Why was it revealed to JS that 'all other creeds are an abomination?'

[mordorbund]

I think Traveler's "minions" is a typo for "millions"

[Guest]

I think Traveler's "minions" is a typo for "millions"

 

You know what... I think you are right!

[mordorbund]

And let's not lose the larger point. There has always been some sort of limitation to who has access to true religion. For most of history (from the biblical record), God has only been dealing with people in a small geographic area. While it's true that some had the means to travel to the holy land and thereby gain exposure to the covenant people (and the covenant), for the most part, the sound majority had no such access. And that's just those that lived on the same land mass. There was also a huge plot of land with countless people who had no access to the covenant people or the covenants (again, strictly following the biblical narrative) because of vast oceans. How is God still just?

 

If you are uncomfortable with the belief that God created a temporal (time-based) barrier to accessing His truth and covenants, you should also be uncomfortable with the belief that God created a spatial (geographic) barrier to accessing His truth and covenants. If you find a way to be at ease with the spatial challenge, you'll find the same argument then works for the temporal issue.

[iguy2314]

One of those truths restored in these Latter-Days is the teaching of Pre-Mortal Existence.  That is the human spirit is Eternal (just like energy and matter are Eternal).  Therefore, we existed prior to our being born on earth.  In Pre-Mortal Life, we were presented with the Plan of Salvation (Mortal Existence necessary for progression - you can read up on it here if you like) and Jesus Christ was chosen to be our Mediator, Lucifer rebelled, and some of the spirits, through their own free will, followed Lucifer while the others , through their own free will, followed Christ.  Under the direction of the Father, Christ then created the earth and those spirits who followed Christ were given mortal bodies.  Therefore, every single human being who ever lived on this planet has exercised their free will to follow Christ.  They are then born with the Light of Christ.  Yep... That includes Hitler and Stalin and the Unabomber... all chose to follow Christ before they were born on Earth and accepted their mortal path for their spirits to progress to the next life.

 

So, when Traveler (who is LDS) refers to some folks as minions, he wasn't LITERALLY calling them minions.  It's just an artistic linguistic expression (or whatever you call it - English is not my first language) to contrast them with the "chosen people who were born in the land of Christians".

 

Also, another one of those truths that were restored in these Latter-days is post-mortal life.  The LDS do not believe that you go to the fires of hell to suffer eternal torment if you're not Christian when you die.  Well, actually, it rather depends on what you consider as hell - I, myself, consider it hell if I die and never get to see my husband and children ever again.  In any case, the LDS give a big distinction between Salvation and Exaltation.  Even if you die non-Christian, you can still attain Salvation.  As a matter of fact, the only way you can forfeit your Salvation is if you have COMPLETE knowledge of Christ and then you choose not to accept His Atonement.  So, we can't tell you for sure if Hitler does not qualify for salvation... because we don't know if he has complete knowledge of Christ when he did all those atrocious things.  Now, as far as exaltation - all those who gained Salvation may attain one of the 3 degrees of "heaven" - Telestial, Terrestial, or Celestial Life.  Telestial is the least joy, Celstial is living with God.  But, even with Telestial Life - it is still infinitely better than Mortal Life...

 

So, as far as LDS and how they look at all peoples all over the world and all over existence - I would say that out of all the Christian faiths, their beliefs are the ones who have the most charitable view of heaven for all people.  And the LDS believe that truth is not only found in the LDS faith.  Truth is found everywhere.  This is so important that it is codified in the LDS Articles of Faith as follows:

 

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

 

13 We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

 

 

 

 

And finally... if you are posting here to challenge the LDS beliefs, then I think you're on the wrong forum.  There are other forums that are more open to that type of discussion.  This forum is for you to learn about what the LDS believe and for the LDS to learn what non-LDS people believe.  This is not the forum for "my religion is better than your religion" topics.

 

Not challenging, I respect the beliefs of all LDS, but I am investigating and wish to follow Christ. I am not Catholic or LDS, but the Catholic Church is the huge elephant in the room if one is looking for Christ's universal, united and Apostolic Church here on Earth. I appreciate the LDS's doctrine on respecting the truth of all religions and living in charity with others and their way of worshipping God. It truly shows that the LDS Church are following Christ as best as they can.

