Potential convert struggling with Mormonism


chasingthewind
 Share

Recommended Posts

·         I am a potential convert and I've been in this category for some time.  At this point I just don't know what to believe about Mormonism any more because there are serious pros and cons.  I am just going to list the pros/cons here and see what sort of response I get. 

Pros:

- I love reading the BoM (for the most part).  As an avid follower of Christ, the more Christ I can get my hands on, the better.  The canonical Gospels just aren’t enough to satisfy my appetite.  I want more.  And the BoM gives me more Christ to chew on.  Yay! 

- I had a really strong spiritual experience while reading Joseph Smith's "history".  The experience was so overwhelming and powerful.  This experience is what some call "receiving a witness", as promised in the introduction of the BoM .  This experience just won't leave me alone, no matter how many intellectual problems I encounter with Mormonism.

- I really like Joseph Smith's teachings with respect to the pre-mortal existence and 'degrees of glory'-concept of the afterlife.  I also like the Mormon emphasis on "agency" (free will).

- I like the fact that Mormonism is a really active religion because I like having an active church life.

 

So it looks like I have all the pieces in place to become a Mormon, right?  But wait, here come the cons:

 

- Even though I had a really strong spiritual experience while reading Smith’s “history”, I just can’t bring myself to believe in all of what Smith taught. I especially can’t bring myself to believe in the “plurality of gods” – the idea that Heavenly Father is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And so on - forever.  Infinitely many gods?!  This is pure silliness.  There is only one God.  End of story.  

- I also can’t bring myself to accept the idea that God began his existence as a mere mortal and eventually became God.  Again, this is pure silliness.  God has been God from all eternity.  He is eternal, in the sense that he exists timelessly. D&C 130:7 affirms this when it claims “the past, present, and future are continually present before the Lord."  So to even suggest God had a "beginning" to his existence makes no sense. 

Joseph Smith really went off the rails with these teachings, in my opinionIf all Mormonism involved was accepting the BoM as another testament of Jesus Christ then I would gladly sign on.  But Joseph Smith’s ideas about the nature of god are serious hurdles for me.

But wait, there's more...

- Eternal polygamy.  Seriously, what gives?  Polygamy is repugnant. Why is this repugnant practice going to continue into the eternities?  What kind of god would actually grant creepy polygamists the highest level of exaltation, as promised in D&C 132:63?  And it gets even worse when you consider the possibility that the Mormon god may even be a polygamist himself!  This would make me out to be a potential polygamist-worshipper! YUCK!

- God threatening Emma to participate in polygamy or get "destroyed".  Seriously, what gives?  What happened to agency?  What happened to  the loving god I've heard so much about?  There's no excuse for this kind of nonsense.

- Contradictions between the prophets on the topic of polygamy.  So is polygamy required for exaltation or not?  Men who are supposedly inspired by the same god have given contradictory answers to this issue.  Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, and some others answer in the affirmative, while modern Mormon prophets do not.  Prophetic reliability, anyone?

- The racism in 2 Nephi 5:22 really bugs me.  If I take the BoM seriously as the word of God, then I must conclude that dark skin is a curse from God.  In short, I must become a racist.  But I don’t want to become a racist. 

- God erased all of our memories from the pre-mortal existence.  Seriously, what the heck? 

Ok, well, that's enough for now... 

Again, whenever I read the BoM, I get the feeling that Joseph Smith definitely had a connection to the divine that no one else had.  Yesterday I read Alma 5 and I was just astonished at what I was reading.  It is just awesome.  UNFORTUNATELY, I inevitably start reading about other things Smith taught (plurality of gods, god was once a man, eternal polygamy, etc.) and I get the feeling that he was a total wackjob .  At this point I am confused beyond belief.  So - as a potential Mormon - do I have to accept *everything* Joseph Smith taught?!  Prophets are supposedly fallible, right?  Is there "essential" Joseph Smith that every believing Mormon must believe in versus "non-essential" ideas from Smith that can be rejected?

 

 

Edited by idontknow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, idontknow said:
  • I had a really strong spiritual experience while reading Joseph Smith's "history".  The experience was so overwhelming and powerful.  This experience is what some call "receiving a witness", as promised in the introduction of the BoM .  This experience just won't leave me alone, no matter how many intellectual problems I encounter with Mormonism.

It looks like you've gotten your answer already.  

Quote

 22 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if you desire a further witness, cast your mind upon the night that you cried unto me in your heart, that you might know concerning the truth of these things.

