What Are The Greatest Challenges In Communication For Lds To Non-Lds And Vice Versa.

[thews]

Hi Thews,

I would think the answer would be speculative at best. Not that there is anything wrong with speculation. But the topic has been laid out and I'll leave it where it stands.

Hi Mudcat,

I don't understand what's to speculate?

From FairMormon

http://www.fairwiki.org/Joseph_Smith/Seer_stones

Did Joseph lose the seer stone(s) and/or the Urim and Thummim?

Following the loss of the 116 pages, the Lord told Joseph:

1 NOW, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them.

2 And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened.

3 Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun.

If things trend toward speculative topics, I would be more inclined to introduce the question if they feel Christ's salvific efforts are Universal in a complete sense or if they feel that it is possible that future Christ type individuals must step forward for the sake of many.

Regards,

Mudcat

You're losing me regarding what is speculative, but OK.

[Mars]

thews, cut it out. The topic relates to challenges for dialog between LDS and non-LDS, not a specific subject such as the Urim and Thummim. At best your topic is germane though the "It's tough for me to relate with Mormons because they have so many question marks concerning their faith, and here's one of them." You're coming across as trying to get some digs in. Go start a new thread if you want to strike up a discussion about the Urim and Thummim.

As for calmoriah:

I think this is one area where most LDS hold different assumptions about what "one true Church" implies to most nonLDS so that most LDS don't see this as something beyond "I think you're wrong and you think I'm wrong" but most nonLDS see this as something that is much more aggressive in its condemnation.

Perhaps so, calmoriah. But Catholics claim Apostolic Succession. Muslims claim there can be no son of Allah. We all claim we've got *the* truth, but I think because Joseph Smith published that line about "their creeds are an abomination before me" a lot of folks get upset. I suppose I don't blame them, but I just wish they'd realize that we all think the other guy is wrong.

I do religion, you do magic. I drive fine, you drive like a maniac. I totally get politics and you're a crazy liberal/commie/gun totin' maniac. Me wanting to break the budget for something is entirely reasonable and justifiable but my wife can't stop spending money. The list can easily go on. We'll all find out together what REALLY is going on after we die, so as long as no one wants to rush me to see that day for being a heretic, I guess I just don't get that worked up over it.

Mudcat:

It's tough to be certain without being judgmental. And a lot of us religious types are certain of what we think, believe, feel, and have a witness of. As strongly as I believe, I understand that I don't know. It's still faith. Tons of Mormons say they "know," and I understand that, but me personally, I just really, really, really, really, really really strongly believe. God's a good guy. If we're true to what we've been entrusted with He'll reward us justly, and that includes spiritual understanding and knowledge of His nature and what His will is concerning us. I think we'll be surprised at who we see sitting next to us in yonder Heaven when all is said and done. Maybe my perfect self can play some music with you.

[Calm]

Thanks for this LDST,

Bold mine. This seems to be a fair articulation of the "one true" paradigm.

This is the classic LDS high horse. Christ saves through the authorized priesthood....

Thus all that don't jive with that are unsaved from something, if not hell.

Well it's a good thing Christ put all this salvation "stuff" in the hands of the CoJCoLDS. It's a grand thing he has made it impossible to save anyone without the priesthood of the CoJCoLDS.

edit add...

IMO, the Church saves no one. Christ saves all who would come to him, those who come to him are part of the Church. Given your stance, the CoJCoLDS are the gatekeepers of salvation. I just don't think it works that way.

Mudcat, do you believe that the Israelites had the only authorized priesthood on the earth during biblical times? Asking to clarify your position, not trying to change your mind or do a 'gotcha' or anything but rather trying to figure out the boundaries of your concepts so to speak.

If no, then how do you see the priesthood working during those times....could anyone who desired it sincerely receive it from God?

If yes (only the Israelites possessed the authorized priesthood), what is different today that makes the claim different from what the Israelites claimed and now inappropriate (I am asking not about the LDS claim, but any claim in general to the authorized priesthood which it appears that you disagree is limited in this day and age).

[Mudcat]

Mudcat:

It's tough to be certain without being judgmental. And a lot of us religious types are certain of what we think, believe, feel, and have a witness of. As strongly as I believe, I understand that I don't know. It's still faith. Tons of Mormons say they "know," and I understand that, but me personally, I just really, really, really, really, really really strongly believe. God's a good guy. If we're true to what we've been entrusted with He'll reward us justly, and that includes spiritual understanding and knowledge of His nature and what His will is concerning us.