 

The LDS Church's beliefs are certainly original and interesting, but they do not jive with my understanding of souls and immortality. I do not believe that matter and energy has always existed, that God simply "reorganized" everything to create the universe. I don't believe that Lucifer has a human soul, but is a spirit, a fallen angel and a tempter of man, a representation of sin and our free will's ability to reject God. I cannot believe in tiers of Heaven - this does not seem right to me, but I see the value in believing in it. My idea of hell is much more akin to C.S. Lewis's The Great Divorce - "hell" is not so much a physical place, but a separation from God, a created thing of pride and choice.

 

But to get this back on topic, I cannot join a church that has God calling other faiths and other people's yearning for him as "abominations". I believe that God judges each of us individually, with mercy and compassion. The spatial and geographic limitations do not account for every way that we live our lives, our choices and our failures, or the times where we loved as he loved us, to the best of our abiliity/our culture/our time. But at the same time, Christ DID come here to create a Church, to place a mission with the Apostles to spread the gospel and welcome all peoples into the new covenant and welcome all into God's family.

[Guest]

But to get this back on topic, I cannot join a church that has God calling other faiths and other people's yearning for him as "abominations".

 

Good!  Then you won't have a problem with the LDS Church.  Because the LDS Church doesn't do that.

 

 

 

And... a favorite line of mine from this Filipino song that is taken from scripture:  Teach me to trust in You with all of my heart, to lean not on my own understanding...

[iguy2314]

But your prophet said God said those words to him? How is that not teaching that? Is that not sacred Scipture/doctrine?

[mordorbund]

The spatial and geographic limitations do not account for every way that we live our lives, our choices and our failures, or the times where we loved as he loved us, to the best of our abiliity/our culture/our time. But at the same time, Christ DID come here to create a Church, to place a mission with the Apostles to spread the gospel and welcome all peoples into the new covenant and welcome all into God's family.

 

This sounds like a reference to my post, but I haven't the foggiest how it ties in.

[iguy2314]

This sounds like a reference to my post, but I haven't the foggiest how it ties in.

 

I cannot see the reasoning in linking and justifying the temporal limitations of the millions of souls from 100AD to 1800AD to the spatial limitations.

 

I don't see God judging harshly a Hindu man living in poverty his entire life, having never been exposed to the Gospel or to Christ as rejecting His Son, or even to an Jew living in 400 BC that is unable to visit the Temple. God judges us accordingly, with mercy and with complete knowledge of us.

 

That is NOT the same to me as God forsaking humanity for 1800 years after Christ came, gave authority to his Apostles, and promising this: "And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." God likes time, God likes history, God likes a storyline-like way for humanity to reach him. I don't think God has called us to "re-baptize" and rewrite history, by baptizing the dead or saving salvation for the afterlife. THIS is the life he has given us and our history, from the moment Christ was incarnated to the second he rose and was assumed to the Father - and nothing was ever taken away or restored. Christ is not a weak promiser. We fail him daily, but he has never failed us.

[Guest]

But your prophet said God said those words to him? How is that not teaching that? Is that not sacred Scipture/doctrine?

 

 I explained what that teaching is as clearly as I can on my first post.  I'll repost it below.  The teaching refers to the creeds of other Churches and not the faithfulness or righteousness of their people.  Let me know if you there's anything in the post below that you don't understand.

 

 

 

We do not think that God could not use the creeds for us to understand Him and His Kingdom.  We simply believe that God restored a truth that was lost when the Creeds were established and handed that truth to Joseph Smith.  The Creeds established God as a Triune God - that which makes them one is a physical substance.  The restored truth renders the Triune description of God as false and establishes the truth that what makes the 3 persons in God One is not their physical substance but the Perfect Unity of their Agency.  This one simple concept has magnificent implications and affects/corrects several understanding of scriptures - for example, John 17:21 among others.

 

Of course, if you deposit your faith on the teaching that God is triune, then you will love the Creeds.  But if you open yourself to the possibility that God is not triune, then the Creeds become questionable.  And if you deposit your faith on the teaching that God is not triune, then the Creeds become wrong.  Just like nobody can prove that God is triune, nobody can prove that God is not... it's all a matter of faith.

