Mormon Teachings

[Jenyar]

Shoudn't every church's every doctrine be dictated by God? Or should people just run around willy nilly making up there own doctrine, until there's over 300,000 christian denominations? Oh wait. That's what's happening now. Good thing God stepped in and restored his church

Have you ever bothered to verify the source for this "30,000", "300,000" or "3,000,000" Christian denominations (depending on how much force they think an argument by outrage would have) argument?

First, here's the original source data: Global statistics for all religions: 2001 AD.

In reality, Barrett indicates that what he means by “denomination” is any ecclesial body that retains a “jurisdiction” (i.e., semi-autonomy). As an example, Baptist denominations comprise approximately 321 of the total Protestant figure. Yet the lion’s share of Baptist denominations are independent, making them (in Barrett’s calculation) separate denominations. In other words, if there are ten Independent Baptist churches in a given city, even though all of them are identical in belief and practice, each one is counted as a separate denomination due to its autonomy in jurisdiction. This same principle applies to all independent or semi-independent denominations. And even beyond this, all Independent Baptist denominations are counted separately from all other Baptist denominations, even though there might not be a dime’s worth of difference among them. The same principle is operative in Barrett’s count of Roman Catholic denominations. He cites 194 Latin-rite denominations in 1970, by which Barrett means separate jurisdictions (or diocese). Again, a distinction is made on the basis of jurisdiction, rather than differing beliefs and practices. -- from Upon This Slippery Rock, by Eric Svendsen.​

Second, to compare apples with apples, let's just make clear that by these criteria there would be more than the 61 current Mormon denominations (a list can be found here).

Barret lists the LDS Church under Marginal Christian Subgroups (so that they are actually counted among all the other "denominations"):

Later-day saints (Mormons), including Mormon schismatics:
Congregations (1995): 20,000
Affiliated members (1995): 7,955,000
Denominations (2000): 122
Countries: 102​

So let's take all the apostolic traditions together: in 2000 years, Barrett’s data tells us that about 242 Roman Catholic denominations have formed and about 781 Orthodox (it includes the Greek, Armenian and Russian orthodox churches). In 175 years, the Mormon church has accumulated 122 denominations according to the survey. Compare this with the Anglican church, which has accumulated 168 denominations since it was founded in 1534.

This is according to the same source that is used to denounce traditional Christianity as being "sectarian". For a comparison of the major Christian denominations, refer to Comparison Chart of Christian Denominations' Beliefs and Doctrine at ReligionFacts.com.

 

[The Goose]

Second, to compare apples with apples, let's just make clear that by these criteria there would be more than the 61 current Mormon denominations (a list can be found here).

Yep,but those are just different christian denominations. Only one of them is Christ's church. People will always be diverted into other faiths, even sometimes making up there own.

 

[The Goose]

What makes you so sure your church is from God?

My church complies completely with the Bible. It doesn't have a bunch of doctrine which diverges, such as catholics baptizing infants, or most protistants, who don't beleive in priesthood authority. It is a true restoration of th eway Christ's church was at th ebegninng.

 

[anonymous2]

My church complies completely with the Bible. It doesn't have a bunch of doctrine which diverges, such as catholics baptizing infants, or most protistants, who don't beleive in priesthood authority. It is a true restoration of th eway Christ's church was at th ebegninng.

Am I to assume that you follow "Paul's" way by greeting each other with a "holy kiss", and when one is sick, that one is anointed with oil and prayed upon [I don't recall any mention of going to the Dr. in James]?

I think there are a lot of "We follow the Bible only" groups, but I doubt they all follow every single thing the Bible says. Do your women pray with their heads covered? Do you and you fellow church goers wash each others feet?

"Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If
I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also
ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an
example, that ye should do as I have done to you." (John 13:13-15 KJV)

Do your slaves obey unreasonable masters? I see nowhere in the Bible where slavery should have been outlawed. If your church has no slaves, then I guess it's not following that Bible verse which refers to slaves.

And if you say all of this was cultural and doesn't pertain to today, then what's different from your church and a "pick and choose" church?

Just wondering if you guys really do follow every single thing the Bible says.

 

[Jenyar]

...or most protistants, who don't beleive in priesthood authority.

