This Sunday, Mike Huckabee is going to visit John Hagee’s Cornerstone Church. Who is John Hagee? Kathryn Jean Lopez breaks down his beliefs in this column.In Hagee’s “black history” of the Catholic Church, for example, Catholics were far from on…

This Sunday, Mike Huckabee is going to visit John Hagee’s Cornerstone Church. Who is John Hagee? Kathryn Jean Lopez breaks down his beliefs in this column.In Hagee’s “black history” of the Catholic Church, for example, Catholics were far from only….

The more you know your Bible, the less there is to wonder and debate about.

You can’t just say that, just because a group doesn’t subscribe to an Aristotelian pronouncement done by an argumentative committee some three hundred years after Jesus’ death, that group is a “Christian cult”.

Tzetzes on December 12, 2007 at 7:38 PM

Read the Bible, you will find that men were left with a written testament and the Holy Spirit after Christ’s departure. Hence, Joe Smith has a problem with his recent revelation.

AZ_Redneck on December 14, 2007 at 6:49 PM

What you say about Smith does not follow from what you say about the written testament and Holy Spirit (hence there’s no need for a hence), and neither thing answers my question.

My point, which I’ve made in different ways on more than one thread, but which no Catholic or Protestant has answered, is this: there’s been a lot of mention in the thread of orthodoxy and the Nicene creed–that the only real or acceptable form of Christianity is that which the individual making the post deems “orthodox”. But this is problematic for everyone except, well…the Orthodox. Catholics can hardly claim orthodoxy based on a creed they’ve changed (adding the non-scriptural filioque), which is why the Catholics (whose misnomer means “universal”) are not in communion with the Orthodox.

Also, if you’re going to accept the creed, then you must accept the council it came out of. And this is rather problematic for pretty much all Protestants other than the Anglicans (who are apostate Catholics anyway), as the council provides for the ordination of bishops and says, ex. gr., that bishops get the eucharist before deacons and elders. It also takes it for granted that there are priests (not a “priesthood of all believers”, but priests ordainded by the church). And it recognizes the See of Jerusalem. How many Protestants do that?

Further, if you accept this oecumenical synod (on what particular grounds I don’t know, except that people yearn for something definitive), shouldn’t you accept the other councils as well? But then if you accept the Council of Chalcedon, you also have to say that not only are Arians, Mormons and Swedenborgians not orthodox, and hence not real Christians, but (as I say above in an unanswered response to Tim Burton) neither are the Copts, the (Nestorian) Assyrian Church or the Armenian Church. Are you really prepared to look a Copt in the eye, or a native Aramaic speaker, and tell him he’s not a Christian?

It’s no good saying “anything unclear in the Bible [which canon by the way?] is made clear in the church councils” and then also reject inconvenient councils or elements of councils with an appeal to the Bible. If you trust the wisdom of the conveners of one council, accept that of the others. But if you’re a sola scriptura person, then you shouldn’t give any significance to the councils at all; and if you don’t do that, then you should stop waving the Nicene creed around.

Take your bigotry elsewhere!

davenp35 on December 12, 2007 at 10:57 AM

Bigotry?!? For someone calling a duck a duck?

Dig in and read what Mormon’s believe and you will find Mormonism ranks right alongside Scientology. NRA4Freedom has a splattering that outght to raise at least one skeptical eyebrow.

Study the Bible and compare to the Book of Mormon and you will learn that Mormonism is not Christianity.

You can’t just say that, just because a group doesn’t subscribe to an Aristotelian pronouncement done by an argumentative committee some three hundred years after Jesus’ death, that group is a “Christian cult”.

Tzetzes on December 12, 2007 at 7:38 PM

Read the Bible, you will find that men were left with a written testament and the Holy Spirit after Christ’s departure. Hence, Joe Smith has a problem with his recent revelation.

So once more, you are caught out in a blatant lie. Maybe it’s time for you to stop claiming you know so much about a church you hate so much. Because 1) You know very little, just what you’ve read on anti-mormon sites and 2) do you think anyone trusts you to be a fair and accurate person on what the LDS church believes? It’s like asking Caiphas what Christians believe.

Why not let Mormons define what they believe? I’m not evangelical, and thus, I don’t go around saying “This is what Evangelicals believe:” and then repeat some doctrine or practice of theirs I can interpret in the worst possible light. Trust me, it’s easy to do so. But it wouldn’t be honest, would it? And you aren’t honest.

Bravo.

As per the official LDS dogma relating Jesus and Lucifer born via sexual intercourse by God with spriritual wives in the Mormon “pre-existence”, they answer with the Book of Moses. Christians will not find that in the Bible. “Old” doctrines are cast aside for new audiences. I ridicule the current “modern” concept of “old” as well as the ease with which so many would ignore history.

