posted
By odd coincidence, I happened to be reading about this today. The rabbi recounted a conversation Dr. Laura had. Paraphrase:
Caller: "So my son doesn't want to do his bar mitzvah. My husband isn't Jewish, but I am, and I raised them to be good Jews ..."
Laura: "You married a non-Jew? How could you possibly raise your son to be a faithful Jew, when you aren't?"
It isn't the Gentile parent that doesn't respect Judaism; it's the Jewish parent. She decided not to follow a significant part of the Law.
(The odd thing is that I'm not Jewish, and it doesn't matter to me much if Jews marry Gentiles. But I relate. I wouldn't marry outside my faith, either, and we don't even have a Law.)
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what helps people lose respect for Jews? Stereotypes like
quote:horns to baking matza with the blood of Christian children to the bloody Protocols of the Elders of Zion
You know what helps allow massacres and pogroms to happen as the world stands by and watches. ANYONE who doesn't challenge perverted, wrong conceptions like those you mentioned.
I'd hope you'd rather some Jews marry outside the faith than have more people belive stupid lies about them.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
What are the essential differences in LDS and other Christian denominations?
Do Mormons really disagree with parts of the Nicene Creed? What parts?
What's Platonic in the rest of Christianity?
--
Hey, does anybody notice the "Ads by Goooogle" at the bottom? Mine currently advertises "pictures of Beautiful Mormon singles" and "Tools for reaching LDS (Mormons) with the true Christian Gospel." Somebody might need to adjust that algorithm...
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. "Judaic Christianity" died out because it was inherently unworkable.
Obviously, Mormons disagree. Though I actually believe 'primitive Christianity' is a better term; you won't find Mormons arguing that circumcision or the law of Moses is still applicable in its entirety. (Actually, I have heard pro-circumcision arguments, though they're hardly official).
And I also find it intersting that Mormons feel the same way about marriage outside the tribe; it's strongly frowned upon, even officially.
quote:So, some questions for LDS people:
What are the essential differences in LDS and other Christian denominations?
Do Mormons really disagree with parts of the Nicene Creed? What parts?
What's Platonic in the rest of Christianity?
1) Yikes. Too many to mention. The conception of the Trinity and of God himself that I think has already been mentioned is a big one. Close behind is the Mormon stress on ecclesiastical authority, though this is shared to some degree with Catholicism. Mormons believe in an open canon of scripture. Add to that a whole host of new doctrines which traditional Christianity does not share - the stuff about intelligences being a primary one. And Mormons have temple rites strongly reminiscent of what you find in Leviticus which other Christians see as terribly foriegn (though you're not going to get any Mormons on this board to discuss them in greater detail; they're seen as highly sacred and therefore not to be discussed in casual company).
2)Mostly there are some difficulties with the overtly classical trinitarianism in some of the language, particularly the "of one Being with the Father" clause in reference to Christ, and the Filioque clause.
3)Short answer: what is usually meant by this is the definition of God as absolute - unbounded, omnipotent, omniscient, etc. The logical conclusion traditionally drawn from this is of an impersonal, unbodied God, beyond any possibility of human understanding, on the other side of an ontological divide that cannot be bridged. Perhaps stuff that has earlier been posted in this thread makes is clear why that's a problem.
Aside to Tom: Really? You're maybe not looking in the right places. Beyond theology, consider the quite conscious self-construction of Mormons as an ethnic group, which was very consciously based on Biblical Judaism - one example of which would be the marriage thing I mentioned above. Mormons even had an Exodus.
quote: Actually, Tom, I think most Mormons would consider that a pretty good description.
Would Jews? Because if I say something like "you know, I'm a lot like your typical black man," I'd expect the black man to be more entitled than I am to that determination. If Jews as a whole agree that Mormons are a lot like them, then I think you've got a claim. Otherwise, not so much.
----
Will, I agree that Mormons quite self-consciously style themselves after what they think is Judaic tradition. I think they fail almost completely, however, at actually resembling Judaism, except insofar as certain similarities -- insularity, taboos against intermarriage, etc. -- tend to be shared among minority religions.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: woah.... thats something I never really saw before.
But I highly doubt that just because the father is non jewish the son/duaghters are denied their heritage for all you'ld know the mother only agreed to marry on the condition that the children are raised as jews. I know this happened in some of the fiction I've read, but it must've happened in real lfe too.
Even if they're raised as Jews, they're hardly going to be raised as Jews who keep God's laws. That doesn't happen.
But what I meant by heritage is more than that. According to Jewish law, being Jewish goes by matrilineal descent. If your mother is Jewish, you're Jewish. No "conversion out" or any personal choice can change that.
