The 17 Threats To The True Church

[Gray]

22 minutes ago, rongo said:

True, but if they deny Jesus a resurrected body, they sure as heck are denying the Father one as well. In spades  And if they're wrong about Jesus . . . 

I find that pointing out the unbiblical nature of their insistence on Jesus not having a body goes far in dispelling criticism of the corporeality of God. Without needing to technically get out in the weeds of trinity vs. modalism, etc. 

Well, I think there's a Biblical case to be made I think for both a corporeal Jesus and a Jesus who has some kind of non-physical body of some sort (spiritual body), depending on if you want to quote Paul or Luke. Just goes to show that Biblical fundamentalism is a sucker's game

[bluebell]

Does this whole '17 threats to the true Church' idea remind anyone else of the 17 points of the true church book that was so popular a while ago?  Did cinepro name the thread this to be cheeky or is this the actual title of the powerpoint?

Edited March 2, 2017 by bluebell

[Gray]

41 minutes ago, bluebell said:

But they are the same substance, right?  So is it possible, according to the doctrine of the Trinity, for God the Father to be Spirit and Jesus to have a physical body?

Yes, but I'm struggling a bit to understand what that means exactly. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consubstantiality

Perhaps someone who believes in this doctrine can clarify? 

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

Well, I think there's a Biblical case to be made I think for both a corporeal Jesus and a Jesus who has some kind of non-physical body of some sort (spiritual body), depending on if you want to quote Paul or Luke. 

Yes, but then they get into problems by complaining that we misrepresent Trinity vs. modalism. When you ask them to define it (in terms stupid old us can understand), they struggle. Then, when they try to say Jesus has both a physical body and a spirit body, you say, "Wait a minute! But I thought you said   . . ." 

[Teancum]

On 2/28/2017 at 3:33 PM, Duncan said:

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAt?????????? I liked him!!! I remember listening to him in BYU education weeks and other things, he has a blog

https://rjnorman.blogspot.ca/

Ahhh the strange things belief in religion and other superstitions does to one's mind. 

[Duncan]

Just now, Teancum said:

Ahhh the strange things belief in religion and other superstitions does to one's mind. 

it's interesting reading but sad bananas

[Atheist Mormon]

On 2/28/2017 at 1:38 PM, MormonVideoGame said:

The real threat to the church are wards that are not friendly enough to new investigators and the less active. You increase friendship in a ward, you increase the success. Friendship and socialization are the keys to success. I know by personal experience.   

I disagree.....

Short of being able to stand up on your head for a prolonged time or catch birds with your mouth while the investigator watches you.....no amount of friendliness, politeness will convince less active come back. 

Because the claims require facts.....

[MormonVideoGame]

2 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I disagree.....

Short of being able to stand up on your head for a prolonged time or catch birds with your mouth while the investigator watches you.....no amount of friendliness, politeness will convince less active come back. 

Because the claims require facts.....

Why do people join or stay in the LDS church? 

[Calm]

9 hours ago, rockpond said:

Yep.  And in that spectrum it names some as "Far Left" and some as "Far Right".  Very politically charged terminology in this country. 

Are you saying they don't exist?

[Gray]

32 minutes ago, rongo said:

Yes, but then they get into problems by complaining that we misrepresent Trinity vs. modalism. When you ask them to define it (in terms stupid old us can understand), they struggle. Then, when they try to say Jesus has both a physical body and a spirit body, you say, "Wait a minute! But I thought you said   . . ." 

I confess I find the whole trinity thing very confusing. It seems like a compromise between the desire to be technically "monotheist" but also affirm the Godhood of Jesus. It's not an elegant compromise, IMO. 

But, for most of my life I confused modalism with the trinity, so I try to be careful about saying too much. I don't know that anyone really understands it, but I'm sure I understand it less than people who grew up in that tradition. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by Gray

[Calm]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Fascinating... I didn't realize they believed/thought that way.  (And a rep point for such a great story + pic!)

Not all Catholics do, imo.  It would be interesting to hear from those on the board, perhaps a new thread in case they aren't reading this one.

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Are you saying they don't exist?

No, "far left" and "far right" certainly do exist.  But I think they are counter-productive labels in the context of this slide.

[sheilauk]

6 minutes ago, Gray said:

I confess I find the whole trinity thing very confusing. It seems like a compromise between the desire to be technically "monotheist" but also affirm the Godhood of Jesus. It's not an elegant compromise, IMO. 

But, for most of my life I confused modalism with the trinity, so I try to be careful about saying too much. I don't know that anyone really understands it, but I'm sure I understand it less than people who grew up in that tradition. 

I grew up with the trinity tradition and, personally, I did not understand it all and I took bible study classes too.  I understand it a bit better now in comparison with the LDS Godhead. I'm speaking personally but I don't think my friends in other churches understood it much either.   For practical purposes, it didn't seem to matter much! 

[Atheist Mormon]

30 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

Why do people join or stay in the LDS church? 

why do they join C. of Scientology, JV or Catholic Church....all the same reason... No evidence but misleading spirituality.....

[rongo]

23 minutes ago, Gray said:

I confess I find the whole trinity thing very confusing. It seems like a compromise between the desire to be technically "monotheist" but also affirm the Godhood of Jesus. It's not an elegant compromise, IMO. 

But, for most of my life I confused modalism with the trinity, so I try to be careful about saying too much. I don't know that anyone really understands it, but I'm sure I understand it less than people who grew up in that tradition. 

Completely agree. I've learned not to do any defining of the trinity at all, because I will get tripped up. Instead, I ask questions and have them define it, and then poke holes in that. Especially when they have to approximate the LDS Godhead even while criticizing it. 

Insistence that God does not have a body is a huge problem, given Luke. 