[bytor2112]

But your prophet said God said those words to him? How is that not teaching that? Is that not sacred Scipture/doctrine?

 

We certainly believe that many other well intentioned faiths profess beliefs that are not in harmony with the realities of the Godhead and salvation. Do we expound and teach about how wrong the creeds are or the belief systems of other churches are? Not really. We teach doctrine as revealed to us in the latter days and invite all to listen and find out for themselves if the church is what it reports to be.

 

If it is (and I believe it is) then accepting the Lord's words to the Prophet Joseph Smith was like having a bright light suddenly turned on where mostly darkness existed.

[iguy2314]

I do not think you have a very sound basis of what the Trinity has been established to be. They do not share the same "physicality" but only the same "essense." Triune is not a term I am familiar with. God is not a cerberus but nor is he three separate/physical things, utterly independent from one another.

 

"I and the Father are one."

 

I realize this is hard to understand, but Aquinas and Augustine and the scholastics have all derived insights using scripture and philosophy/reason to understand the nature of God. The working knowledge of the Trinity and its applications show the basis of God being Love itself. If God is absolutely perfect, then he knows himself perfectly - this perfect self-knowledge is so complete and so real that it creates another essense, the mind of God, or the "logos" which is the Son. God loves the Son perfectly and the Son obeys the Father -  and that love is so perfect that it creates another thing of the same essense, the Holy Spirit. In complete communion, the Trinity is One God, One Lord.

 

This was a huge part of my investigation and I hope any Catholic/Christian who believes in the Creeds/Trinity can correct my understanding of this.

[mordorbund]

I cannot see the reasoning in linking and justifying the temporal limitations of the millions of souls from 100AD to 1800AD to the spatial limitations.

 

I don't see God judging harshly a Hindu man living in poverty his entire life, having never been exposed to the Gospel or to Christ as rejecting His Son, or even to an Jew living in 400 BC that is unable to visit the Temple. God judges us accordingly, with mercy and with complete knowledge of us.

 

That is NOT the same to me as God forsaking humanity for 1800 years after Christ came, gave authority to his Apostles, and promising this: "And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." God likes time, God likes history, God likes a storyline-like way for humanity to reach him. I don't think God has called us to "re-baptize" and rewrite history, by baptizing the dead or saving salvation for the afterlife. THIS is the life he has given us and our history, from the moment Christ was incarnated to the second he rose and was assumed to the Father - and nothing was ever taken away or restored. Christ is not a weak promiser. We fail him daily, but he has never failed us.

 

Let me try to restate your perspective to see if I understand it.

 

The problem is not that God removed His authority for almost 2000 years (after all, He doesn't judge harshly those that are outside the authoritative reach of worship), but rather the problem is that God promised His authority will last forever and Latter-day Saints claim it did not.

 

Is that accurate?

[The Folk Prophet]

They do not share the same "physicality" but only the same "essense." Triune is not a term I am familiar with. God is not a cerberus but nor is he three separate/physical things, utterly independent from one another.

 

Ah...perfectly clear now.

[bytor2112]

Iguy? I am not sure to whom your last post is referring, but, many of us are converts from other Christian faiths. Anatess was a Catholic and I grew up attending an Assemblies of God church and then later a Baptist church.

 

In the event that you become a member, you will discover the truths that we declare the same way each of have, line upon line, here a little, there a little, as you are ready to receive it. Trying to figure out who is wrong and who is right is EXACTLY what led Joseph Smith to his knees in a grove of trees. The things of God can only be understood by the power of the Holy Spirit and nothing else.

 

As the late Elder McConkie said, "God either stands revealed or remains forever unknown...."

 

Good luck on your journey....

[iguy2314]

Iguy? I am not sure to whom your last post is referring, but, many of us are converts from other Christian faiths. Anatess was a Catholic and I grew up attending an Assemblies of God church and then later a Baptist church.

 

In the event that you become a member, you will discover the truths that we declare the same way each of have, line upon line, here a little, there a little, as you are ready to receive it. Trying to figure out who is wrong and who is right is EXACTLY what led Joseph Smith to his knees in a grove of trees. The things of God can only be understood by the power of the Holy Spirit and nothing else.

 

As the late Elder McConkie said, "God either stands revealed or remains forever unknown...."