But tribal affiliation, to the extent that such is known, goes according to the father. In most cases, this is only known for Levites and the subset of Aaronites (Kohanim) within them. The son of a Kohen is a Kohen. And even if someone doesn't know their tribe, they're still a member of it. But the child of a Jewish mother and a non-Jewish father is tribeless. And while it has less immediacy in 2005, it is a difference.
That was the heritage I was speaking of.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And of course, there's no way a Jewish child can be raised to have any respect for Judaism when one of that child's parents isn't even Jewish.
So you believe that nobody who is not Jewish has any respect for Judaism?
And is it true that you've stopped beating your wife?
I'm going to answer this for those, other than Icarus, who might actually be interested in an answer, rather than in scoring rhetorical points.
I think there are a ton of non-Jews who have a lot more respect for Jews and Judaism than a Jew who has intermarried. Marrying out demonstrates contempt for Judaism. How do you teach your kids that it's important to follow God's laws when you aren't following them yourself? "Do as I say; not as I do"?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Will, I agree that Mormons quite self-consciously style themselves after what they think is Judaic tradition. I think they fail almost completely, however, at actually resembling Judaism, except insofar as certain similarities -- insularity, taboos against intermarriage, etc. -- tend to be shared among minority religions.
Ah, that depends on how you define Judaic tradition, and I'd be interested in how you do so. If you're defining it solely as religious practice, than perhaps you have a point; Mormons aren't celebrating Passover (though there *are* similarities, particularly in the temple rituals). However, in terms of sacred history and rhetoric - the things which make up religious culture - the degree to which Mormons have patterned themselves after Judaism are striking, and are far more specific than the simple expressions of insularity you cite.
And applying your 'black man' logic to the parameters of this discussion, I can only conclude that the Catholics get to decide who is Christian.
Edit: By the way, I was considering citing turnabout as fair play and calling you 'Tim,' but graciously decided not to do so. Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Princess Leah: You know what helps people lose respect for Jews? Stereotypes like
quote:horns to baking matza with the blood of Christian children to the bloody Protocols of the Elders of Zion
You know what helps allow massacres and pogroms to happen as the world stands by and watches. ANYONE who doesn't challenge perverted, wrong conceptions like those you mentioned.
I'd hope you'd rather some Jews marry outside the faith than have more people belive stupid lies about them.
Shouldn't that be Princess Leia?
And I'm sorry you'd hope that. Because I wouldn't rather that at all.
I've run into some of the most arrantly stupid misconceptions about Jews. Some from people who are relatively inoffensive about it; they were just miseducated.
A missionary once came to my parents' home on Saturday when I was home visiting from college. I wasn't raised religious, and the rest of my family isn't, but I argued myself into it in college.
So this guy comes to the door selling window cleaner. I explain to him that I wish him luck, but that I can't buy anything on Shabbat. Well, this gets us into a whole big discussion about Judaism and so on. And it develops that he'd never, ever, heard that Jews don't believe Jesus was the messiah. He was under the impression that everyone accepted that, and that the Jews, nevertheless, had rejected him.
I don't know whether I was successful in disabusing him of this weird concept or not, but I certainly did try.
And yes, you can make the case that people believing tripe like that is dangerous, since hell, what kind of perverse and evil nutjobs believe that someone is god on earth and some sort of savior, and rejects him anyway?
But Leah, understand something. I'm a Jew. And I know that the only thing that ever endangers us is ourselves. God has made it quite clear, over and over and over again, that we can rely on Him if we do what we're supposed to, and that we can rely on Him standing aside if we don't.
A Jew who marries out is a greater danger to the Jewish people than a hundred Mel Gibsons.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then that will be the death of Judaism, if all Jews believe that.
I think that the relation between Mormonism and the Gnostic Christians, or Buddhists, is greater than the similarity between it and Judaism by a long shot.
Posts: 883 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
and I am saying it will be the death not as an aggressive remark, but as a expression of my view that primarily genetic religions cannot survive in todays culture.
Posts: 883 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RunningBear: and I am saying it will be the death not as an aggressive remark, but as a expression of my view that primarily genetic religions cannot survive in todays culture.
<shrug> We've been counted out by more nations and cultures that no longer exist than probably any other people in history. Had we given in to other cultures as you seem to be suggesting, we'd be nothing but a footnote in the history books by now.
Today's culture will pass, and we'll still be here. I'm not worried.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom -- what I said was that most Mormons would consider the description of Mormonism as it relates to Judism quite a good description. I never said Jews would agree. And I certainly never said you would have a clue.
Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nod* But since we initially entered the conversation from the direction of "a non-Mormon, Harold Bloom, says that Mormonism is something like a return to Judaic Christianity," and since we all know the LDS church has its one of its foundational tenets that they are a return to Judaic Christianity, I didn't particularly see the value in saying something that would boil down to "Mormons think their theology is right." Because, well, duh.
