The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent

[CV75]

2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Nothing🤣. I knew what he was going to say. I just wanted to see why he and my mom are so at odds with each other when it comes to religion. 

There's a really good book about that which i highly recommend: The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt.

But now I am kind of confused in that your OP says it was amazing what he picked up on that you hadn't, an invitation to explore our doctrine from another angle (an approach that is covered in the book I mentioned).

[AtlanticMike]

30 minutes ago, CV75 said:

There's a really good book about that which i highly recommend: The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt.

But now I am kind of confused in that your OP says it was amazing what he picked up on that you hadn't, an invitation to explore our doctrine from another angle (an approach that is covered in the book I mentioned).

What my uncle picked up on was amazing to me because I had never even realized what Elder Holland was saying could be seen as divisive to some. Like I said, I've listened to that talk many times, it's inspirational to me, but to him he heard it totally different. I'll check that book out, thank you.

[CV75]

43 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

What my uncle picked up on was amazing to me because I had never even realized what Elder Holland was saying could be seen as divisive to some. Like I said, I've listened to that talk many times, it's inspirational to me, but to him he heard it totally different. I'll check that book out, thank you.

It would be interesting to go back into he archives and see if that talk made it on this board -- that is the kind of talk that gets (got?) a lot of attention here, for the reasons you describe.

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, CV75 said:

It would be interesting to go back into he archives and see if that talk made it on this board -- that is the kind of talk that gets (got?) a lot of attention here, for the reasons you describe.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/45069-what-is-the-lds-definition-of-incarnation/

My memory is the thread starter blueadept was Catholic, but I may be confusing them with someone else  

First referenced in this post I believe for a thread about the Trinity started by iirc an evangelical here:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/63827-whats-up-with-the-trinity/?do=findComment&comment=1209398644

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by Calm

[MiserereNobis]

19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

IF GOD allows new revelation- then the Book of Mormon could be true- so then you at least need to pray about it, earnestly and with real intent after knowing about it!

I'm going to quibble a little bit here  

I don't think we need to ask God about every religion out there. If God has already let us know that we're in the right spot, it would seem a bit like ignoring Him to keep asking Him if this or that religion is true.

So, someone could hear about the Book of Mormon, even read some parts of it, and not feel a need to ask God about it.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/45069-what-is-the-lds-definition-of-incarnation/

My memory is the thread starter blueadept was Catholic, but I may be confusing them with someone else  

First referenced in this post I believe for a thread about the Trinity started by iirc an evangelical here:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/63827-whats-up-with-the-trinity/?do=findComment&comment=1209398644

 

Thank you, Calm -- I guess it wasn't such a hot topic after all!

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I've never heard this, I'll look in to it, 

And so they have no reason to believe the bible as religious source!

History maybe, but the atonement etc? Reason should tell them it's all just legends if they cannot ask God if it is true!!

We do have a reason - the BOM- that tells us that that is the only way we can know.

Since in James 1, it says we CAN ask God- that is why Joseph did, remember? The whole restoration is based on that point!

They are actually CONTRADICTING the Bible by not praying about its truth!

 

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Wow, thank you. You make me think outside the box. As far as what I quoted above from you, I know it upsets people that I dont like being called "Christian", but what you wrote above is part of the reason. I rather say, let's say we dont use the word  mormon anymore, let's blaze our own path and say we're SAINTS, followers of christ. Do it with confidence and and I guarantee alot of Christian's who are upset with Christianity would take a look at becoming a saint. 

    To me, when Joseph took the steps to re-establish Gods true gospel on earth he was willing, and he understood , that he was going to upset the apple cart and bring upon himself and his followers alot of heat. If you read quotes from Joseph, Brigham, taylor and others, they didnt speak about christianity in glowing terms. Maybe I'm looking at this wrong,  but I've never cared being seen as just a mormon, or lds, or Latter-Day Saint. The word Christian doesn't do anything for me. That's just me.

Pres. Nelson has already told us to use ONLY "Church of Jesus Christ" or the full formal name, adding "of Latter Day Saints"

No more "Mormon"! 

 That idea you received Is a testimony that president Nelson is a prophet!!.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I'm going to quibble a little bit here  

I don't think we need to ask God about every religion out there. If God has already let us know that we're in the right spot, it would seem a bit like ignoring Him to keep asking Him if this or that religion is true.