 23 Did I not speak peace to your mind concerning the matter? What greater witness can you have than from God?

D&C 6: 22-23

If the Lord has told you already what path you've walked on, then don't you think you ought to walk it?

There are always going to be things you don't understand when you start walking on a new path.  But you have to walk it for a while and get the feel for it.  This is true when learning ANYTHING new.  You start learning a few things that make sense.  And much of it is either incomprehensible, or actually sounds wrong until you start actually getting into it.  Then you begin to understand.

This is what the Lord meant when he said:

Quote

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

John 7:17

As a youth, I used to think that if I just studied enough, I'd begin to understand everything.  And there would be an explanation for everything.  And it would all be so clear.

As an adult I learn that we're just babies compared to the wisdom of the Lord.  I as a parent have difficulty explaining things to my children about life.  Sometimes they just get some idea stuck in their heads that I need to correct.  It may have some logic to it, but in this application, it is just plain wrong.  And there's no arguing the point.  They're just going to insist they are right and I'm wrong.  Imagine how often we do that with God.

I eventually have to tell them, just trust me for now.  Do what I tell you.  You'll begin to understand by doing.  As time goes on, they get it.  And if I ask them why they now understand, they are at a loss for words.  But they usually end up saying some variant of "Well, you just do it and it's pretty clear why you have to do that."

I myself tend to intellectualize almost everything.  But there have been some concepts that I still don't get or don't understand the "why" of it.  But I have received firm witness through the Holy Ghost that it is correct.  I just need to wait to understand later.

So I'm encouraging you to just walk the path that the Lord has already told you to walk.  As you do so in faith, relying upon the arm of the Lord rather than on your own wisdom, you'll begin to understand.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To build off Carborendum's points the scriptures are clear that "God's ways are not our ways, and God's thoughts are not our thoughts"

And that God will teach us line upon line, precept upon precept... and that God then expects us to act on the little bit he gives us, before getting more.

 

God has given you some light and knowledge, and he is waiting for you to act on it before giving you more.  You seem to be stuck... On one hand you have clear indications that God is willing to teach you and show you about him and his ways...  On the other you have your preconceived notions and expectations on what God "must be" and "must do"... And you need to choose one or the other...

You can humble yourself and acknowledge you don't know how or why God does the things he does, and accept his offer to learn from him... Or you can demand that God fits into your neat little boxes, and biases.  Therefore creating a false God after your own likeness. 

It is your choice... and it is one that a lot of people struggle with..  There are answers to your questions but ultimately they require Faith to be understood... So to get them you need to act in Faith.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Idontknow,

Doing your research ahead of time is a good thing - kudos.  I often say the only good reason to become a Mormon is you believe God wants you to be one.  If you figure He does, all this 'bring yourself to believe' stuff sticks around and continues to be unresolved until it's resolved, but you're following God.

So, do you think He wants you to be Mormon?  Even though all those things you mentioned are things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've gotten some good replies already, but I'll add my voice to the choir---

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - I had a really strong spiritual experience while reading Joseph Smith's "history".  The experience was so overwhelming and powerful.  This experience is what some call "receiving a witness", as promised in the introduction of the BoM .  This experience just won't leave me alone, no matter how many intellectual problems I encounter with Mormonism.

This is the most important part of your post.  If God tells you something is Truth, nothing else matters.  Ultimately, a person should act on what is Truth.

Granted, rest of your pro's list is awesome too.  On to your concerns--

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - I just can’t bring myself to believe in all of what Smith taught. 

You don't have to.  

Here's an important fact: a prophet is a man of God.  When he's speaking specifically as a the capital-p  Prophet on behalf of God, that you need to listen to and seek confirmation from the Lord.  But the other vast majority of time, they speak as a man trying to do their best to follow God.  Still something to be considered, but not automatically the infallible word of God.  Every prophet (including Joseph Smith) spends much time learning doctrines themselves and growing.  They can and do make mistakes along the way.

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·       I especially can’t bring myself to believe in the “plurality of gods” – the idea that Heavenly Father is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And so on - forever.  Infinitely many gods?! 