Certain Mormon terminology is deliberately taken from Judaic tradition, but very few Mormon traditions, rituals, or beliefs have anything to do with Jewish ones as they are now practiced or understood to have been practiced. This doesn't mean that the Mormons can't be right, but it does mean that I can understand why many Jews consider the Mormon assertion that they represent a Jewish heritage to be insulting to the point of blasphemy.
Again, it would be like my claiming to represent "real" Hispanic culture. Maybe I DO -- but would a typical Hispanic think so? Does that mean they're doing it wrong?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sigh. back to original question. Because, you see, I don't believe what my parents raised me to, with regards to religion. OSC says he'd blame himself for improper child rearing, because no child raised properly could deny the truth of it.
But that happens in *every* religion. And there will always be some children for whom the religion just doesn't ring true, no matter how sincere and devoted the parents are.
I truly believe my parents raised me correctly as a child to stay faithful to their religion. It's just sometimes it doesn't work out. The belief just doesn't resonate at the deep level it's supposed to. How long as a parent do you blame yourself for it and how do you move on with life.
I feel awful about my parents blaming themselves. Insisting it was my choice to leave the religion doesn't really help either. And it isn't entirely correct, because it wasn't just choice, it was lack of reasonance , which is something that can't be manufactured or chosen. Telling them too leave it up to their God isn't comforting either (though theoretically it should be.)
quote:And applying your 'black man' logic to the parameters of this discussion, I can only conclude that the Catholics get to decide who is Christian.
I'm Catholic, so I'm ok with that!
OK, back to being serious.
So Mormons are big on ecclesiastical authority? I thought they were ultra-Protestant, and preferred to think of everyone as clergy. Hm.
What is an open canon of Scripture?
What are the intelligences?
I looked up the Filioque clause. It seems that the controversy over whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father & Son (Catholic) or from the Father only (Orthodox). Seems sort of technical to me.
So Mormons reject the Trinity. What is the relation between Father Son and Holy Spirit, in Mormon thought?
I'm getting an impression Mormons think of God as a very powerful being, but not fundamentally different from less powerful beings like us. Is this right? Does this difference have a practical effect?
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:So Mormons are big on ecclesiastical authority? I thought they were ultra-Protestant, and preferred to think of everyone as clergy. Hm.
Yes and no. We believe that each person can receive revelation pertaining to his or her domain. So a mother and father can receive revelation about what their family should do, and a person can receive revelation for him- or herself. A "bishop" (basic ecclesiastical leader of a congregation) can receive revelation for his ward (congregation), and so on. But at the point where the bishop tries to speak for the church or tries to lay down new doctrine, the bishop is overstepping his bounds. Only the prophet is authorized by God to speak for the church. At the same time, not only the prophet is authorized to receive inspiration from God.
quote:What is an open canon of Scripture?
This means we believe that God will continue to reveal things to His church. We do not believe that the Bible is the end of revelation; not even our current set of canonized scripture (the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants with the Bible) is the end of God's words. As God reveals new things to His prophets, we will add to the scriptures.
quote:What are the intelligences?
I think this has already been answered in this thread, so I won't go into that again. Basically, they are proto-spirits, which are proto-people. God organized intelligences into spirits and then spirits into us.
quote:I looked up the Filioque clause. It seems that the controversy over whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father & Son (Catholic) or from the Father only (Orthodox). Seems sort of technical to me.
We believe that the Holy Spirit is a being distinct from either the Father or the Son and that He does not yet have a body. He is a member of the trinity or Godhood as we call it.
quote:So Mormons reject the Trinity. What is the relation between Father Son and Holy Spirit, in Mormon thought?
As I said above, we believe they are three separate people who are perfectly united in purpose. This means that any of them can speak for the others, which allows the Holy Ghost to bear witness of the Father and the Son.
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm getting an impression Mormons think of God as a very powerful being, but not fundamentally different from less powerful beings like us. Is this right? Does this difference have a practical effect?
Yes. The practical effect is that we believe (and this is where a lot of other Christian religions begin to call "blasphemy!") that we can become like God is. That is our purpose in this life: to become perfect through Christ so that we can live with the Father for eternity and continue to progress toward the perfection of knowledge, goodness, and power that He is. We also believe that He is the father of our spirits and the literal father of Jesus Christ. Because we see God as a father, our perception of the family is that it is the most important unit in the church and that motherhood and fatherhood are essential parts of learning to become like God.
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: So Mormons are big on ecclesiastical authority? I thought they were ultra-Protestant, and preferred to think of everyone as clergy. Hm.
A few things to add, apart from what Brinestone said.