So, someone could hear about the Book of Mormon, even read some parts of it, and not feel a need to ask God about it.

That is correct; it is just an invitation that gets extended as opportunity arises  .

[Ahab]

On 2/21/2021 at 8:09 AM, AtlanticMike said:

Yesterday I met with my one of my non mormon uncles. He is a Christian and attends a few different churches depending on how he feels. I'm trying to get a better understanding of our doctrine so I asked him if he would meet so we could talk doctrine, something I've never done with my non mormon family because it brings up memories of being young and listening to my parents bible bash with my uncles for hours and hours.

     It's going to be an ongoing relationship, he and I are planning to meet every once in a while to talk religion, so yesterday I didnt want to get into discussing the bible and what verses "prove" Christianity true or Mormonism false in his opinion because, well, no one wins in that battle. So I started with him listening to a talk by Elder Holland, The Only True God and Jesus  Christ Whom He Hath Sent. I wanted his opinion on the over all message. 

    I have to say, it was amazing what he picked up on compared to what my mormon ear hears while listening to this talk. I've probably listened to this talk a dozen times since it was given and never even heard what my uncle picked up on. Here's a list of what he found to be "hurtful" as a Christian while listening to Elder Holland profess our Christianity. Here is what Elder Holland said

1. A trinitarian notion never set forth in the scriptures

2. The trinity is not to be found in the New Testament 

3. That our view of the God Head breaks with post new testament Christian history and returns to the doctrine taught by Jesus himself.

4. No one claiming to be a true Christian will want to do that. (Speaking about an embodied God)

5. Then may we live their teachings and become true Christians indeed. (Speaking of our version of the Godhead)

6. Lastly,  something I've never picked up on till yesterday,  he was upset at the fact that the audience laughed when Elder Holland said "we agree with our critics on atleast that point, that such a formulation of divinity is truly incomprehensible" (speaking of the trinity)

     It was eye opening to see how a Christian heard Elder Hollands message compared to what I take  from this talk. My uncle was picking up on what divides us instead of what unites us. In his opinion, his southern Christian opinion, us not accepting the trinity is a huge issue. The talk to him was very divisive and it just widened the gap between he and my mother. 

    Is this just a southern Christian misunderstanding? How do we move forward with other Christian denominations if we view their version of the Godhead as incomprehensible and they view our version of the Godhead as incomprehensible? First, we should stop laughing and joking about what they believe. And lastly, what is a true Christian in your opinion?

  

https://youtu.be/

     

   

I think because of my background I am able to see it both ways, both from a trinitarian perspective and a non-trinitarian perspective, so I think I could maybe help Elder Holland to see how a trinitarian view of the Godhead is comprehensible.  It just takes being able to understand words and terms from multiple perspectives instead of staunchly demanding there is only one perspective to relate to what is true.

For example, the term "trinity" simple refers to 3 who are united or in unity with each other.  3 what, though?  3 persons or 3 kinds of beings?  I would say 3 persons who are all the same kind of being.

Ta Da!  We believe our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost/Spirit are all united or in unity with each other, and that is what Trinitarians believe, too.  Nothing incomprehensible about that.

[mfbukowski]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I think because of my background I am able to see it both ways, both from a trinitarian perspective and a non-trinitarian perspective, so I think I could maybe help Elder Holland to see how a trinitarian view of the Godhead is comprehensible. 

You need to send him a letter right away and set him straight.

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

You need to send him a letter right away and set him straight.

Nah, not even if I was sitting on the stand right next to him while he was giving his talk.  He'll learn what he doesn't know now, eventually.

[Stargazer]

On 2/21/2021 at 4:38 PM, AtlanticMike said:

To him Elder Holland is insinuating that other denominations are false Christians.

That's kind of ironic, considering that is how other denominations view us. 

[Stargazer]

On 2/21/2021 at 4:38 PM, AtlanticMike said:

His biggest gripe for years, and what he uses to bash my mom with is the fact that in the first vision account God tells Joseph that all creeds are an abomination. 

This actually made me laugh!

If God actually comes to a young man who is asking Him to let him know which church is His church, and then God tells him not to join any of them, how else would God characterize them?  If God thought they were all OK (which your uncle may believe), why would God even bother to answer the question at all? If there is no preferred church, then God doesn't care!

Of course, your uncle doesn't believe God and Christ came to see Joseph in the first place. But if He did, what should He have told Joseph? Which Church is right? Your uncle, who you say has been with several churches, seems not to know himself.