I would echo your sentiments here Mars. When it comes to faith, the things that I feel certain about are a very short list my salvation through Christ being chief among them.... though there are lots of things I attach to that list that seem to make sense as well in regards to doctrine.

I think what makes communication with LDS a bit difficult for me, is that if I just look at the short list of things I "know" and I apply that to what LDS believe. It doesn't seem to exclude LDS from the possibility of being saved. However it doesn't point towards the CoJCoLDS being the "one true Church". The notion that I firmly believe that I am saved and the notion that salvation can not exist apart from the CoJCoLDS are in diametric opposition.

I think we'll be surprised at who we see sitting next to us in yonder Heaven when all is said and done. Maybe my perfect self can play some music with you.

I think we will all be surprised as well Mars.

Personally I a looking forward to playing a perfect bass guitar and I wouldn't exclude you from a perfect jam session for a minute.

[bluebell]

I think what makes communication with LDS a bit difficult for me, is that if I just look at the short list of things I "know" and I apply that to what LDS believe. It doesn't seem to exclude LDS from the possibility of being saved. However it doesn't point towards the CoJCoLDS being the "one true Church". The notion that I firmly believe that I am saved and the notion that salvation can not exist apart from the CoJCoLDS are in diametric opposition.

I know a Hindu man who feels the same way about Christians (was introduced to him through a 'religious quest' philosophy class at college).

His beliefs do not exclude Christians from an afterlife that is good (his version of being saved), but all the Christians he knows have beliefs that exclude him from the same sort of an afterlife.

HIs beliefs, and those of his Christian friends, are diametricly opposed.

I can empathize with him, but i don't know what else i can do for him.

[TAO]

Thanks for this LDST,

Bold mine. This seems to be a fair articulation of the "one true" paradigm.

This is the classic LDS high horse. Christ saves through the authorized priesthood....

Thus all that don't jive with that are unsaved from something, if not hell.

Well it's a good thing Christ put all this salvation "stuff" in the hands of the CoJCoLDS. It's a grand thing he has made it impossible to save anyone without the priesthood of the CoJCoLDS.

edit add...

IMO, the Church saves no one. Christ saves all who would come to him, those who come to him are part of the Church. Given your stance, the CoJCoLDS are the gatekeepers of salvation. I just don't think it works that way.

Erm... Mudcat... it's not that they are 'unsaved' from something. It's just that the baptism (via proxy) will have to be done later with them.

Considering that they automatically get the chance in the time after this life, it isn't too much of a 'not saved from something' issue, as it is just an explanation as to why the priesthood had to be restored according to God's command. If the priesthood didn't need to be restored, I'm pretty sure God would not have asked it, if you know what I mean.

It really doesn't have to do with LDS being 'higher' than another, it just has to do with doing things 'right'. Doing things because the Lord wants us to. Even if they seem... indirect. We should still do them.

BTW, you do know that the priesthood is received via proxy in the temples? So that wouldn't be a problem... also saving from hell... everyone will suffer hell for their unrepresented sins. Be they of the church or not.

Also, yah, no, the church isn't the gatekeepers of salvation... we don't look at salvation in the same way that Evangelicals do... it's not a 'polar' thing for us. Christ allows us to return to Heavenly Father - and he will do that for every soul, except the sons of perdition. Not just the ones in the church. Every soul upon this Earth which he is assigned to save from spiritual death.

What the priesthood allows us to do is to act in the name of Christ, and to do his works for him. It also allows us to use our faith for certain much more powerful miracles (think moving mountains, splitting the red sea) than we would normally be able to, I believe. Furthermore, it's a command of our God to have it, and so we will, regardless, because it is our duty.

The church is important because it is led by the prophet, who gives advice and commandments from God. It is really important to listen to him, and so that's why the church is important. In addition, blessings come from paying the law of tithing, and for obeying other laws in his church. Thus, those blessings, and the revelation from the apostles and prophets are what makes the church useful, and important. Along with knolwedge that is more clear, that is... as we view things differently than other religions sometimes. For example, that 'save from hell' thing you referred to earlier... we view it much differently... everyone except the SoPs will be saved from hell... it may take a while though, for some.

Mudcat... it is really important... yah gotta stop thinking of the church as a 'polar' being. Cuz it's not. It's weird, yah, I know. But it's not so polar. And this is coming from a person who likes polarity (TAO).