First of all, LDS do not consider themselves 'Protestant'. We consider ourselves 'Restorationist'
I understand that in the Catholic church, there is taught to be a lesser priesthood of all Church members, who do not have authority to act in priesthood ordinances unless there are very extreme conditions, and a proper Priest, who has been set apart in Holy Orders, is not available.
The LDS Church believes that while all men can recieve the authority of, and be ordained to the Priesthood, they are still under the direction of their local leaders. While some ordinances (such as giving blessings of comfort, and annointing of the sick) can be performed without permission from a higher authority, other ordinances (such as Baptisms and Confirmations) must be done only under the direction of the local Bishop.
While the Bishop leads the local congregation (with his two councilors) in temporal and spiritual matters, he too, when it comes to leadership matters and policy, is under the direction of a Stake Presidency (a stake being a larger, city-wide-or-larger area), who in turn is under the direction of Area Authority Seventies, who are in turn under the direction of the General Authorities (The Quorum of Twelve Apostles, and the First Presidency).
All of whom are under the direction of Jesus Christ
There is a definite Line of Authority that is very highly maintained.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I, like Will B, am also Catholic, and am very interested particularily in your perception of Jesus Christ, particularily the incarnation. One belief Catholics and Mormons have in common is the belief in the physical body of Christ. I'm wondering whether you belive Jesus had a body before the incarnation. Because if so, why "be born of a virgin" and all that?
BTW, I'm finding this discussion fascinating, especially that alot of my beliefs surrounding mormonism were unfounded. It certainly bears investigation.
Posts: 18 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, you may not agree that Mormons are much like Jews, and perhaps I see your point. Even Mormons would agree that we aren't JEWISH in our practices. However, I would at least like you to read Harold Bloom's "Post-Christian America" (or whatever that is called). Especially what he says about Mormons. His conclusions are that Joseph Smith has an uncanny ability to bring back ideas from the more ancient Jewish religion. It would also be nice if you could read some books by Margeret Barker, although she doesn't mention Mormons at all. Jan Shipp's "A New Religous Tradition" also mentions the Jewish Christian relationship at least once.
Still, that isn't really my question. It has more to do with what an Eastern religion is and why would Mormons be related? As for Gnostic Christianity, I disagree completely with the comparison. If you really understood both of them there are some huge and insermountable differences. Ones I can think of right now is the nature of Evil (LDS necessary vs. Gnost a mistake), the human body (LDS not just good, but great vs Gnost completely evil and to be done away with), and God (LDS seperate and distinct with glorified bodies vs. Gnost having no body or even expressable existance). Those are pretty important differences. The more I read about Gnostic the more different the similarities become; usually of superficial relationships. It would be like saying an apple is pretty much an orange. They are round, sweet, and come from trees.
edit: Hot Soup, LDS don't believe Jesus had a body before coming to Earth to be born. It was his first one. Part of his mission was to get a body (although different from us mortals because of his miraculous birth and parentage)and resurrect making it possible for everyone to do likewise.
posted
Becoming like God: other Christian sects also have the concept of becoming virtuous like him, and there's certainly some implication of power (we are "priests and kings" and "what we bind on earth shall be bound in heaven"). Can we ever equal God's power, in LDS thinking? Or is our future simply exercising His power (as I believe Catholic thought has it)?
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: One belief Catholics and Mormons have in common is the belief in the physical body of Christ. I'm wondering whether you belive Jesus had a body before the incarnation. Because if so, why "be born of a virgin" and all that?
We believe that He did not have a body before His incarnation, but was a spirit Being. (Which doesn't lessen His Godhood.)
Posts: 561 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:God has made it quite clear, over and over and over again, that we can rely on Him if we do what we're supposed to, and that we can rely on Him standing aside if we don't.
Well, starLisa, I have a oft-told joke to repeat, and then i will stop because I've promised myself I wouldn't rise to this bait again.
(this has nothing to do with Katrina. it's just how the story goes) There once was a flood. A man was left stranded on his rooftop with the water rising higher and higher every minute. He was a devout believer. He prayed to God to save him from drowning. When the water was up to his knees, another man in a boat came rowing by. He offered to take the man to safety, but he refused, saying that he had faith that God would save him. The man in the boat shrugged and moved on. This happend again and again. The man on the roof was treading water and tiring fast. He prayed to God to save him with his last strength, then he went under. In heaven, he asked God, "why didn't You save me?" And God replied, "Why didn't you get into the boats I sent?"
Do I have to sum up the moral. Cuz I'm stressed out and I really don't feel like it. I'm going to take a walk and go to bed.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:God has made it quite clear, over and over and over again, that we can rely on Him if we do what we're supposed to, and that we can rely on Him standing aside if we don't.
I know. All those people who died in the Holocaust must have deserved it. Theodicy is a bit more complex than you're making it out to be.