This is not LDS scripture, and you can be a Mormon 100% in good standing and totally disbelieve it.  I know several Mormons that do.  Personally I'm a active temple recommend holding LDS women and I don't believe it (or disbelieve it-- I'm in the "don't know and don't care cause it doesn't matter" camp).  There are two primary sources which this idea traces two: one sermon and one two line couplet.  Neither of these are ratified by the Church as scripture, infallible, or otherwise acknowledged as the word of God.  Whatever the Truth is about this, it has yet to be concretely revealed one way or another.  To cite the 9th Article of Faith: we believe God has many wonders yet to reveal pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - I also can’t bring myself to accept the idea that God began his existence as a mere mortal and eventually became God.  Again, this is pure silliness.  God has been God from all eternity.  He is eternal, in the sense that he exists timelessly. D&C 130:7 affirms this when it claims “the past, present, and future are continually present before the Lord."  So to even suggest God had a "beginning" to his existence makes no sense. 

My previous paragraph applies to this.

Note though: one thing that is scripture is that we (human beings) also have existed for all time.  So there isn't really a conflict in that regard.

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      Joseph Smith really went off the rails with these teachings, in my opinionIf all Mormonism involved was accepting the BoM as another testament of Jesus Christ then I would gladly sign on.  But Joseph Smith’s ideas about the nature of god are serious hurdles for me.

Accepting revelation from God (like to Book of Mormon) is the central part of being a Mormon.  Like I said earlier, you can be LDS in 100% good standing and not believe the non scriptural King Follet sermon.  
(Breaking this long post up)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Continued from above)

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - Eternal polygamy.  Seriously, what gives?  Polygamy is repugnant. Why is this repugnant practice going to continue into the eternities?  What kind of god would actually grant creepy polygamists the highest level of exaltation, as promised in D&C 132:63?  And it gets even worse when you consider the possibility that the Mormon god may even be a polygamist himself!  This would make me out to be a potential polygamist-worshipper! YUCK!

You're looking through a modern-sensablities bias lens here.  Do you want to write a letter to Jacob and tell him "I'm sorry Jacob, you're only allowed to have one wife.  Please leave your other three behind, sucks to be them".  No!  Such is nonsense!   That's how things were back then.   Nowadays, if you want to marry more than one chick you'll be immediately kicked out of the Church, because such is strictly forbidden.  

As to D&C 132:63, that verse is saying essentially "wife don't cheat on your husband".  

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - God threatening Emma to participate in polygamy or get "destroyed".  Seriously, what gives?  What happened to agency?  What happened to  the loving god I've heard so much about?  There's no excuse for this kind of nonsense.

If I tell Bob "give up the meth or it's going to destroy you", is that me/God restricting Bob's agency?  No!  Rather specifically supporting Bob's agency: he can do this OR this, he gets to choose.  With each choice comes consequences.  

It was the same with Emma's choice she had.  She could accept that God had told her husband to do this OR she could not.  The latter choice undoubtably would have shattered her marriage and faith.

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - Contradictions between the prophets on the topic of polygamy.  So is polygamy required for exaltation or not?  Men who are supposedly inspired by the same god have given contradictory answers to this issue.  Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, and some others answer in the affirmative, while modern Mormon prophets do not.  

This practice, like the Law of Moses, was commanded in some periods of time and forbidden in others.  For the last century+ it's been forbidden.

7 hours ago, idontknow said:

·       Prophetic reliability, anyone?

Would you ask the same question as to whether or not you're supposed to slaughter oxen on an alter?

(Man this is the longest reply I've written in a while)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - The racism in 2 Nephi 5:22 really bugs me.  If I take the BoM seriously as the word of God, then I must conclude that dark skin is a curse from God.  In short, I must become a racist.  But I don’t want to become a racist. 

Just to make things clear, there are no black people (aka of African descent) in the Book of Mormon.  There are also not white people (aka of Arian descent) in the Book of Mormon.  Lehi's family was Jewish.  They probably later interbred with other New World peoples (the Book is silent on this, and blatantly says it abridges history to focus on Christ). 

What is in the Book of Mormon: when Lamen & Lemual families (*two* families) break with Nephi & crew (whom became the Nephites).  After the two families (whom became the Lamenites) are "cursed with a skin of darkness".  What all this means / how it was done we don't know.  It could literally be God took out a paintbrush, it could be tanning, it could be intermarrying with other New World people whom were darker skinned, it could be symbolic.  There's a lot of theories.   

Anyway, fast forward: the Lamanites are not always the evil bad guys.  For example, when a Laminate prophet (yes, a Lamaite man of God) comes to prophecy of Christ's birth the horribly wicked Nephites try their best to kill him and he is only saved by a miracle of God.  There are many times the Lamanites are more righteous than the Nephites.  There is lots of times people move from one group to another and presumably they interbreed  (well, when the evil Nephite false priests rape a bunch of Laminate women we don't have to assume interbreeding).  