[rongo]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not all Catholics do, imo.  It would be interesting to hear from those on the board, perhaps a new thread in case they aren't reading this one.

I'm certain that what the priest said is not representative of Catholicism, or even other Catholic priests. 

If LDS were to be judged by the worst arguments made by our bishops and stake presidents, in any place at any time . . . yikes!  

I wasn't violating Stendahl's law in sharing this story; I was illustrating anecdotally my experience that I've never met a non-Mormon Christian that believes that Jesus has a body now --- or that he will have one in heaven (the priest was an extreme example of this). This fascinates me, because the Resurrection is at the center of the gospel, by anyone's definition. The Restoration is indispensable in not only understanding the Resurrection, but why Resurrection is necessary. And only the Restoration can give us that. 

[phaedrus ut]

2 hours ago, cinepro said:

If members of the Church are being otherwise faithful except when it comes to keeping the Sabbath Day holy, and are doing those things that were traditionally shunned for Sundays (recreation, sports, shopping, eating out, going to missionary farewell open houses etc.), then it's possible that there are members of the Church that are finding that the Church's version of the "Sabbath Day" isn't spiritually good for them.  They are just as happy (or happier) doing those things than staying at home and writing in their journals and watching overpriced Living Scriptures DVDs. 

Focusing on Sabbath observance has always seemed strange.  If God blessed the 7th day in the Genesis creation narrative and made it's observance one of the 10 commandments then why is it ok to change?  Notably because the change came well into what Latter Day Saints consider the great apostasy it seems strange the restoration didn't include restoration of the Sabbath observed in the Hebrew bible and by Jesus and the apostles of the early church.  

Phaedrus

 

 

[clarkgoble]

38 minutes ago, rongo said:

 I was illustrating anecdotally my experience that I've never met a non-Mormon Christian that believes that Jesus has a body now --- or that he will have one in heaven (the priest was an extreme example of this). This fascinates me, because the Resurrection is at the center of the gospel, by anyone's definition. The Restoration is indispensable in not only understanding the Resurrection, but why Resurrection is necessary. And only the Restoration can give us that. 

Just for the record most non-Mormon Christians I know think Christ has a body right now. Those who don't typically are people who've adopted a fairly liberal theological position. i.e. most of the Bible are myths, allegories or flawed histories where people assume things about God. Often they deny deity in a strong sense to Jesus too.

To be fair I also find the typical Mormon has  pretty superficial knowledge of their own religion's theology and often several very odd beliefs. I also find that Mormons assume the Trinity is modalism. So when they talk about truth restored about God what they're attacking is a modalistic belief which isn't what most of our other Christian neighbors believe. Well to a point. I ask many Christians about the Trinity and modalistic descriptions are pretty common too.

Edited March 2, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I disagree.....

Short of being able to stand up on your head for a prolonged time or catch birds with your mouth while the investigator watches you.....no amount of friendliness, politeness will convince less active come back. 

Because the claims require facts.....

I don't think most people leave because of facts. They just don't enjoy it or else lose that spiritual connection. Of course once they leave they may appeal to facts (that often are themselves mangled). That's not to dispute in the least people who do leave because of facts. But I think that's more common in the intellectual class than the typical person.

[MormonVideoGame]

6 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

why do they join C. of Scientology, JV or Catholic Church....all the same reason... No evidence but misleading spirituality.....

Okay, let me try again. 

Why do people leave the church? it has nothing to do with facts and research, at least not for most of them. 

[Tacenda]

29 minutes ago, MormonVideoGame said:

Okay, let me try again. 

Why do people leave the church? it has nothing to do with facts and research, at least not for most of them. 

I disagree!

[Atheist Mormon]

15 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I don't think most people leave because of facts. They just don't enjoy it or else lose that spiritual connection. Of course once they leave they may appeal to facts (that often are themselves mangled). That's not to dispute in the least people who do leave because of facts. But I think that's more common in the intellectual class than the typical person.

Hard to disagree with you, in so many cases ....However, As Humanity continues to evolve this belief element hits closer to a "Dead End", there's no solution no innovation......just rehashing the stuff over & over.....

[Gray]

16 hours ago, phaedrus ut said:

Focusing on Sabbath observance has always seemed strange.  If God blessed the 7th day in the Genesis creation narrative and made it's observance one of the 10 commandments then why is it ok to change?  Notably because the change came well into what Latter Day Saints consider the great apostasy it seems strange the restoration didn't include restoration of the Sabbath observed in the Hebrew bible and by Jesus and the apostles of the early church.  

Phaedrus

 

 

We seem to take the Lord's Day (Sunday, commemorating the resurrection) and treat it like it's the Sabbath. Not just us, that's pretty widespread. 

There are several doctrines that we've adopted from post-apostasy Christianity. For instance, the idea that the Holy Spirit is an actual person and not the breath or life of God (which was believed by first century Christians, and also taught very early in LDS church history, and then abandoned for the trinitarian notion that the Holy Spirit is a person). 

Edited March 3, 2017 by Gray

[JulieM]

16 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I don't think most people leave because of facts. They just don't enjoy it or else lose that spiritual connection. 

I couldn't disagree with you more.

I've found most people leave because they learn facts (mostly from church history such as details regarding polygamy. BofM, or BofA).  

Many remain very spiritual after they leave.  You don't have to be active in an organized religion to be a spiritual person.

Edited March 3, 2017 by JulieM

[Gray]

26 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I couldn't disagree with you more.

I've found most people leave because they learn facts (mostly from church history such as details regarding polygamy. BofM, or BofA).  

Many remain very spiritual after they leave.  You don't have to be active in an organized religion to be a spiritual person.

I think it depends on if you're talking about people who just go inactive vs people who deliberately reject Mormonism.