---
Incidentally, so is Judaism as a whole. The orthodox view you're representing is not held by a great many faithful Jews.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
One question that always puzzled me about religions is the conditions of being sent to Hell by belief in other faiths. In Christianity it states that as long as you believe that Christ died for the forgiveness of your sins and you accept him as your savior then you get your ticket to Heaven. This means that if your Jewish...you go straight to Hell. But then if you're Mormon or Cathlic and so many other Christ based religions then by the Heaven-entry beliefs of Christianity they would still go to Heaven even though they are of other religions. What my question is is does this apply on the other end? i.e. By the rules and beliefs of Mormons and Cathlics, even if someone is Christian then wouldn't they still go to Heaven too? And if the answer is yes then I don't see why there must be so many different religions and so many different branches in those religions. If the answer is yes then that proves that there is no wrong way to worship just as long as you believe and trust in the word of the Bible. Then again maybe that's why there is so many religions and branches of religions (because they are all just different ways of worshiping same thing with slightly different beliefs) and the competition between them is the simple cause for them saying that the other way is wrong when infact it isn't. Am I wrong by thinking this?
Posts: 112 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Though engaged to a Methodist girl, several years ago I started studying my own religion (Judaism) much more closely. Going to temple on a very regular basis, reading up on traditions and beliefs my mother never taught and so forth. I hear people speak starLisa'a point of view fairly often. The scriptures do flat order Jews not to intermarry. There really are no if and or buts about it. The biggest reason is to be a good Jew, one must strictly adhere to the 600+ laws given to us, and having a non Jewish spouse makes that impossible. I'm the perfect example of what she's talking about. My mother married a non-Jew. We had a non kosher household, and did not attend services often. I had my Bar Mitzvah and Confirmation, but until just after college I never really did much. (Though I can honestly say I never celebrated a single Christian holiday!) Now I have no tribe (mother was Kohein) and my children will never be Jewish.
[ September 13, 2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Stephan ]
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trance: One question that always puzzled me about religions is the conditions of being sent to Hell by belief in other faiths. In Christianity it states that as long as you believe that Christ died for the forgiveness of your sins and you accept him as your savior then you get your ticket to Heaven. This means that if your Jewish...you go straight to Hell. But then if you're Mormon or Cathlic and so many other Christ based religions then by the Heaven-entry beliefs of Christianity they would still go to Heaven even though they are of other religions. What my question is is does this apply on the other end? i.e. By the rules and beliefs of Mormons and Cathlics, even if someone is Christian then wouldn't they still go to Heaven too? And if the answer is yes then I don't see why there must be so many different religions and so many different branches in those religions. If the answer is yes then that proves that there is no wrong way to worship just as long as you believe and trust in the word of the Bible. Then again maybe that's why there is so many religions and branches of religions (because they are all just different ways of worshiping same thing with slightly different beliefs) and the competition between them is the simple cause for them saying that the other way is wrong when infact it isn't. Am I wrong by thinking this?
Judaism teaches that non-Jews just have 7 laws they must follow to enjoy what ever world there is to come.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I feel awful about my parents blaming themselves. Insisting it was my choice to leave the religion doesn't really help either. And it isn't entirely correct, because it wasn't just choice, it was lack of reasonance , which is something that can't be manufactured or chosen.
Banna, set yourself at ease. Good parents feel guilty about what they do wrong (perceived or factual) raising their kids. I will feel bad and something of a failure if my children reject the God I'm bringing them up to love. It won't make me love them any less and it certainly will not be their fault that I feel that way. But I'm pretty sure I will feel I failed them some. Along with all the other things I failed them in, a list which grows longer as they grow older. It's an occupational hazard. Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do not worship idols. Do not blaspheme. Do not murder. Do not steal. Do not commit immoral sexual acts (homosexuality is open for debate). Do not be cruel to animals (eating flesh ofliving animal). Maintain courts of justice to uphold the other 6 laws.
Its one of the reasons we don't try to convert people. Non-Jews are supposed to have an easier path to the world to come.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Before I finish reading the page (because I have to go home now) I have a few questions starting from this little event:
Mormons come up in a discussion about Christianity/Evolution (since I'm the agnostic guy who comes in looking for a fight ) and a freind of mine smiles and says "They aren't Christians" as if it was something only children would consider.
And about a year later he lists these things that Mormons believe (supposedly): Sacred underpants, 8 foot tall aliens on the moon and the 12 lost tribes of Israel are living in the North pole sipping on Coconuts.
And, more important, where do they get the coconuts? Are they carried? And what is the windspeed velocity of a swallow?
