WE Worship Jesus and have Personal Relationship

[_SteelHead]

How is the cross not a pagan symbol?

[_ldsfaqs]

ldsfaqs, I am responding to your post(s) perhaps against my better judgement since I find your personal attacks to be quite objectionable. I am quite willing to accept the sincerity of your position yet you apparently are not able to reciprocate preferring such labels as liar and ignorant. As I said before, I will place my knowledge of Mormonism on a par with yours.

Well, bearing false witness is certainly a "personal" thing, so you thinking it's a personal attack is on you, not I. I only point out your own actions. Further, I'm not the one lying about others, ignoring the facts which clearly debunk your views, etc., thus what do you actually have to be critical of me for, because I point out your sin? Well, you won't be alone here.

That said, I am fully aware that individual Mormons do not interpret the symbols on temples and other buildings with Satanism (did I even say that?)

Let me tell you a little secret.... Individual Mormons ARE the CHURCH OF Jesus Christ OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS. "IT" is who we are..... It's THEOLOGY is who we are, what we believe, how we live. Your trying to "separate" the two, just shows your desperation to holding onto your argument.

We aren't like you, to where a religion is simply a religion to believe whatever you want according to your OWN interpretation. We are literally in Christ'S CHURCH.... It is us, and we are it.

but I do believe there is a major disconnect between them and the founding intent of Joseph Smith

Let me tell you another secret.... EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US are "mini" Joseph Smiths....!!!
We see the conflicting religions and beliefs, we seek after the whole and actual truth, and trust God to reveal it, and he did and does. We have no "disconnect" with Joseph Smith, we ARE Joseph Smith, and every other Prophet of the Lord God ALMIGHTY!!!

who was actively involved in some questionable practices... folk magic...masonry and its rituals, seer stones in hats..Jupiter talisman and such...

You know, I really love how you people rip things entirely out of the history and context, bunch them together, and say ooo ahhhh "occult". Joseph was a country boy in the 1800's.... EVERYONE played with "folk magic", kids even still today have their "lucky stones" and go "treasure hunting".... Do you know the only difference between everyone else and Joseph??? Joseph was a young boy starting to discover his prophet powers being manifest, but he still was a boy, doing things boys do.

Further, the things you are critical of him for show your OWN ignorance of Prophets of God. There is all kinds of "magic", "seer stones" etc. with Prophets of the Old Testament.... You for some reason IGNORE those examples, or aren't taught them, because you are taught bigotry toward other religions instead of what the Bible actually teaches.

and his clear emphasis on the dead within Mormon temple ritual does nothing, IMV, to lessen that connection.

Strange, heck with that Christ who taught the spirits in PRISON so they might also be judged the same as those in the flesh, as the Bible says. Heck with what the Bible says about in the Last Day's that the hearts of the children shall turn to the fathers and the hearts of the fathers shall turn to the children or God will smite the earth with a curse. Heaven forbid BAptism for the Dead, also taught in the Bible, promoted, not condemned, but ignored and tried to find rationalizations for. Heck, ignore Christian history for which those same ordinances were done at times, let alone Judaism.

Ya, heaven forbid that those Mormons not only serve the living, but also the dead, touching the heavens and spirit world, to be taught of God more purely by the HOLY SPIRIT, in our sactuary's from the world, the LORDS HOUSE. SO EVIL IT ALL IS.....

Nowhere within a Mormon temple is the cross, the universal symbol of Christianity and the risen Christ who overcame sin and death, seen...

Actually, the cross can be seen in every Temple. It's just not broadcast.
Further, that is YOUR symbol..... It is not ours. We focus on a personal and living Christ, not on a cross the instrument of his death, not his resurrection by the way. Fine if you want to use that, but you have NO RIGHT to condemn us for having our own symbols.... Why don't you condemn Judaism for not using it?

It's a funny thing you people are.... You condemn fellow Christians for not being Christian enough, but don't say a word about people who completely deny Christ's first coming, and even historically have condemned Christians.