Oh, we do - we believe Christ has it: "because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood."

You see, nowhere in the Bible is there any mention of "keys of the priesthood". It's "doctrine which diverges", as you would say.

 

[Marlin]

Jenyar, I agree with a lot of what you are saying, specifically about Jesus fulfilling the old law. Where we disagree is the issue of Priesthood--you don't believe that men can hold the Melchizedek Priesthood today or have the keys of the Priesthood, and I do. I don't believe that either of us is going to budge in regards to these beliefs, so we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Jenyar, I agree with a lot of what you are saying, specifically about Jesus fulfilling the old law. Where we disagree is the issue of Priesthood--you don't believe that men can hold the Melchizedek Priesthood today or have the keys of the Priesthood, and I do.

by reading Hebrews, I see no part that deals with believers gaining or being part of the Melchizedek Priesthood, only that Jesus is our Melchizedek Priest, could you quote scripture here?

I don't believe that either of us is going to budge in regards to these beliefs, so we will have to agree to disagree.

Marlin, you may have to change your views just to remain a mormon, the LDS church has changed many tenets of its core beliefs as times changed; see polygamy, no blacks in the priesthood

if the LDS chuch still followed either tenet, would you follow it?

also, if the LDS claims Joe Smith restored christianity to its primitive purity, & that LDS conforms to this purity, why the change?



WARNING!!!
hemming-n-hawing alert

 

[Brutus1964]

Senator Harry Reid The MINO (Mormon in Name Only)​

<p align="center"><a href="SITE"><img alt="" src="http://magazine.unlv.edu/Issues/Fall04/images/reid.jpg" border="0" /></a></p>
<div align="justify"><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/D8CO6J9G5.html">Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada </a>uses his church affiliation to get votes from the heavy Latter-day Saint population in Nevada. However as an elected official he uses his power to promote causes that are diametrically opposed to everything the Church and it’s members stand for.

He has stated publicly his intention to vote against Judge John Roberts as Chief Justice for the Supreme Court. His excuse for doing so is so absurd that the truth must lie somewhere else. Harry Reid says he is voting against Judge Roberts because in the eighties Judge Roberts referred to illegal aliens as “illegal Amigos.” Harry Reid has taken himself the role of arbiter of what is offensive to illegal aliens.

Since this excuse is patently absurd then there must be another reason for Harry Reid’s actions. There are three obvious answers, and those are abortion, abortion, and abortion. Harry Reid must walk razors edge to be the Democrat minority leader. On the one side he has his conservative voters who appose abortion. On the other side he must appease the far left and particularly the powerful abortion lobby. NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) and other extreme abortion organizations were apprehensive about Harry Reid ascending to minority leader because his membership in the LDS Church which strongly apposes abortion. In order for Harry Reid to obtain their endorsement he had to assure them he was on their side. Now he has made good on his promise to NARAL and the Democrats. In doing so he has betrayed the people that sent him to Washington. He doesn’t even have the moral fortitude to tell the truth about his reasons for apposing Judge Roberts.

Mr. Reid I certainly do not speak for the Church and never would, but sir don’t you ever again invoke or even imply your church membership in any further political activity. As far as I am concerned you have raped my Church and therefore my Lord. How dare you! </div><div align="justify"></div><div

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Senator Harry Reid The MINO (Mormon in Name Only)​

>uses his church affiliation to get votes from the heavy Latter-day Saint population in Nevada. However as an elected official he uses his power to promote causes that are diametrically opposed to everything the Church and it’s members stand for.

Mr. Reid I certainly do not speak for the Church and never would, but sir don’t you ever again invoke or even imply your church membership in any further political activity. As far as I am concerned you have raped my Church and therefore my Lord. How dare you!

why should all mormons vote alike? you expect robots, non-thinking zombies out of mormons?

also, if you're saying that Nevada is mainly mormon, why do they let gambling & prostituition run hog wild in that state? now that is an even worst offense, shame on mormons, Harry Reid included

if its for the money only, double shame, its mammons not mormons

http://www.godspy.com/meditations/You-cannot-serve-both-God-and-mammon-Pope-John-Paul.cfm

YOU CANNOT SERVE BOTH GOD AND MAMMON.