Those relying upon official LDS website entries must realize that EVERY authorized document displayed has been processed through countless edits and revisions. For instance, compare the original “Manifesto” with their online version. The official LDS records have been changed incessantly, and what you read from them online is not what you would read from the original document. The official LDS image is merely a portrait of Dorian Gray.

Today’s youth eschew the past as irrelevant. Young Mormons eschew their pioneering ancestors as irrelevant. In doing so, they also lose their own relevance. Through WWII, Mormons absolutely revered their pioneers’ absolute obedience to Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. But children of Mormon baby-boomers have been reared with a totally “improved” revision and have absolutely lost reference with the original reality, having sold out long ago. So which Mormon generation will be right about any Mormon doctrine at their grand reunion in the resurrection? The old Mormon pioneers gave up EVERYTHING to obey God’s command of polygamy, the everlasting covenant, in order to attain glory with/as God and prove to all, including themselves, their obedience to those in authority. Their progeny now deny that it ever happened in their family. What was should not be denied if to be appreciated for what it was. Relative relevance.

The LDS church sells itself to converts as having the monopoly on ETERNAL TRUTH. That LDS eternal nature of truth is concrete during the sell, but plastic after the deal is struck.

Read original documents before denying their content or existence. The truth shall set you free.

MATTHEW 7
7Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
24Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
28And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
29For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Just stop trying to pass yourself and your lying religon off as “Christian”…

NRA4Freedom on December 12, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Reading is fundamental:

No…if I really thought that, I’d be a Mormon.

James on December 12, 2007 at 11:56 AM

This is exactly what I was talking about. I’m not a Mormon. I said I wasn’t a Mormon…in a direct reply to one of YOUR posts. You’re wrong on so many things in just this thread alone because you’re blinded by hate and the unshakable (but incorrect) belief that you’re right because you say that you’re right that you have lost all credibility to speak on the subject.

I have some of the same doctrinal issues with Mormons that you do…probably more because I have relatives that converted to Mormonism for a while (and were easily able to leave, thankyouverymuch)…but I don’t think they should be driven out of the United States or should be called a cult because there’s some mystical line in the sand that separates the bizarre beliefs that you need to handle dangerous snakes or fake being overcome by gibberish speech to get closer to God and the equally bizarre beliefs of the Mormons.

I’ll come back and check in around 24 hours. (Or, maybe 18.)

(But don’t let that distract you. Answer the first guy.)

Yet they are all H20. Of course it’s not a perfect analogy but then there couldn’t be one when talking about God.

If the virgin birth bothers you, just think about one cell animals. All of their births are virgin births.

Mojave Mark on December 12, 2007 at 11:22 PM

Is this Thales‘ take on the trinity? ;)

Me, I haven’t got a problem with (let’s call it) theoparthenogenesis.

But, as to the trinity, our Hindoo friend (who first came up in this thread) might very well say “yes, Christian, you are very poetic and wise. We believe the same, but have different names: Brahma is [mutatis mutandis] water, Krishna is water and Shiva is water.”

Then our Mahometan friend tells us, “see Christian, I told you you were a polytheist.”

water = H2O
ice = H2O
steam = H2O

water is not ice nor steam
ice is not water nor steam
steam is not water nor ice

Yet they are all H20. Of course it’s not a perfect analogy but then there couldn’t be one when talking about God.

If the virgin birth bothers you, just think about one cell animals. All of their births are virgin births.

The most important qualifiers haven’t changed in 2000 years:
Faith in Christ
Obey the Commandments
Endure to the End

If you don’t do these, it won’t matter if you married one wife or three dozen.

That’s crazy talk. Heathen! Heretic!

Plural marriage is still the most important qualifier of who will be exalted and who will live in on of the lesser heavens without wives or spiritual progeny.
Beto Ochoa on December 12, 2007 at 10:28 PM

Plural marriage is not a qualifier of exaltation. Marriage in the new and everlasting covenant is, of which plural marriage is a part. So anyone who has been married to one wife on this earth qualifies, mormon or non-mormon. (Non-mormons will have their marriages performed by proxy after they are dead.)

The most important qualifiers haven’t changed in 2000 years:
Faith in Christ
Obey the Commandments
Endure to the End

If you don’t do these, it won’t matter if you married one wife or three dozen.

Fatrap,
It’s true. Mormons believe Jesus and Satan were literally brothers. Brothers, meaning, God had sex with one of his wives and Jesus was born from it, then again with Satan. Jesus was the first born of all God’s children, and Satan was #2…..Mormons also believe that they will one day become gods themselves. They will be given a portion of the universe to call their own, will have literal sex with their wives and create children to populate this world they made. They will have their own Savior and everything.

That’s why I’m confused by the brouhaha about this. It is Mormon Doctrine of the primary level. It is also part of Joseph Smith’s defense of plural marriage. Wilford Woodruff suspended plural marriage under duress of law and made that plain in later addresses after the 1890 Manifesto. Plural marriage is still the most important qualifier of who will be exalted and who will live in on of the lesser heavens without wives or spiritual progeny.