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is my first post on this website, so I'd like to say "hi" to everyone. I've been enjoying reading this thread today. Very interesting! As a member of the LDS Church myself, I'm always excited to share my beliefs with anyone who will listen.
First, I'd like to offer my thanks to Orson Scott Card for his delightful and intelligent post on the subject. So much wisdom in so few words!
The topic has wandered from the original question, but that's okay. I'll contribute my $0.02 I suppose.
quote:Originally posted by trance: One question that always puzzled me about religions is ... [snip] ... other faiths. In Christianity it states that ... [snip] ... so many other Christ based religions ... [snip] ... I don't see why there must be so many different religions and so many different branches in those religions ... [snip]
It's interesting that you ask this question in this thread. Why on earth are there so many Christian religions? Why so many churches, all claiming to believe in Christ? Shouldn't the Bible answer all these questions, if it's the word of God?
The reason it is so interesting is that this is precisely what drove Joseph Smith to the grove of trees to pray to God for an answer in the first place.
Somewhere around 1820, this 14-year-old boy read James 1:5 where it states that "if anyone lacks wisdom, let him ask in faith, and it shall be given him."
After pondering deeply on this scripture, he went to the woods to pray in private, and ask which church to join.
Now here is the tip of the blade: What happened next? Did Joseph make up his story about the vision? Was he a liar, or did he really have a vision from God? Was he misguided, or deceived?
There are currently more than twelve million members of The Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-Day Saints. If Joseph Smith was a fake, then all these people have been duped. This would probably be the greatest hoax in the history of the world.
If this is the case, the only consolation is that many of these people are trying to live good Christlike lives. Even if it happens that we're being too vigorous in our devotion, surely we're not going to fare the worse in the next life for it.
On the other hand, if Joseph told the truth, that he did indeed see God the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ, and they told him that these churches were the churches of men, and that later in his life, Joseph would be an instrument in the hand of God in bringing to pass the restoration of an organization personally headed by Jesus Christ Himself, for the purpose of bringing mankind closer to God, and preparing the world to receive Christ at his Second Coming, then can there possibly be a more important message for the world, than that the heavens are open once again, and that God speaks to a prophet to guide mankind?
Perhaps this gives clues as to the great success of the missionary efforts of this church. They really believe in the importance of the message.
If this is the case, then why doesn't God just tell everyone the good news directly?
Because one of the purposes of life is to develop faith. If we were just given the answer, there would be no faith. Faith is of critical importance in the eternities, it is a crucial aspect of divinity. It was by faith that the universe was made. If we are "gods in embryo", we'd better learn to have faith.
I think that another reason that God doesn't usually come directly to the populace with his message is to protect us. Huh? How does this work?
People tend to be disobedient, and self destructive. Even though we know that smoking is horribly addictive, and almost certainly fatal, lots of people start the habit every day.
If a person were to receive the law directly, from an undisputable divine source, and then they were to break that law, there is no way out for them. They must pay the full consequence of their transgression.
However, if accepting the law requires faith on the part of the recipient, and the faith is lacking, then the veracity of the law is in question to that person. They didn't know for sure that it was valid, so breaking the law carries a lesser penalty.
On the other side of the coin, the blessings that come from obeying a law that requires faith to accept are much greater than the blessings that come from obeying a law that was just given directly.
The LDS Church (Mormon church), is different from traditional Christianity in that we claim that there is again divine relevation. The heavens are open, and God again speaks to man. Therefore, we are NOT completely founded on the Bible, as are most Christian churches. An appeal to the Bible is not our last recourse. (Don't get me wrong, we still believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is translated correctly.)
Some people fault the LDS Church for occasionally changing its official position on various matters (plural marriage comes to mind, the practice ended in the 1800s). This doesn't damage my faith, it strengthens it. When the organization changes and adapts, we don't apologize and say "we were wrong all along," but rather, "The Lord must feel that this is the better course for us now."
Joseph Smith relates this prophesy of himself, given during a visit by a heavenly messenger: "He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people."
One simple way to help determine if Joseph Smith was a fake is to read the book he translated from ancient gold plates, the "Book of Mormon". (People can visit www.lds.org to get a free copy.)
In summary, I would say that the big difference between "Mormonism" and traditional Christianity is belief in the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith.
You are referring to the "temple garment". Wearing special clothing underneath outer clothing sure seems strange to most people. It relates to covenants made in temples. There is a detailed explanation here (be sure to read the last paragraph too): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment
* 8 foot tall aliens on the moon * the 12 lost tribes of Israel are living in the North pole sipping on Coconuts.
Is everything a prophet says a prophesy? No, prophets are just men with a special calling. They can make mistakes, and can speak for themselves. Someone once asked Joseph Smith if he thought there were people living on the moon. He said he thought so. And the lost tribes were supposedly in the North Countries, according to the Old Testament, so I suppose the North Pole could be one speculation someone had at some time.
