Page 1 of 1
Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:10 am
by _Joey
As Christians, the Easter holiday is a reminder of the blessings we reap from the scarafice and atonement of Jesus Christ.
But how does the Mormon church explain it? They claim that their god was once a man who had to learn how to become a god. If so, who atoned for his sins allowing him to become a god? Why did this atonement not last when he became a god? If there was no atonement needed for their god to become a god, why was it needed with Christ? What failed? Likewise, will their be needs for more atonements in the future? Will the atonement of Christ not be enough as,it seems, it was not enough with prior Mormon gods?
Any answers out of Provo or are we "Basta-ing" again?
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:08 am
by _Daniel Peterson
When a serious question emerges from Dogpatch, Provo will, I suppose, be right on it.
I live in Orem, though.
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:37 am
by _Brackite
Provo and Orem are both in the County of Utah. It is just like that both Jerusalem and Bethlehem are both in the land of Jerusalem.
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:46 pm
by _Mad Viking
Joey wrote:As Christians, the Easter holiday is a reminder of the blessings we reap from the scarafice and atonement of Jesus Christ.
But how does the Mormon church explain it? They claim that their god was once a man who had to learn how to become a god. If so, who atoned for his sins allowing him to become a god? Why did this atonement not last when he became a god? If there was no atonement needed for their god to become a god, why was it needed with Christ? What failed? Likewise, will their be needs for more atonements in the future? Will the atonement of Christ not be enough as,it seems, it was not enough with prior Mormon gods?
Any answers out of Provo or are we "Basta-ing" again?
The notion of a savior being needed for each god's worlds doesn't seem any more ridiculous to me (an atheist) than does the notion of the trinity, or the need for a savior in the first place.
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:31 am
by _moksha
Brackite wrote:Provo and Orem are both in the County of Utah. It is just like that both Jerusalem and Bethlehem are both in the land of Jerusalem.
Great, then one could literally be born in both Orem and Provo. Hey, if you combined names that would be Provem. Mere coincidence?
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:35 am
by _Daniel Peterson
moksha wrote:Great, then one could literally be born in both Orem and Provo. Hey, if you combined names that would be Provem. Mere coincidence?
Personally, given the high birthrate here, I think the ideal name for the combined cities would be
Ovem.
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:48 am
by _harmony
Joey wrote:As Christians, the Easter holiday is a reminder of the blessings we reap from the scarafice and atonement of Jesus Christ.
But how does the Mormon church explain it? They claim that their god was once a man who had to learn how to become a god. If so, who atoned for his sins allowing him to become a god? Why did this atonement not last when he became a god? If there was no atonement needed for their god to become a god, why was it needed with Christ? What failed? Likewise, will their be needs for more atonements in the future? Will the atonement of Christ not be enough as,it seems, it was not enough with prior Mormon gods?
Any answers out of Provo or are we "Basta-ing" again?
Why would you want answers out of Provo? Surely the place you want answers from is really SLC?
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:18 am
by _Jason Bourne
Joey wrote:As Christians, the Easter holiday is a reminder of the blessings we reap from the scarafice and atonement of Jesus Christ.
But how does the Mormon church explain it? They claim that their god was once a man who had to learn how to become a god. If so, who atoned for his sins allowing him to become a god? Why did this atonement not last when he became a god? If there was no atonement needed for their god to become a god, why was it needed with Christ? What failed? Likewise, will their be needs for more atonements in the future? Will the atonement of Christ not be enough as,it seems, it was not enough with prior Mormon gods?
Any answers out of Provo or are we "Basta-ing" again?
My personal idea is the Eternal God of all other gods got it all started. He was first. Though this may dispute some comments made about gods being there in infinite regression.
Anyway the Eternal God was the one in Abraham that says he was the most intelligent of all intelligences, In fact he is more intelligent than all of them together. And he wants everyone to have the same opportunity he does. For some reason he knows that to progress He and we must go through mortality. So he makes the first world and goes to it as the Savior of that world. From there on those from that world who become gods help in keeping the process moving along.
I most likely am incorrect on this but that is how I reconcile some LDS ideas on this.
Re: Mormonism and Easter - brings up the conflicted theology
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:09 am
by _Calculus Crusader
Don't expect to make much sense of Smith's chicanery and self-aggrandizement. Same goes for Elrond Hubbard's fraud.