Earnest Wishes, and no offense intended =P,

TAO

[Mudcat]

Mudcat, do you believe that the Israelites had the only authorized priesthood on the earth during biblical times? Asking to clarify your position, not trying to change your mind or do a 'gotcha' or anything but rather trying to figure out the boundaries of your concepts so to speak.

"Biblical" is a fairly broad expanse of time, but no I don't think so. Melchizedek was not an Israelite, but seemed to be recognized in scripture as a priest. Though it's an exception to the rule that priests were Israelites, decendants of Aaron, primarily Levites.

When we shift from the OT to the Gospels, the priesthood seemed to do a bang up job of charging the Son of God with blasphemy and seeing to it that Jesus was executed by Roman authority.

Post resurrection, in the NT, the priesthood seems to be extended to all who have come to Christ.

If no, then how do you see the priesthood working during those times....could anyone who desired it sincerely receive it from God?

It typically seems to be a patristic type thing in the OT. So you would have to born a priest, in some respects. Melchizedek being the exclusion. As far as how the priesthood worked... well they killed animals for the sins of the people, kept the

Temple clean, anointed people... that sort of thing.

Though IMO, their primary role was to intercede for the sins of the people.

If yes (only the Israelites possessed the authorized priesthood), what is different today that makes the claim different from what the Israelites claimed and now inappropriate (I am asking not about the LDS claim, but any claim in general to the authorized priesthood which it appears that you disagree is limited in this day and age).

Cal, bold mine, this is a broad statement your making. Only specific Israelites were priests. You ask what it is different today?

As best I can see it, Christ has made all believers priests/priestesses.

We have been given the power to self intercede for our own transgressions, on our own behalf and Christ serves as our High Priest and mediator.

[Mudcat]

I know a Hindu man who feels the same way about Christians (was introduced to him through a 'religious quest' philosophy class at college).

His beliefs do not exclude Christians from an afterlife that is good (his version of being saved), but all the Christians he knows have beliefs that exclude him from the same sort of an afterlife.

HIs beliefs, and those of his Christian friends, are diametricly opposed.

I can empathize with him, but i don't know what else i can do for him.

Well the actual situation is a bit different, seeing that we aren't talking about a Hindu that doesn't have a problem welcoming another deity to the pantheon. I mean, I think we are both talking about the same Jew that was nailed to a cross at Golgotha. LDS just seem to think Christ can only save me if I become LDS.

What chaps my hide, come to think of it, is the efforts put forth by some LDS "apologists". Take Offenders for a Word for example. Peterson staunchly argues that LDS should be considered Christian. He does a good job of it.

However, I don't see much point in arguing the point that you are a Christian, if you also believe that you are the only real Christian sect that exists.

[Nathair/|\]

I think I would say that all good and honorable people of any faith will be saved to great glory, it is just that without the ordinances of the Priesthood which is only held within the Church of Jesus Christ, one cannot partake of some of the blessings. I also believe that while the Church has all truth necessary to receive the highest blessings in the Celestial Kingdom, there are many subordinate truths that we don't have as part of our doctrine that are present in other places. Kerry Shirts has done a lot of work in this regard and I've tried to do my small bit, though not nearly as well.

Yours under the oaks rooted in the gospel, but spreading out into all truth;

Nathair /|\

[Mars]

Hrmmm... hummmmmm... words get in the way of how I feel... So here goes... And I'm going to try avoid using terms like 'saved' or 'exaltation' so that I'm as understandable as possible.

I don't deny that I believe that certain things must be done in order for someone to be with God in the eternities. I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has had the authority from God delegated to it to administer those things. I also believe that everyone will have the fairest of chances to decide whether or not to accept, and all that without the static of the world to get in the way. In other words, when that chance presents itself, the person and God will know what it is they're choosing between. When that chance to choose happens, whether in this world or out of it, is between that person and God.

God didn't send His only begotten down to Earth to suffer and die just turn around and tell the overwhelming majority of his children that aren't Mormon that they're up the heavenly creek.

[bluebell]

LDS just seem to think Christ can only save me if I become LDS.

And Christians believe that God can only save men if they become Christian. I'm guessing it chaps some Jewish people's hides that you believe that. I'm guessing you might think the issue is between them and God, not between you and them though, because you believe God set it up that way and not any Christian church.

LDS believe the same. We believe that Christ can only save you through His church and we believe that if you don't like that, it's really between you and God because we believe He's the one who made it so.