After Christ's visit, all the people were one, and the Nephites/Lamanites difference is done away for centuries (presumably much interbreeding).  When the people fall back into evil ways, the divisions occur once again, they are on who wants to follow Christ vs not.  

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - God erased all of our memories from the pre-mortal existence.  Seriously, what the heck? 

Do you act differently when your parent or boss is staring at you?  I do.  I know I act more like I'm supposed to when my boss is watching and am a much better pupil then (as are rest of my co-workers).  The test of how good of a worker/follower each of us are comes not when the boss is staring at us, but what we do when he's not their.  Likewise when my daughter goes into take a behavioral test, I'm supposed to leave the room so she can shine.  

Likewise it is with the Father: He leaves the room, gives us directions/encouragement, and then let's us shine/be tested.

Edited by Jane_Doe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

So - as a potential Mormon - do I have to accept *everything* Joseph Smith taught?! 

Nope.

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

Prophets are supposedly fallible, right? 

Yep.

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

Is there "essential" Joseph Smith that every believing Mormon must believe in versus "non-essential" ideas from Smith that can be rejected?

There's actually an official statement on this (http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine ).  This is an exert of it, bolding is mine:

  • Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency(the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
  • Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.

Based on the scriptures, Joseph Smith declared: “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

  •  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·         I am a potential convert and I've been in this category for some time.  At this point I just don't know what to believe about Mormonism any more because there are serious pros and cons.  I am just going to list the pros/cons here and see what sort of response I get. 

Welcome.

 

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·         So it looks like I have all the pieces in place to become a Mormon, right? 

Not yet.

To be a Mormon you need to be able to answer YES to the following questions with complete honesty and conviction:

1.) Do you believe in God - the Heavenly Father, his Son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost?

2.) Do you believe in the restored gospel of Christ, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and Thomas Monson as the current prophet of God?

3.) Are you repentant of your past transgressions?

4.) Do you commit to making covenants (promises) to follow the Word of Wisdom, Law of Chastity, Law of Tithing, and keeping the Sabbath Day holy?

There's also something about being a criminal with an ongoing investigation, currently living with a common-law spouse without legal marriage, being a minor child of homosexual parents, etc., that may need to be worked on before you can qualify to be baptized.

 

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      - Even though I had a really strong spiritual experience while reading Smith’s “history”, I just can’t bring myself to believe in all of what Smith taught. I especially can’t bring myself to believe in the “plurality of gods” – the idea that Heavenly Father is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And that god is the child of another god.  And so on - forever.  Infinitely many gods?!  This is pure silliness.  There is only one God.  End of story. 

The 3rd page of the Book of Mormon that contains the Testimony of Three Witnesses states:

"And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen."

That is what the restored gospel teaches and that is what the LDS believe.  As you can see, there is one God but there are three persons - Father, Son, Holy Ghost - in that one God.  Just because there are 3 persons in there does not mean there are "many gods".  There is only one God.  The number of persons in that Godhead, therefore, does not change the fact that there is one God.

Now, a god being a child of another god and so on and so forth... that's not taught in the LDS Church beyond Jesus Christ being a God and being the son of Heavenly Father who is also a God.  Rather, that is speculative - that means, if you believe it, it does not necessarily go against LDS teaching of one God because the number of persons in that Godhead does not change the fact that there is only one God.  But, as far as God has revealed, there are only 3 persons in that one God.

 

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·      

- I also can’t bring myself to accept the idea that God began his existence as a mere mortal and eventually became God.  Again, this is pure silliness.  God has been God from all eternity.  He is eternal, in the sense that he exists timelessly. D&C 130:7 affirms this when it claims “the past, present, and future are continually present before the Lord."  So to even suggest God had a "beginning" to his existence makes no sense. 

As far as has been revealed, God the Heavenly Father has always been God.  God the Son became mortal.  How Heavenly Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost became God is not revealed.

Yes, God - all 3 persons - are eternal and exists timelessly.  Our intelligences (also referred to as consciousness or spirit) are also eternal and exists timelessly.  God created our mortal bodies in preparation to receive our post-mortal spiritual bodies that God also created.  That we are eternal is a difference between LDS teaching and the rest of Christianity.