Oh, I know, you're "politically correct" now.... You had your fun with the Jews historically. Now it's time to be bigots against the Mormons....

and yet within the highest token of the temple's ritual the very nails that held Christ to that cross are elevated as representative of the holiest of priesthoods to which only Jesus can lay claim.

1. There are many symbols in the Temple which teach lessons, spiritual lessons based entirely on the Word of God. You don't know a thing you're talking about.

2. The Melchizedek Priesthood is not a Priesthood that "only" Christ lay's claim to. The name itself debunks that point. Further, it is a "Priesthood ORDER" after the Son of God, which means many have access to according to it's definition (and it was had long before Christ was even on the earth). Further, MANY were given the Priesthood by Christ, and they gave it to others. Where do you think the Catholic Church got most of it's stuff and why we are so similar to it, even though Joseph Smith and most otherwise had nothing to do with Catholics??? Further, your claim here shows your own level of apostasy from what Christ actually established. Anyone educated of Christianity knows that you are either Catholic or Mormon. You and the rest don't have a leg to stand on authority and truth wise.

That, my friend, is puzzling in the extreme when seen through the lens of Biblical Christianity.

Guy, you are not "Biblical Christianity"..... You are people who use the Bible and make "your best guess" of what the truth is. You are no more "Biblical" than you think we are. We fully accept the Bible, believe everything in it, etc. I was a Mormon before I even knew Mormonism existed, because I saw things in the Bible that many of YOU don't see or ignore, or misinterpret, etc. which is why I knew well before being Mormon that your religions were of men, and were not true.

Anyone that follows the Bible is "Biblical Christianity"..... We simply know and understand more from it and from latter-day revelations. I knew your "Trinity" (post Nicea) was false from the Bible alone long before being and knowing of Mormonism, and many other things. From our perspective, Mormonism is far more "Biblical" than you are. We actually believe and follow ALL that it teaches. You talk about Christ's Priesthood, but you ignore the New Testament Priesthood requirements and aspects. You ignore the fact that people did things by authority, and weren't able to do things unless they had the authority, having to wait for the proper priesthood authority to come and do that thing, and so much more. All Mormonism has done is made "clear" a lot of what isn't as clear as could be in the Bible, and otherwise.

Anyway, your "lens" is a broken and incomplete lens..... You haven't been outside of your box, you think your box is the only and true way, when really, there is much more to know and see. What's worse about your "religion", is that you allow them to tell you how to think about other things i.e. "anti-mormonism".

Tell me, how many LDS scholars and leaders books have you read? (few to none) How many "Christian" Author's and scholars have you read? (likely many) How many atheist and anti-christian books have you read? (few to none) In contast, how many anti-mormon websites and books have you read??? (MANY MANY MANY) Can you claim balanced objectivity in discovering what is really true and factual when it concerns anything, let alone Mormonism? Absolutely not. And you really think you know as much as me? You haven't even CLOSE led my life of objectivity, searching in both experience and study. Do you think you understand "Exercise" by reading some "anti-exercise" book??? Me, I've studied several 100 anti-mormon books, let alone all the websites and forums, I've also studied several 100 LDS authored books, and many books by Christian author's, history, etc. I've studied ALL of LDS history, not just anti-mormon cherry picks that they can paint in some negative way, but the entire thing? Have you? Nope. You don't know squat.... More importantly, I've done most of these studies, and still do with an open mind, not with an agenda to condemn or pick apart like you.

One of my favorite "web" works by christians is the "The Seven Laws of the Harvest" article. It's very LDS.
http://Bible.org/article/seven-laws-harvest
One of the reasons I like it, is because it condemns anti-mormon condemnation of the Book of Mormons "saved after all we can do" scripture. Because guess what, the same teaching is also in the Bible in the law of the harvest.

[_ldsfaqs]

by the way....