Yeah, i'm sure that's not a great way to debate the issue, and like a Jewish person might respond to a Christian who told them that, i wouldn't blame a non-LDS person for thinking it was a cop-out either. IF God did set it up like that though, it's really the only answer for those who disagree.

If He didn't, then that's between me and Him as well, and not something that you need to prove or apologize for or back away from, regardless of how much it might upset me.

What chaps my hide, come to think of it, is the efforts put forth by some LDS "apologists". Take Offenders for a Word for example. Peterson staunchly argues that LDS should be considered Christian. He does a good job of it.

However, I don't see much point in arguing the point that you are a Christian, if you also believe that you are the only real Christian sect that exists.

We don't believe we are the only real Christian sect that exists. That maybe your interpretation of our beliefs, but they aren't our beliefs.

[bluebell]

God didn't send His only begotten down to Earth to suffer and die just turn around and tell the overwhelming majority of his children that aren't Mormon that they're up the heavenly creek.

This is what i LOVE about being a mormon. For all the accusations we get for being 'exclusionary', as far as i understand it, we are the only Christian church that believes that God will provide a way for as many people as possible to learn about Him and His Son and be saved.

A lot of Christian churches seem fine in teaching that God is going to damn the majority of His children because they don't belong to the right church (they aren't a Christian at death). I'm grateful for a church that teaches otherwise.

[Lightbearer]

Hi Mudcat! Hope you are doing well. As for your OP it is a rather obvious one, and if you look at it from a general perspective instead of a specific perspective it may help shed light on the subject. First if you as a Christian believe that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the light, and that no man may come to the Father except through Him... then that also places you in the same position generally than LDS are specifically when you have religious discussions with Jews, Buddists, Muslims, or any others of a non-christian faith. We as LDS are in much the same boat... you may have a more broad view (one sect of Christians among many) but the truth is, if you are going to get specific then it is a difficult task to try to convert others (and that by the way is the objective of all LDS Missionaries)without pointing out where others are lacking. Otherwise why would someone want to change? Why be LDS if one can be a good Baptist or Catholic and still enjoy the same reward? The key I think is to try to keep the lines of communication open by being as kind and open as possible. The Lord said what was required of missionaries:

(D&C 4:1-7) "NOW behold, a marvelous work is about to come forth among the children of men. Therefore, O ye that embark in the service of God, see that ye serve him with all your heart, might, mind and strength, that ye may stand blameless before God at the last day. Therefore, if ye have desires to serve God ye are called to the work; For behold the field is white already to harvest; and lo, he that thrusteth in his sickle with his might, the same layeth up in store that he perisheth not, but bringeth salvation to his soul; And faith, hope, charity and love, with an eye single to the glory of God, qualify him for the work. Remember faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, godliness, charity, humility, diligence. Ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. Amen."

This is why it is difficult to do missionary work on an apologetic website, because it is hard to maintain these attributes on a debate board, it is much more easy in person (most of the time)and there is another necessity and that is to teach by the spirit of truth (D&C 50) and not by any other way, or else it is "not of God." We see through a glass darkly but if we do not have the goal in mind, one of blessing our fell man rather than cursing them, it cannot be done. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is a gospel of love, so we must learn to love one another, and if we can learn to do this, looking unto God to give the increase then we will find success and perhaps one day all may be able to see eye to eye.

God bless,

your brother in the love of Christ,

Lightbearer

[Mudcat]

Erm... Mudcat... it's not that they are 'unsaved' from something. It's just that the baptism (via proxy) will have to be done later with them.

Considering that they automatically get the chance in the time after this life, it isn't too much of a 'not saved from something' issue, as it is just an explanation as to why the priesthood had to be restored according to God's command. If the priesthood didn't need to be restored, I'm pretty sure God would not have asked it, if you know what I mean.

Hi TAO,

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I understand what you are saying here in regards to BftD.

But at the end of the day, LDS beliefs entail an acceptance of LDS beliefs, baptism and so forth even in an after death type scenario. "Gatekeeper" may be too strong of a term... I was bit aggravated when I was typing.. but essentially am I incorrect in saying the LDS believe you have accept the CoJCoLDS as the true Church... it's doctrines, baptism and so forth to be saved?

As stated earlier LDS and EV's have communication problems on the word "saved". Typically the EV is referring to a status that will put them in presence of the Father, Son and Spirit in the afterlife.