It is necessary to create lifestyles in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Marlin, why did you never answer these questions, afraid to answer & show your true self?

you may have to change your views just to remain a mormon, the LDS church has changed many tenets of its core beliefs as times changed; see polygamy, no blacks in the priesthood

if the LDS chuch still followed either tenet, would you follow it?

also, if the LDS claims Joe Smith restored christianity to its primitive purity, & that LDS conforms to this purity, why the change?

 

[Marlin]

Marlin, why did you never answer these questions, afraid to answer & show your true self?

No, it's because nothing I say ever seems to have the slightest change in your bigotry and religious intolerance. However, I will answer those questions right now, if you will tell me, if your church still practiced slavery and segregation, would you still follow it?

Polygamy--as long as I didn't have to practice it, I wouldn't care if the Church practiced it, as I see nothing inherently wrong with it per se.

Blacks and the Priesthood--I would disagree with the policy but would still remain a member. I would want it changed and would greatly desire that it would be. But that is a straw man, since the Church no longer denies blacks the Priesthood but allows all worthy male members to hold it.

Why the change?

Blacks and the Priesthood--the time came for it to be changed. President Kimball felt inspired to ask the Lord about changing the policy and received revelation that it was time.

Polygamy--we had to change it or the U.S. government was going to seize all our assets and throw practicing members in jail. When governments interfere like that, we have to obey them and are no longer responsible for carrying on the practice of that which the government forbids.

 

[Marlin]

On blacks and the Priesthood:

Are Mormons Prejudiced?

 

[WildBlueYonder]

On blacks and the Priesthood:

that's all well & good, but if you had a so-called modern prophet, why wasn't he an abolitionist? ahead of the game, pointing out the hard truths prior to the Civil War?
Why did the LDS wait until after 150 years to let blacks into full equity with whites?

 

[Marlin]

Joseph Smith was teaching equality of blacks and whites before your ancestors even acknowledged that blacks even had souls, WBY.

 

[Nisus]

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.

 

[nameless]

Another religion based on fraud, lies and the credulous idiots who believe them!

Any real reading on Joseph Smith from a historical perspective shows that its all BS! Only the ones that have a 'need' will ignore the facts and cling to their beliefs.

Where's Darwin when we need him?

 

[Marlin]

Another religion based on fraud, lies and the credulous idiots who believe them!

Any real reading on Joseph Smith from a historical perspective shows that its all BS! Only the ones that have a 'need' will ignore the facts and cling to their beliefs.

Where's Darwin when we need him?

Have you even read "any real reading on Joseph Smith"? Or is this just pap that an anti-Mormon website has fed you, only to have you regurgitate it here?

What "facts" am I ignoring, pray tell? I believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God, and I've read both pro- and anti-Mormon works. I'm convinced fully that he was the real deal.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Joseph Smith was teaching equality of blacks and whites before your ancestors even acknowledged that blacks even had souls, WBY.

really? cite the source for your statement, or I may think you are making it up

 

[nameless]

Have you even read "any real reading on Joseph Smith"? Or is this just pap that an anti-Mormon website has fed you, only to have you regurgitate it here?

Actually, I have never seen an anti-Mormon website. I have never had a need..
Due to some Mormon neighbors and their 'communications', I highed my maximus over to the public library. There, I found about two or three (small town!) reasonably intelligent works regarding the history of your church, John Smith. From what I read, and have heard from Mormons, and have seen written in the Book of Mormon, I have come to the opinion that I have, an 'informed' opinion.

What "facts" am I ignoring, pray tell?

Whats the difference? I'm not trying to convince you of anything, or change your mind. I'm just expressing my opinion.

I believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God, and I've read both pro- and anti-Mormon works. I'm convinced fully that he was the real deal.

If they work for you and get you what you want, then who am I to say anything against your 'beliefs'? If they don't you'd have to be a fool to keep them, wouldn't you?

 

[Marlin]

really? cite the source for your statement, or I may think you are making it up

Oh no! Whatever shall I do if you think that?

2 Nephi 26:33

33 For none of these iniquities come of the Lord; for he doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and he inviteth• them all• to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth• none that come unto him, black and white, bond• and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen•; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.