[Stargazer]

On 2/21/2021 at 6:52 PM, AtlanticMike said:

Also, alot of Christian schools in our area in the 80s and 90s wouldn't allow mormons to attend k-12. So I am glad to see a lot of that hostility has subsided, but we have a long way to go on both sides.  

One of my stepsons got married to a woman whose father was some kind of Baptist minister in Georgia, and this guy once told my stepson (who attended his church) that if he happened to be driving on a road, saw some LDS missionaries walking or on their bicycles down that road, and there were no witnesses, he would have no compunction against running them over with his truck.

Real classy dude, for sure.

Yeah, there are some real pieces of work out there who claim to be Christian.

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Ta Da!  We believe our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost/Spirit are all united or in unity with each other, and that is what Trinitarians believe, too.  Nothing incomprehensible about that.

Just to be clear, the trinitarian view of God and the LDS view of the Godhead are not compatible.

[MiserereNobis]

35 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

This actually made me laugh!

If God actually comes to a young man who is asking Him to let him know which church is His church, and then God tells him not to join any of them, how else would God characterize them?  If God thought they were all OK (which your uncle may believe), why would God even bother to answer the question at all? If there is no preferred church, then God doesn't care!

Of course, your uncle doesn't believe God and Christ came to see Joseph in the first place. But if He did, what should He have told Joseph? Which Church is right? Your uncle, who you say has been with several churches, seems not to know himself.

I think the issue is the word "abominable." That is A LOT worse than just wrong. It's like the difference between saying the LDS church is wrong or that it is a cult.

Out of curiosity, what parts of the Nicene Creed are actually abominable, as supposed to wrong? Here it is:

Quote

I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered death and was buried,
and rose again on the third day
in accordance with the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins
and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by MiserereNobis

[JLHPROF]

45 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Nah, not even if I was sitting on the stand right next to him while he was giving his talk.  He'll learn what he doesn't know now, eventually.

Your claims to understand impossible things better than everyone are always good for a laugh.

I was reading a discussion in Adam God in the board archives last night where you did the same thing.

[Stargazer]

6 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I think the issue is the word "abominable." That is A LOT worse than just wrong. It's like the difference between the LDS church is wrong or that it is a cult.

Out of curiosity, what parts of the Nicene Creed are actually abominable, as supposed to wrong? Here it is:

 

If God said it, then what of it? Is it somehow wrong for God to have said it, and should He be counseled to be less offensive?

Christ drove the moneychangers out of the Temple. Do you object to that?  The moneychangers sure did.

It seems to me that false doctrine is abominable to God. Does He have to cite chapter and verse in order to justify Himself?  He didn't actually mention the Nicene Creed -- I'm sure God knows there are more than one, and besides, the idea of a creed extends to more than just summaries such as the Nicene. 

Either the Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith in a vision, or they did not. If They didn't, then there we are. If They did, then what is there to complain about?

[MiserereNobis]

5 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

If God said it, then what of it? Is it somehow wrong for God to have said it, and should He be counseled to be less offensive?

I think the issue is the apparent disparity between how LDS want others to view your church and the LDS belief that God thinks our beliefs are an abomination. If you believe that our doctrines are an abomination, have it!  But then don't complain when people use similar terminology to describe your doctrines (cult, from the devil, etc.).

I personally have no issue with this, but I can understand where some people might be coming from and just want to (perhaps) clarify their issue.

12 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Christ drove the moneychangers out of the Temple. Do you object to that?  The moneychangers sure did.

I'm all about that scene! I like to point to it (and others) when people try to foist WWJD. No one really ever knows what He would do.

13 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Either the Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith in a vision, or they did not. If They didn't, then there we are.

Well since they didn't, that means we're left with you believing our creeds are an abomination, not God  Hey, no offense, it's just some good natured ribbing  

[AtlanticMike]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

I think because of my background I am able to see it both ways, both from a trinitarian perspective and a non-trinitarian perspective, so I think I could maybe help Elder Holland to see how a trinitarian view of the Godhead is comprehensible.  It just takes being able to understand words and terms from multiple perspectives instead of staunchly demanding there is only one perspective to relate to what is true.

For example, the term "trinity" simple refers to 3 who are united or in unity with each other.  3 what, though?  3 persons or 3 kinds of beings?  I would say 3 persons who are all the same kind of being.