 

 

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·       

- Eternal polygamy.  Seriously, what gives?  Polygamy is repugnant. Why is this repugnant practice going to continue into the eternities?  What kind of god would actually grant creepy polygamists the highest level of exaltation, as promised in D&C 132:63?  And it gets even worse when you consider the possibility that the Mormon god may even be a polygamist himself!  This would make me out to be a potential polygamist-worshipper! YUCK!

- God threatening Emma to participate in polygamy or get "destroyed".  Seriously, what gives?  What happened to agency?  What happened to  the loving god I've heard so much about?  There's no excuse for this kind of nonsense.

- Contradictions between the prophets on the topic of polygamy.  So is polygamy required for exaltation or not?  Men who are supposedly inspired by the same god have given contradictory answers to this issue.  Brigham Young, Joseph F. Smith, and some others answer in the affirmative, while modern Mormon prophets do not.  Prophetic reliability, anyone?

Polygamy was a preparation to the restoration of the teaching on Eternal Marriage.  In Christendom, it was believed that Marriage ends in death.  This was sourced from a misinterpretation of Christ's teaching in Matthew 22.

Therefore, in Christendom, when your spouse dies and you marry again, you are still only married to 1 person.  In the teaching of Eternal Marriage, marriages sealed by priesthood authority does not end in death, rather, it is eternal.  Therefore, when your spouse dies, your marriage does not end.  When you remarry, you become married to 2 people.  Therefore, as far as the organization of families are concerned, whether your spouse is alive or dead makes no difference.  The restoration of this particular teaching on Marriage is essential in the restoration of the gospel.  Joseph Smith's reluctance to accept that marriage to somebody when Emma is alive is acceptable when he is just fine with marriage to another after Emma dies shows that Joseph Smith was reluctant to restore the gospel on Eternal Marriage.  This was not because he did not believe in it, he did.  It was simply because he was fearful of Emma's reaction.  It came to a point where he had to choose between God and Emma.

After Eternal Marriage was restored with all the priesthood authority behind it, it was not necessary to continue the practice of polygamy (marriage to more than 1 person who are all alive) and God gave instruction to end the practice.  Eternal Marriage, of course, remained a foundation of families and you may marry another after your spouse passes away and you could still end up with more than 1 marriage.

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·        - The racism in 2 Nephi 5:22 really bugs me.  If I take the BoM seriously as the word of God, then I must conclude that dark skin is a curse from God.  In short, I must become a racist.  But I don’t want to become a racist. 

If you believe the LDS Church is racist and that I am racist because I am Mormon, then you should not become a member of that Church.  So, if you want to know how the LDS Church is not racist with 2 Nephi 5, then ask that question.  It, frankly, boils my blood to be called a racist by some random person on the internet.

8 hours ago, idontknow said:

·     - God erased all of our memories from the pre-mortal existence.  Seriously, what the heck? 

Yes, seriously.  We're such kooks you see. 

Anyway, until you learn to humbly, honestly, and diligently seek the truth of all things, you can't possibly learn what is truth.  A full cup cannot gain more knowledge.  It is impossible.  You have to empty your cup first instead of thinking you know it all already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like you're in conflict between your God given faith and your humanly derived logic. I testify from my own experience that following divine faith over human logic will lead to a richer, more satisfying, more joy-filled mortal and eternal life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there!
Others have already shared some great insights so I will just add:
- I've been an active member all my life and don't concern myself with the things on your 'cons' list.  I just figure it will all work out and/or I'll understand those things if/when I need to.  Not that I blindly follow but there's just so much to study that there isn't time to get bogged down with those things.
- For now and in the future (since other things may come up for you down the road), remember that sometimes you just need to 'put it on the shelf' and act on the truths you already have.
- Have you read 'The 13 Articles of Faith'?  They're a basic outline of our beliefs so review them if you haven't already.
- The Gospel is simple.  Learn line upon line and don't complicate it.
Thanks for giving us a chance to respond to your queries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the responses...

Jane_Doe, thanks for the really thorough response.  I am not going to respond to all your points, though, because this would make the thread too cluttered and confusing.  I raised a lot of issues in the "con list" in the OP and I now realize that I should have created a separate thread for each issue.

Carborendum, reading D&C 6:22-23 helped me a lot. Thanks...

anatess, sorry I didn't mean to imply 'all Mormons must be racists because of 2 Nephi 5'.  What I meant to say is that I don't see any way to read 2 Nephi 5 without concluding dark skin is a divine curse.  If you can show me a way to avoid that conclusion then I'd appreciate it.