When a prophet is speaking, take care. Is he just talking from his own thoughts? Keep an eye out for a key phrase; If he starts a sentence with "THUS SAITH THE LORD:" then you had better sit up and listen.
quote: If Joseph Smith was a fake, then all these people have been duped. This would probably be the greatest hoax in the history of the world.
Only if all the other religions in the world are true.
quote: One simple way to help determine if Joseph Smith was a fake is to read the book he translated from ancient gold plates, the "Book of Mormon". (People can visit www.lds.org to get a free copy.)
I don't need a vacuum cleaner or new siding, either, thank you very much. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blayne, one of them is sort of true. However, the others are so outrageous (and that is the point of bringing it up, isn't it, by those hostile to the LDS faith) that I must believe you are lazy for not finding out. At least you asked I suppose, but they seem to be things you can easily find on your own by independant research. Its like telling someone that Jews drink goat blood. A simple search of even the most basic of Jewish writings would show that it doesn't even show up!
Understand that I know it isn't you, but when people ask such silly questions I question their thinking ability. There is no denial that Mormons have views that are strange to outsiders. But frankly outsiders who would study the most isoteric information are flat out stupid and lazy when it comes to the LDS religion. To be honest, the same can be said of people's views of Islam.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: There is probably not a single thing that a Jew can do which is as damaging and offensive to the Jewish People as intermarriage. Nothing else even comes close. Even apostasizing and "converting" to another religion only comes a close second.
If a Jewish man marries a non-Jewish woman, their children aren't Jewish. If a Jewish woman marries a non-Jewish man, their children are Jewish, but they are cut off from much of their heritage. And of course, there's no way a Jewish child can be raised to have any respect for Judaism when one of that child's parents isn't even Jewish.
See, it isn't just that we don't like it. God commanded it. Now it's true that God commanded a great many things. There are Jews who eat non-kosher food. That's bad. There are Jews who violate the Sabbath. That's really bad. There are Jews who would eat a ham sandwich on Yom Kippur (you're not allowed to eat or drink anything on Yom Kippur). That's extraordinarily bad. But all of those are individual sins, and all can be dealt with on an individual level. None of them are necessarily lasting. Intermarriage creates what we call a bechiya l'dorot, or a weeping for the generations.
I sometimes wonder if the solution to the whole Arab/Jewish problem wouldn't be just to get everyone drunk, lock them into a warehouse and let nature take its course. 70 years down the road, no more Arabs and Jews, just Arews and Jabs that will all live happily ever after.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
AH HA! the gold plates in Redemption Of Christopher Colombus are from Mormon! I love making connections. And these gold plates, can someone give me some history on them?
Posts: 883 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Do not worship idols. Do not blaspheme. Do not murder. Do not steal. Do not commit immoral sexual acts (homosexuality is open for debate).
Um... no. Unless you're talking about female homosexuality. There are a very small number of people who hold that the 7 Noachide Laws prohibit sex between women. Almost all authorities say they do not. And there are no dissenting views to the fact that the arayot (which you translated as "immoral sexual acts") include one particular sexual act between men.
I wouldn't label them as "immoral", necessarily, either. "Forbidden", yes, but I don't see anything more immoral about a married woman having sex with a man she isn't married to than a married man having sex with a single woman. The former is "adultery" in terms of Jewish law, and the latter isn't.
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Do not be cruel to animals (eating flesh ofliving animal). Maintain courts of justice to uphold the other 6 laws.
Its one of the reasons we don't try to convert people. Non-Jews are supposed to have an easier path to the world to come.
A non-Jew who keeps those seven is on the same level, spiritually speaking, as a Jew who keeps all of ours. Looks like non-Jews are going to be getting most of the good seats in the next world. <sigh>
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trance: One question that always puzzled me about religions is the conditions of being sent to Hell by belief in other faiths.
Jews don't believe there is such a thing as hell. Which is a shame, really, because folks like Hitler, Dahmer, etc, really deserve one.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hearing the preponderance of denominations as evidence of discord is like seeing the different shops at the food court and assuming that people who eat Wendy's look down on the ones who eat Chick-Fil-A. Not everyone likes the same thing. It doesn't mean we hate each other.
That's about Christian denominations. When it's religions, of course it depends on the religion. As starLisa points out, Jews don't believe in hell (actually, don't some?). Neither do many other religious groups. (And it still doesn't mean we hate each other.)
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The term "Judaic Christianity" is Bloom's own, as if he didn't bother to learn the correct terminology. We are NOT a return to Christianity as interpreted by those who believed it to be a part of Judaism. What Jews think is irrelevant to our truth claim, as we don't claim to restore any part of their religion as practiced today or by the post-temple rabbis. We are a return to as much as is still applicable of the post-Petrine-vision primitive Christianity - when Christians no longer needed to be circumcised to be Christians, etc.