 

Good luck on your journey....

 

Thank you for making some things clearer for me. I have a deep respect for LDS and I don't believe that fostering on how other's beliefs are wrong is very healthy, spiritually speaking. I am searching for God with all of my knowledge and will, and also pray for the Holy Spirit to illuminate my path to Him. I also believe in continuning revelation, albeit on a more personal level, but for me all the public revelation needed has already been given to us in the form of our brother and savior, Christ, who has perfectly fulfilled the law and whom all the prophets have pointed us toward.

 

Thank you and God bless.

[Blackmarch]

Hi all, I am new here. I am currently investigating the LDS church with the help of some missionaries. This troubled me deeply, as I believe there is truth in all creeds and churches and that God would appreciate anyone trying to worship him as they see it.

 

 

"I was answered that I must join none of ... [the churches], for they were all wrong ...all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof. He again forbade me to join with any of them."

History 1:19

 

Does the LDS Church actually teach and believe this?

Yes the church does. 

Any interpretation that supplants, hinders, or removes someone from being able to obtain blessings and covenants that God has for them, especially if it is instituted as law or doctrine will be abominable before the Lord.

 

Take any one church, suppose its the one church that God has vested his authority to be able to seal both in heaven and on earth... then ask why does any other church not direct their members towards that one church that has that authority?

 

[Guest]

I do not think you have a very sound basis of what the Trinity has been established to be. They do not share the same "physicality" but only the same "essense." Triune is not a term I am familiar with. God is not a cerberus but nor is he three separate/physical things, utterly independent from one another.

 

"I and the Father are one."

 

I realize this is hard to understand, but Aquinas and Augustine and the scholastics have all derived insights using scripture and philosophy/reason to understand the nature of God. The working knowledge of the Trinity and its applications show the basis of God being Love itself. If God is absolutely perfect, then he knows himself perfectly - this perfect self-knowledge is so complete and so real that it creates another essense, the mind of God, or the "logos" which is the Son. God loves the Son perfectly and the Son obeys the Father -  and that love is so perfect that it creates another thing of the same essense, the Holy Spirit. In complete communion, the Trinity is One God, One Lord.

 

This was a huge part of my investigation and I hope any Catholic/Christian who believes in the Creeds/Trinity can correct my understanding of this.

 

Iguy, your understanding of the Trinity (Triune = adjective form of Trinity) is not correct.  In Trinitarian teaching, God is one in ousia which is not just His essence.  He is one physical substance.  The substance that is God has the power to manifest himself into 3 separate Persons, one proceeding from the other.  One of those Persons - that which is called Jesus Christ - is of mortal substance as fully as he is God substance.

 

It is not very hard to understand, but it does take some maturity to intellectually grasp it just as all things pertaining to matters of faith.

 

Let me know if you want to know how this contrasts to LDS concept of God.  And just so you know, LDS also believes that there is ONE GOD.

[The Folk Prophet]

It is not very hard to understand....

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[iguy2314]

Iguy, your understanding of the Trinity (Triune = adjective form of Trinity) is not correct.  In Trinitarian teaching, God is one in ousia which is not just His essence.  He is one physical substance.  The substance that is God has the power to manifest himself into 3 separate Persons, one proceeding from the other.  One of those Persons - that which is called Jesus Christ - is of mortal substance as fully as he is God substance.

 

It is not very hard to understand, but it does take some maturity to intellectually grasp it just as all things pertaining to matters of faith.

 

Let me know if you want to know how this contrasts to LDS concept of God.  And just so you know, LDS also believes that there is ONE GOD.

 

Your use of Triune is correct, I have just never heard it before. Thank you for clarifying that. But I don't see in the Catecism the use of "physical substance." God created matter separate from himself - He does not conform to matter, but matter conforms to Him. My use of essense is more in line with the thinking and economy of the Trinity. From the Catechism -

 

The dogma of the Holy Trinity

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".⁸³ The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."⁸⁴ In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."⁸⁵

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."⁸⁶ "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."⁸⁷ They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."⁸⁸ The divine Unity is Triune.