I can't remember which thread you asked this, but I will respond here.

You asked me "what you could bring" as a Christian if you came to Mormonism, because we often say the saying "bring what you have, and let us add unto it", and you gave some examples.

Well the answer is pretty much everything you believe in the Bible.

We have the Trinity (yes, not the post Nicene Trinity which try's to make the Father, Son, Holy Ghost ONE BEING, but we have it, here only adding to your understanding)
We have Grace (yes, we believe faith and works is equally required, so yes, we aren't grace aloners, but what we teach is what the Bible actually teaches, so your again only adding to your understanding, not taking away)

What else....? Since we believe in the Bible, everything you see in there we also believe, the rest is just adding additional knowledge and understanding. Bring what you have, we add to it.... What do you really think we are so "radically" different about when it comes to so-called "Biblical Christianity"??? We have the same Bible, and believe every word in it.

You guys try to again misrepresent claiming we "discount" the Bible, simply because we are factual and realists, etc. But, proof is in the pudding. Quote for us an ACTUAL "LDS Lesson" that actually condemns something taught in the Bible??? Guess what, it doesn't exist. We study the Bible AS IT IS.... we read it as it is, we quote it as it is, etc.

Of course, obviously there are going to be otherwise some small corrections of things. But the "core" of what you believe in the Bible for the most part is little different than our beliefs.

Me, I can go to almost any other Christian religion and not be "offended" by what I'm taught or see. Might disagree with some, might not prefer some things, but so called "Biblical Christianity" is at the core of Mormonism. More importantly, the salvatory Gospel of Jesus Christ, his essential teachings are taught by ALL OF US.

Anyway, some thoughts....

[_Mittens]

LDSFAG has built a strawman with his explaination of the Trinity, God- Godhead- Substance- Essence- being [ all Synonyms ] and Three separate and distinct persons represent that one God is the correct difinition of the Trinity.



E. Calvin Beisner
God in Three Persons

The Christian Church throughout history has found in order to remain faithful to the teachings of the New Testament regarding the person and work of Christ, it had to affirm at least the following doctrines:
The doctrine of the Trinity----that in the nature of the One True God, there are three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each fully God, Coequal and Coeternal
When we have said these three things, then—that there is but one God, that the Father and the Son and the Spirit is each a distinct person—we have enunciated the doctrine of the Trinity in its completeness.
We may condense this into a somewhat shorter statement, one which is more precise: In the nature of the God, there are three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ( or substance ) of the one true God, there are three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit p 24

“The Nicene Creed, then, with centuries of theological discussion and controversy behind it, still teaches of the Trinity as the New Testament does: that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, while distinct from each other personally, are the same God” p 153

It is this relation of Christ to the Father and the Spirit which Dr John Robinson takes as one of the strong-est indications of triunity in the Godhead:
At the Incarnation… the Godhead is revealed for the first time as existing in three distinct relationships. It is these differences of relation that make necessary a doctrine of the Trinity, not differences of “character” or modes working. The Old Testament, too knew God in different “characters” but it was not forced to a Trinity Theology…We cannot begin with God creating, God redeeming, God sanctifying, or any such collection of attributes, and proceed to identify these with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit…Rather, one must start with the three Persons, no more and no less, which are required by the three relations at the Incarnation
When we have said these three things, then---that there is but one God, that the Father and the son and the spirit is each God, that the Father and the Son and the Spirit is each a distinct person---We have enunciated the doctrine of the Trinity in its completeness.Page 40

[_Albion]

Well, ldsfaqs, you certainly covered a great deal of ground....was there anything you left out? You even presume to know things about me and my knowledge and understanding of Mormonism. I won't even attempt to respond to the mish-mash of your post which is all over the place and lacking in specifics ....but then perhaps that was your intent.

[_Albion]

The Christian Trinity teaches that within the unity of one Diety there are three separate persons who are coequal in power, nature, and eternity.....but never let it be said that ldsfaqs ever does what he accuses others of.