Nor was our return based on scholarship. If so, we'd be practicing a mishmash of the faulty beliefs about primitive Christianity that were prevalent when JS was alive. Or, worse yet, the just-as-silly version of those who claim to be scholars but have not done their scholarship, in which Christianity is supposedly the invention of Paul. Silly stuff that is defied by the records, but ... The rejection of the neoplatonic western tradition was accomplished as a byproduct of a revealed religion. Nobody in the early Mormon Church had enough of a grounding in western philosophy or theology to realize that was what they were doing, but it was. Nobody who knows what they're talking about, vis-a-vis Mormonism and primitive Christianity, disputes this point. It's so obvious as not to be interesting. For those curious about it, I suggest "How Greek Philosophy Corrupted the Christian Concept of God" by Richard R. Hopkins. It's from an LDS point of view, but the scholarly reading of the early Church Fathers is sound. It's available in paperback now on Amazon.com
The only disturbing thing to me about this thread, Tom, is your attitude of mockery and lightness about other people's sacred beliefs. That may be your general style in your personal dealings, but it does not come off at all well-meant in the cold print of your postings. And considering that you are posting on a forum of a website owned by a believer in this particular doctrine, it makes your mocking tone very hard to understand. Do you insult everyone whose home you visit, or just me?
I am perfectly happy to have people who don't share my beliefs come here and post as they wish. But I am not happy to have people mock my faith. If you were a guest in my house and spoke the way you have spoken repeatedly and consistently here in this thread - I would not invite you back, and would apologize to my other guests after you left.
Because this is something different from my home, and because I think you aren't actually aware of the deadly insults you offer in your tone and in the substance of some of your remarks, I am NOT asking you to leave. But I am asking you to take the smirk off your face as you write about my religion on my website, and speak with politeness. Or - and here's a thought - maybe you don't have to say every nasty little thing that comes into your mind, and stick only to things you know something about. Mormonism is not one of them. Neither is primitive Christianity. Neither, for that matter, is Judaism as practiced in the early decades CE.
Of course you understand, Tom, that I mean this in the nicest possible way.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dunno, in a world that contains Blayne Bradley and King of Men, Tom might actually be considered deeply respectful Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: The only disturbing thing to me about this thread, Tom, is your attitude of mockery and lightness about other people's sacred beliefs. That may be your general style in your personal dealings, but it does not come off at all well-meant in the cold print of your postings. And considering that you are posting on a forum of a website owned by a believer in this particular doctrine, it makes your mocking tone very hard to understand. Do you insult everyone whose home you visit, or just me?
You know, I can't actually find more than one point in this thread in which my tone has been a mocking one. In fact, it's been very neutral throughout, as far as I can tell -- with the exception of a single response to Wad's overt proselytization, something that you've made a point of discouraging on your site, yourself, for very similar reasons. Nor for that matter can I find a post I've made which has been factually incorrect about Mormonism, primitive Christianity, or early Judaism, except insofar as mainstream historians might have gotten facts considerably wrong; if I err by siding with historians, I am unaware of it.
You know of course that I'm not a Mormon. I'm actually really, really skeptical about the church, and have few qualms about laying out the details of that skepticism when it's relevant. But by and large I respect Mormons and Mormonism -- I like what it does to people, in general, to sum up quickly -- and really have made a good-faith effort to learn as much about it as I think it's reasonable for a non-Mormon non-theologian to pick up through conversation (which is a qualified statement, I'm aware, but anyway.)
Compared to a number of the skeptics we've had on this site over the years, several of whom have been hostile outright, I really don't think my tone ever degrades into "deadly insults." But this may be a cultural issue, as well; I'm aware that there are substantial differences between the way our societies communicate, and it's possible that there are things I've said on this thread which are almost insupportably insulting.
If so, I unreservedly apologize -- and I recognize too that, if so, you really did mean what you wrote in the "nicest possible way." But if you'd be willing, I'd love to hear (by E-mail, if you'd rather not make it public) what I wrote that seemed particularly insulting or mocking to you. Upon hearing your criticism, I've re-read the thread now several times looking for what could have prompted that response, and am coming up empty -- which I'm perfectly willing to admit could be a symptom of my own tin ear. Since I don't intend to insult your religion to your face, I'd like to know what I said that was considered an insult so I can avoid it in the future.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Though I actually believe 'primitive Christianity' is a better term; you won't find Mormons arguing that circumcision or the law of Moses is still applicable in its entirety. (Actually, I have heard pro-circumcision arguments, though they're hardly official).![[Wink]](wink.gif)
