Still abominable?

[_stemelbow]

The church leaders and missionaries would never say such a thing nowadays. They're not that dumb. But you hear it in ward buildings all the time. I recently heard a guy bearing his testimony that said one day the Pope will join the church. He was joking, but church members do take a lot of shots at the catholic church.

How is joking about the Pope joining the LDS Church one day taking a shot at the Catholic Church?

I don't mean to confuse here though. There are plenty of LDS folks who take shots at other religions during Church, which I don't appreciate. But your example doesn't work too well.

[_stemelbow]

Who said "all other churches are abominable and corrupt"?

Why Dad of a Mormon of course.

For me, there is plenty of room to accept what Joseph Smith said God said and still hold to the notion that many churches, and other orgs for that matter, hold many truths, just not the whole enchilada. Indeed, it is heavily implied, at the very least, that the LDS Church itself, while holding much truth does not have it all. And since Joseph Smith' day perhaps some of the same things that were common in churches in Joseph's day, like the abominable creeds and the corrupts professors are also somewhat crept into the LORD's Church.

CFR
CFR[/quote]

Now I have to go find allusions to the notion that the Church itself, whether in scripture or by statements made by leaders, that the Church itself doesn't claim to know all truths? I think some of the iffy stances on certain things, like evolution can help supply that information for you, no?

As for the second CFR, my "perhaps" was meant to suggest I don't have a reference, its theoretical. I'm just saying I wouldn't doubt it.

[_stemelbow]

Would it nbe safe to say that Joseph was at least told that the creed and teachers of any religion available to him was abominable and corrupt? I think so.

Sure. I would say the creeds being an abomination, while being harsh, is not meant to suggest the teachings within the creeds are all wrong, only that God views the creeds themselves as an abomination. I don't know if that makes sense, the way I said it.

I also think that LDS teaching since make it clear that there is no other religion that contains what is needed to return to live with God (exaltation). Right? That's why the Church send out 50K missionaries. This isn't just about quality of life— it is about living with God again as an exalted being.

True that. But of course I don't know any LDS who think all those who lived during the era of what is termed apostacy are automatically disqualified for exaltation.

Right. Wouldn't you agree though that most if not all active LDS think the LDS Church will never fall far enough into apostasy
to not make it the only game in town as it were? Regardless of it's flaws it will always be the only place with the authority and doctrines to bring about exaltation.

Now if only people could figure out what the doctrines really were. =)

I agree with you there. The doctrines are a difficult thing to sort out sometimes too.

[_stemelbow]

I was referring to polygamy.

Well shoot, i was hoping for something far more scandalous than that.

[_harmony]

I was referring to polygamy.

Well shoot, i was hoping for something far more scandalous than that.

Blame Jacob.

[_malkie]

Who said "all other churches are abominable and corrupt"?

Why Dad of a Mormon of course.

You mean here?

Yes, its still the view of the Church as far as I'm aware.

It certainly is not the way that the missionaries present things now. They usually take the approach that other churches have part of the truth, but that the LDS church is the only one that has it all. That is a far cry from saying that all other churches are abominable and corrupt.

If so, I think you are attributing a statement to him that he did not make[my bold] - please read again. He was commenting on the way missionaries present the LDS church with regard to other churches.

For me, there is plenty of room to accept what Joseph Smith said God said and still hold to the notion that many churches, and other orgs for that matter, hold many truths, just not the whole enchilada. Indeed, it is heavily implied, at the very least, that the LDS Church itself, while holding much truth does not have it all. And since Joseph Smith' day perhaps some of the same things that were common in churches in Joseph's day, like the abominable creeds and the corrupts professors are also somewhat crept into the LORD's Church.

CFR
CFR

Now I have to go find allusions to the notion that the Church itself, whether in scripture or by statements made by leaders, that the Church itself doesn't claim to know all truths? I think some of the iffy stances on certain things, like evolution can help supply that information for you, no?

As for the second CFR, my "perhaps" was meant to suggest I don't have a reference, its theoretical. I'm just saying I wouldn't doubt it.

For the second, what did you have in mind as examples?

[_malkie]

I was referring to polygamy.

Well shoot, i was hoping for something far more scandalous than that.

Blame Jacob.

Well, it's a change from "Blame Joseph" (;=) - either of the Josephs.

[_Dad of a Mormon]

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: “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 thereof."

Many people, both Mormon and non-Mormon, interpret this to mean that he was condemning the formal creeds (such as the Apostle's creed or the Nicene creed) and that the professors were the clergy. I don't think that is what it meant. I think he is claiming that what the churches believed (creeds) were an abomination and that all of the members of the various churches (professors - as in they profess that they believe what their church teaches) were corrupt. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding of what he meant. It wasn't just a condemnation of the leadership. Joseph Smith was claiming that God (or Jesus) was saying that the church's beliefs (believed by all) were abominations and the members (professors) were all corrupt.

[_malkie]

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: “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 thereof."

Many people, both Mormon and non-Mormon, interpret this to mean that he was condemning the formal creeds (such as the Apostle's creed or the Nicene creed) and that the professors were the clergy. I don't think that is what it meant. I think he is claiming that what the churches believed (creeds) were an abomination and that all of the members of the various churches (professors - as in they profess that they believe what their church teaches) were corrupt. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding of what he meant. It wasn't just a condemnation of the leadership. Joseph Smith was claiming that God (or Jesus) was saying that the church's beliefs (believed by all) were abominations and the members (professors) were all corrupt.

I used to subscribe to that view, but am unsure that god/Joseph meant to condemn all the members as corrupt. Corrupted by incorrect teachings, perhaps, but no more than that.

[_madeleine]

Yes, LDS belief and existence hinges on a mythical "great apostasy". It is why I have to wonder what it is about not being a Christian religion is offensive to LDS, when the very foundation of all restorationist churches (including LDS) is that Christianity is exactly what is being rejected.

I don't see the rational behind it at all.