Mudcat... it is really important... yah gotta stop thinking of the church as a 'polar' being. Cuz it's not. It's weird, yah, I know. But it's not so polar. And this is coming from a person who likes polarity (TAO).

Earnest Wishes, and no offense intended =P,

TAO

No offense taken TAO. Thanks for the reply.

If you have a minute, could explain what you meant with the term "polar"? I am not sure I am understanding you there.

Regards,

Mudcat

[Mudcat]

God didn't send His only begotten down to Earth to suffer and die just turn around and tell the overwhelming majority of his children that aren't Mormon that they're up the heavenly creek.

I understand what you are saying.

Though I don't root my thoughts on the matter in LDS teachings. In some ways I hold a somewhat similar view.

[Mudcat]

Yeah, i'm sure that's not a great way to debate the issue, and like a Jewish person might respond to a Christian who told them that, i wouldn't blame a non-LDS person for thinking it was a cop-out either. IF God did set it up like that though, it's really the only answer for those who disagree.

If He didn't, then that's between me and Him as well, and not something that you need to prove or apologize for or back away from, regardless of how much it might upset me.

Bluebell,

Thanks for the response. My apologies for a raw and frustrated post to you yesterday.

When we come to the place where the debate hit's a brick wall. Well sometimes we just go 'Splat!'.

My apologies for splatting in your direction. It's just frustrating at times and there doesn't seem to be much I can do about it.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

[SilverKnight]

The "one-trueness" gulf will always be tough to bridge.

For the non-LDS Christian, the LDS across the table will always be, at best, a person whose faith in an extrabiblical religion is misplaced.

For the LDS, the Christian across the table will always be, at best, a person whose religion only contains fragments of the greater whole.

[Mudcat]

The "one-trueness" gulf will always be tough to bridge.

For the non-LDS Christian, the LDS across the table will always be, at best, a person whose faith in an extrabiblical religion is misplaced.

For the LDS, the Christian across the table will always be, at best, a person whose religion only contains fragments of the greater whole.

Well said SK.

The thing that amazes me, is that personal testimony attributed to the Holy Spirit by both sides is what holds this particular Gordian knot together.

Both sides would likely agree that God is not the author of confusion... Nor that the Holy Spirit would falsely testify about something.

But it all seems a bit confusing nonetheless.

[blueadept]

The "one-trueness" gulf will always be tough to bridge.

For the non-LDS Christian, the LDS across the table will always be, at best, a person whose faith in an extrabiblical religion is misplaced.

For the LDS, the Christian across the table will always be, at best, a person whose religion only contains fragments of the greater whole.

All one can do is for both sides to share their testimony of Christ in their lives and ignore your two common issues I've encountered in LDS/non-LDS communications.

It does allow both sides to focus on the similarity of their respective beliefs though while recognizing there may be a bridge that prevents them from starting at a common point even though both believe they are Christ-centered.

[bluebell]

Bluebell,

Thanks for the response. My apologies for a raw and frustrated post to you yesterday.

When we come to the place where the debate hit's a brick wall. Well sometimes we just go 'Splat!'.

My apologies for splatting in your direction. It's just frustrating at times and there doesn't seem to be much I can do about it.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

[Mars]

It does allow both sides to focus on the similarity of their respective beliefs though while recognizing there may be a bridge that prevents them from starting at a common point even though both believe they are Christ-centered.

This leaves out the high I get from judging others whom I feel are lower than me.

[Mudcat]

This leaves out the high I get from judging others whom I feel are lower than me.

:rofl: XD

[blueadept]

This leaves out the high I get from judging others whom I feel are lower than me.

An irritation I have found in talking to some LDS members for sure...

but I like Mudcat's response.......

[SilverKnight]

Well said SK.

The thing that amazes me, is that personal testimony attributed to the Holy Spirit by both sides is what holds this particular Gordian knot together.

Both sides would likely agree that God is not the author of confusion... Nor that the Holy Spirit would falsely testify about something.

Indeed.

The secularists have a bothersome explanation why both are getting identical spiritual confirmations of their differing religious traditions.

But I hold out hope that God treats 'One Trueness' as more malleable concept than we do, and he sends spiritual manifestations more to confirm of the "goodness" of things than the "trueness" of them.

I would not expect such introspection from 19-year old mormon missionaries however. They spend 12 hours a day declaring what they believe to be God's supreme truth to a world lost in the wilderness of apostasy.

[Mars]

An irritation I have found in talking to some LDS members people for sure...

Fixed.