255 The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: "In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance."⁸⁹ Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."⁹⁰ "Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son."⁹¹

[Guest]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

You might want to take my word for this one.  I was Trinitarian for more years than I am LDS. :)

[estradling75]

Thank you for making some things clearer for me. I have a deep respect for LDS and I don't believe that fostering on how other's beliefs are wrong is very healthy, spiritually speaking.

 

 

Please note that we don't either.   The only reason this subject is even being discussed is because you came asking about it.  Members of the LDS faith did not initiate this conversation.   It is perfectly understandable why you did, but it was you.  And it should be perfectly understandable that coming to a PRO-LDS site you would get PRO-LDS answer. 

 

Now there are also some members of this site who aren't LDS and who for reasons that should be very clear don't agree with the LDS position on the matter.  The wording is very strong in the passage you quoted so its not surprising that they would react strongly to it.  Notice while there might have been a few misunderstanding by and large the response has been to explain and clarify why the LDS think the way we do and why we disagree with the other groups and people.

 

But please don't fall in to the increasingly worldly idea that to truly respect someones belief and to allow them to live how they might, that we have to agree with them

[Guest]

Now there are also some members of this site who aren't LDS and who for reasons that should be very clear don't agree with the LDS position on the matter.

 

We used to have our Religious Affiliation displayed under our Avatars in the old lds.net software.  I miss that feature.  Can we have that added to this one?

[The Folk Prophet]

You might want to take my word for this one.  I was Trinitarian for more years than I am LDS.

 

I don't not take your word. I just believe that the Trinity is not truly understandable because it is senseless.

 

I will grant, that my understanding of it is not well studied...shallow reading at best...but those explanations I have read are back-bending, mind-twisting, illogical logical efforts to try and explain the unexplainable. Which, frankly, seems strange to me. There are things in LDS teachings that are unexplainable -- even in the nature of God. We understand, for example, that God has a physical body -- but how He is able to see all things at once, travel anywhere immediately, attend to all things all the time, etc., etc... We do not understand. We cannot understand. Saying that we understand that God is all knowing does not mean we actually understand God being all knowing.

 

Even if one were to concede the Trinity as truth, to say that one understands that God is three separate persons in one being does not mean that this concept is, in the least, understandable.

[iguy2314]

Yes the church does. 

Any interpretation that supplants, hinders, or removes someone from being able to obtain blessings and covenants that God has for them, especially if it is instituted as law or doctrine will be abominable before the Lord.

 

Take any one church, suppose its the one church that God has vested his authority to be able to seal both in heaven and on earth... then ask why does any other church not direct their members towards that one church that has that authority?

 

 

I have no idea what you are talking about. We are all able to bless one another, to pray for one another, and the new covenant that God has created has been opened to all.

 

I believe in authority, as seen in the Apostles and the primacy of Scripture/Tradition. For most of Christian history, the Church was not separate and there was no other "church". There was a universal Church with one faith, one line of bishops/priests, one laity, though many regional "rites" like the Roman/Western, the Eastern, the Alexandrian, the Armenian, etc. This authority was obviously granted to one head, to Peter, whose office has continued uninterrupted since Christ.

[Guest]

Your use of Triune is correct, I have just never heard it before. Thank you for clarifying that. But I don't see in the Catecism the use of "physical substance." God created matter separate from himself - He does not conform to matter, but matter conforms to Him. My use of essense is more in line with the thinking and economy of the Trinity. From the Catechism -

 

The dogma of the Holy Trinity

253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".⁸³ The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."⁸⁴ In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."⁸⁵

254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."⁸⁶ "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."⁸⁷ They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."⁸⁸ The divine Unity is Triune.

255 The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: "In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance."⁸⁹ Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."⁹⁰ "Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son."⁹¹

 

The bolded and red above is what makes "essence" an incomplete depiction of ousia.  By the way, did you click on that underlined ousia word in my post?  It takes you to the Wikipedia entry of what that means.  It clearly defines why it says ., the divine substance, essence or nature instead of just substance itself or essence itself or nature itself - each of the 3 words having very slight variations in meaning, each of which encompasses ousia.

 

But, it might be that we are not understanding each other because of my usage of the word "Physical".  This word is important in distinguishing Trinity from Godhead.  I am using the word physical as a label to what he is made of - his substance (incorporeal - not made of matter).  It was not meant to denote anthropomorphistic qualities to God.  I may be using that word incorrectly.