Ta Da!  We believe our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost/Spirit are all united or in unity with each other, and that is what Trinitarians believe, too.  Nothing incomprehensible about that.

To explain the trinity to me my mom said imagine 3 birthday candles burning together in one big flame, and at any time one of the candles can separate, but always be part of the big flame. But in Mormonism, the birthday candles are always separate, like on a birthday cake.

[AtlanticMike]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

One of my stepsons got married to a woman whose father was some kind of Baptist minister in Georgia, and this guy once told my stepson (who attended his church) that if he happened to be driving on a road, saw some LDS missionaries walking or on their bicycles down that road, and there were no witnesses, he would have no compunction against running them over with his truck.

Real classy dude, for sure.

Yeah, there are some real pieces of work out there who claim to be Christian.

I walked into a gymnasium one time at a huuuge baptist church to play basketball. Afterwards they would serve kool aid and cookies and do bible study. Well, the good but dumb mormon boy in me walked in with my new quad I got for turning 12 and becoming a deacon, it was beautiful. It was one of the very small light brown leather ones with gold leaf and a snap to hold it shut, had my initials on it. Well, we sat down and started reading from the bible and the youth minister came over and picked up my quad, looked at it, walked it outside and put it in the flower bed right outside the door. When he came back in he gave me his bible to study out of for the rest of that night. It was humiliating. But, unlucky for him, he didnt understand mormon boys who grew up in the 90s. We stole all the toilet paper out of the janitors closet at our church and toilet paperd all his precious dogwood trees, I think he had five in his front yard. We even threw in a few eggs for fun. Man, those were the good old days.😁😁😁 We figured god wouldn't care we stole the toilet from his one and only church since we were putting it to good use.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

Thank you, Calm -- I guess it wasn't such a hot topic after all!

Other threads might have used less of the title as a label than I used for my search, so it is possible there are more. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Calm

[InCognitus]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I think the issue is the word "abominable." That is A LOT worse than just wrong. It's like the difference between saying the LDS church is wrong or that it is a cult.

Out of curiosity, what parts of the Nicene Creed are actually abominable, as supposed to wrong? Here it is:

The Lord told Joseph, "all their creeds were an abomination in his sight" (Joseph Smith-History 1:19).   By that, I don't think he's necessarily saying that they all have something wrong in them (although many of them do), but rather, by their very nature, they are designed to shackle our thinking with man made restraints that could (and often do) prohibit further truth from being understood.

Joseph Smith explained his position on creeds on many occasions.  For example, here are two statements taken from the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith manual, in the chapter on "Gaining Knowledge of Eternal Truths", with the footnote references replaced (by me) with links to the Joseph Smith Papers sources:

In January 1843, Joseph Smith had a conversation with some people who were not members of the Church: “I stated that the most prominent difference in sentiment between the Latter-day Saints and sectarians was, that the latter were all circumscribed by some peculiar creed, which deprived its members the privilege of believing anything not contained therein, whereas the Latter-day Saints … are ready to believe all true principles that exist, as they are made manifest from time to time.”  (History, 1838–1856, volume D-1 [1 August 1842–1 July 1843])

“I cannot believe in any of the creeds of the different denominations, because they all have some things in them I cannot subscribe to, though all of them have some truth. I want to come up into the presence of God, and learn all things; but the creeds set up stakes [limits], and say, ‘Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further’ [Job 38:11]; which I cannot subscribe to.”  (History, 1838–1856, volume E-1 [1 July 1843–30 April 1844])

So the idea that the creeds are an "abomination" (abhorrence or disgust) may have more to do with their intended design to restrict a person's thinking, and not with any particular doctrinal errors in the creeds.

But since you asked specifically about the Nicene Creed, I think the primary LDS objection would be with the post-Nicene understanding of the statement in the creed that Jesus is "consubstantial [homoousios] with the Father".   That statement was debated for some time after the first council of Nicaea and came to be understood to mean that Jesus and his Father are one being or one substance.

Edited February 23, 2021 by InCognitus

[blueglass]

According to footnote 35 of the becoming like God essay 

"While the King Follett discourse represents Joseph Smith’s most detailed known discussion of divine nature and exaltation, it is important to note that because of the wind on the day the sermon was delivered and the limitations of transcription techniques, we are left without certainty"

Ah thats too bad.

I guess 177 years later divine beings are still

"incomprehensible"

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by blueglass