[_Albion]

Steelhead, the cross may or may not have been used by so-called pagan religions in the past...it is after all a simple symbol. I submit, however, that its use in Christianity derives from the atonement of Jesus and to the believer signifies his triumph over death and sin and does not come not from pagan beliefs or practices. No matter how it was used in pre atonement times, that is its significance to Christians throughout the world today. My whole point about the inverted pentagram, no matter how it was used in the past, is that it is a symbol currently/still used in the occult and yet the LDS Church continues to display it on their "holy" buildings. Whether or not their intent is the occult or not its current connection to the occult does, IMV, make it, together with other symbols inappropriate for buildings claimed to be centers for Christian worship. Perhaps you don't care, but what would be thought of, say, Episcopalians if they adorned their buildings with swastikas. That was once a benign symbol but in light of 20th Century events it is no long seen that way and would not be acceptable to most within or without the church.

[_Mittens]

The Christian Trinity teaches that within the unity of one Diety there are three separate persons who are coequal in power, nature, and eternity.....but never let it be said that ldsfaqs ever does what he accuses others of.

Trinity

The doctrine of the Trinity in the godhead includes the three following particulars, viz. (a) There is only one God, one divine nature; (b) but in this divine nature there is the distinction of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as three (subjects or persons); and (c) these three-have equally, and in common with one another, the nature and perfection of supreme divinity. It was the custom in former times for theologians to blend their own speculations and those of others with the statement of the Bible doctrine. It is customary now to exhibit first the simple doctrine of the Bible, and afterwards, in a separate part, the speculations of the learned respecting it.
(from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright © 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)


, first used by Theophilus (A.D. 168 A.D. - 183 A.D.), or from the Lat. trinitas, first used by Tertullian (A.D. 220 A.D.), to express this doctrine. The propositions involved in the doctrine are these: 1. That God is one, and that there is but one God (Deut 6:4; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa 44:6; Mark 12:29,32; John 10:30). 2. That the Father is a distinct divine Person (hypostasis, subsistentia, persona, suppositum intellectuale), distinct from the Son and the Holy Spirit. 3. That Jesus Christ was truly God, and yet was a Person distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit. 4. That the Holy Spirit is also a distinct divine Person.

(from Easton's Bible Dictionary, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

[_SteelHead]

Steelhead, the cross may or may not have been used by so-called pagan religions in the past...it is after all a simple symbol. I submit, however, that its use in Christianity derives from the atonement of Jesus and to the believer signifies his triumph over death and sin and does not come not from pagan beliefs or practices. No matter how it was used in pre atonement times, that is its significance to Christians throughout the world today. My whole point about the inverted pentagram, no matter how it was used in the past, is that it is a symbol currently/still used in the occult and yet the LDS Church continues to display it on their "holy" buildings. Whether or not their intent is the occult or not its current connection to the occult does, IMV, make it, together with other symbols inappropriate for buildings claimed to be centers for Christian worship. Perhaps you don't care, but what would be thought of, say, Episcopalians if they adorned their buildings with swastikas. That was once a benign symbol but in light of 20th Century events it is no long seen that way and would not be acceptable to most within or without the church.

Do you not see the double standard inherent in your statement?

The swastika is a architectural and design element present and still existant in a variety of Christian churches, especially during the medieval period. Would you suggest the churches remove it from their historical buildings, motifs, iconography, etc?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

[_Albion]

I agree that the swastika was an essentially innocent symbol in the past. In fact, I think it was used inside the church Hitler attended as a youth and was likely from where he took his use of it. Today, however, this bent cross symbol is associated with nazism and I think it highly unlikely it would be used in newly built Christian churches because of that association no matter its innocence in the past. By extension, I might possibly understand why Mormonism used the symbols it did on its early temple in Nauvoo but I do question why they continue to use them on newer buildings given the association they have with the occult today in western culture.