Christianity and that they alone are the only true Church, and that Christianity is "so-called", I take that as being specific enough. I am glad though you do not hold to this LDS teaching.

IOW, what I beleive is what my church teaches.

What might that be?

Thanks

Mark

[zerinus]

Whoa, could you skew it any more than you have? The LDS Church has never come out and said that the Baptist are the church of the devil, or any other group specifically. You have failed to post anything that has given your point of view any credence. Sorry. You are simply wrong again. Stop it.

IOW, what I beleive is what my church teaches. You are the one that thinks it is teaching something else.

Thank you Mola. Saved me the trouble!

[zerinus]

The church of the devil: Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God.

That is how somebody who wrote that article in the "Guide to the Scriptures" has chosen to interpret or understand the scriptural passages. It is not necessarily an accurate representation of LDS doctrine. As I have shown in my previous posts, other more logical ways of understanding the scriptural passages is possible.

[scooby]

Never mind mail-order doctorates, I want to buy me an "et al." to put at the end of my name.

Scooby, et al.

[Daniel Peterson]

Just send me $200, and you can have a really nice et al. to go after your name.

My et als. are, I can honestly say, the best in North America.

[Greg Smith]

That is how somebody who wrote that article in the "Guide to the Scriptures" has chosen to interpret or understand the scriptural passages. It is not necessarily an accurate representation of LDS doctrine. As I have shown in my previous posts, other more logical ways of understanding the scriptural passages is possible.

Even this quote isn't really saying anything different: "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God."

Most denominations on earth do not "pervert" the gospel--they've never HAD it to pervert. As I said earlier, they're victims of the apostasy of the 1st-2nd centuries.

And, most denominations do not spend their time fighting against the Lamb of God (or His Church, in either a denominational or apocalyptic sense). There are a few conservative protestants whose entire or main religious undertaking seems to be the critique or attack upon others' religions, but they are (happily) a distinct minority (albeit vocal).

I think we have a quorum of Mormons here, though. We could always agree to grant Markk honorary official membership in the Church of the Devil if he is determined to have us place him there. All in favor, please activate your brain chips, and prepare to sacrifice the goats to the dark gods upon my signal from the mothership. Markk, if elected, you are assigned to put away the chairs after the meeting through all eternity.

:-)

Greg

[AngelPalmoni]

Of course the church isn't going to name the church of the devil if it were to be as specific as a denomination that would be just REALLY BAD PR. Not that we care about PR, because all we should care about is doing the will of the Father in reguards to His Church. If God wanted us to publically name the church of the Devil then we would, but I think he just wants individual members to figure that out. And then if you figure it out, you can't tell anyone because then you become the crazy doctinal nut in the ward which is who we all want to be anyways.

I mean it's not like the cross is the sign of the beast, or that God doesn't work through those denominations to further His Work on earth.

Everyone will be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints soon anyway, why fight it....

~Angel Palmoni~

[Daniel Peterson]

I'm more than willing, personally speaking, to recognize Markk as a member of the Church of the Devil.

He seems to want it very badly, and I see no real reason to deny him his wish.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Even this quote isn't really saying anything different: "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God."Most denominations on earth do not "pervert" the gospel--they've never HAD it to pervert. As I said earlier, they're victims of the apostasy of the 1st-2nd centuries.And, most denominations do not spend their time fighting against the Lamb of God (or His Church, in either a denominational or apocalyptic sense). There are a few conservative protestants whose entire or main religious undertaking seems to be the critique or attack upon others' religions, but they are (happily) a distinct minority (albeit vocal).I think we have a quorum of Mormons here, though. We could always agree to grant Markk honorary official membership in the Church of the Devil if he is determined to have us place him there. All in favor, please activate your brain chips, and prepare to sacrifice the goats to the dark gods upon my signal from the mothership. Markk, if elected, you are assigned to put away the chairs after the meeting through all eternity.:-)Greg

Greg, once again you are absolutly right. Nice jokes too.

I'm more than willing, personally speaking, to recognize Markk as a member of the Church of the Devil.He seems to want it very badly, and I see no real reason to deny him his wish.

I concour. I guess Markk is our guy.

[Markk]

Hi Z,

That is how somebody who wrote that article in the "Guide to the Scriptures" has chosen to interpret or understand the scriptural passages.

None the less, it is an official LDS teaching, and the definition the LDS church chose for "the church of the Devil". It also agrees with other teachings by past GA. It is a Church teaching, yours is not.

The LDS church teaches they are the only true Church, and the only true Christianity on the earth today scene 1830, that seems to be right in line with the LDS definition. The BoM teaches that Church of the Lamb of God are the saints, is there saints in other church's, in that the LDS definition of a saint is one that has been baptized and confirmed in the church. The problem here is that the LDS church teaches that no other church has the authority (priesthood) to baptize and confirm, so again, this is a problem for your interpretation, remember in the same chapter in question the BoM says that the Church of the Lamb of God are the saints.

Your method of interpretation here is eisegesis, your interpretations are based on your own preconceived ideology, and your ignoring past teachings by those that have authority to speak for the church in doctrine when you do not. This does not make your interpretation wrong, or theirs right, but your is not an official LDS teaching while the other interpretations are. That said we should continue to test your interpretations with theirs and see if yours compliment or contradict LDS official doctrine.

Thanks for your time

Mark

John 1:12