On ‎2‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 0:38 PM, askandanswer said:

It sounds like you're in conflict between your God given faith and your humanly derived logic. I testify from my own experience that following divine faith over human logic will lead to a richer, more satisfying, more joy-filled mortal and eternal life. 

 

But my ideas about the nature of God come from the Old/New Testament, not human logic.  I also quoted scriptures from Doctrines and Covenants (your own 'God given faith') in the OP.

Edited by idontknow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, idontknow said:

Thanks for all the responses...

Jane_Doe, thanks for the really thorough response.  I am not going to respond to all your points, though, because this would make the thread too cluttered and confusing.  I raised a lot of issues in the "con list" in the OP and I now realize that I should have created a separate thread for each issue.

Carborendum, reading D&C 6:22-23 helped me a lot. Thanks...

anatess, sorry I didn't mean to imply 'all Mormons must be racists because of 2 Nephi 5'.  What I meant to say is that I don't see any way to read 2 Nephi 5 without concluding dark skin is a divine curse.  If you can show me a way to avoid that conclusion then I'd appreciate it.

*Thumbs up*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, idontknow said:

Anatess, sorry I didn't mean to imply 'all Mormons must be racists because of 2 Nephi 5'.  What I meant to say is that I don't see any way to read 2 Nephi 5 without concluding dark skin is a divine curse.  If you can show me a way to avoid that conclusion then I'd appreciate it.

I know you asked Anatess..  but I am going to respond anyways...  Don't take scriptures out of context.  For example you can't say that 2 Nephi 5 is the mind and will of God without taking in the rest of the Book of Mormon into account.  Read the stories of Jacob calling the Nephites to repent.. pointing out as he does so that the "Cursed" Lamanites are in a better state before the Lord because they were more righteous.  Read the stories of the missionary efforts of the Sons of Mosiah and how they converted large numbers of these "Cursed" Lamanites. Their miraculous conversions and that they remained stead fast ever after, even up to dying for their faith. (While at the same time pointing out that Nephite dissenters never did).

Read the stories of the Army of Helaman... were the young son of these "Cursed" Lamanite converts where so faithful that the Lord preserved them through wars.  So faithful that even now we have songs about them and teach our children to follow their example.

Read the story of Samuel the "Cursed" Lamanite who was call as a prophet God to call the sinning Nephites to repent.  Called of God to be the one to tell the Nephites the signs and times of the Saviors Birth.

Also read how the title of Lamanite stopped referring to the descendants of Laman and started being used as a label for those in rebellion from God no matter the skin color or genealogy.

We might not fully grasp why God created different races and the reason we do get might not sit well with us.... but it is demonstratively, repetitively, shown in the scriptures, that God's judgement are only based on how obedient we are in following his commands not by skin color.

 

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, idontknow said:

But my ideas about the nature of God come from the Old/New Testament, not human logic.

Have you ever stopped to think why you believe the Bible is the word of God?  Why do you?  What method did you use to arrive at that conclusion?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@idontknow, it may seem that the question is flippant, but it's not.  It's a very important question: why do you believe that what the Bible teaches is the word of God?  (But that other writings, whether they make the same claim, are not the word of God?)  What is it that convinced you that the Bible is the word of God?  How did you learn to interpret the writings within the Bible? (Because a lot of people interpret them awfully differently.)  Knowing the answer to this kind of question is important to gaining new spiritual knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, idontknow said:

By reading it...

Seriously.  It was a serious question meant to help you in your uncertain stage.  And you responded with a flippant answer.  Not very encouraging when so many come onto this site with a false front intending to deceive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I arrived at the conclusion that the Bible is the word of God in pretty much the same way I arrived at the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is the word of God: By reading the book and judging for myself whether I think it is inspired or not.  In both cases, the inspiration of the book is something that can be *felt*.  As a child of God I have some kind of spiritual faculty that allows me to discern inspired from non-inspired writings.

 

Now the Bible paints a very different picture of God than the ‘god’ of the The King Follet Discourse.   Thus, once the Bible is accepted as inspired, it can then be used to disprove the Joseph Smith's speculation.  Consider the following scriptures:

 

 

Quote

Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

-  Isaiah 43:10

 

Quote

"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.

- Isaiah 44:6

 

 

Quote

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

- Isaiah 45:18

 

All three of these scriptures clearly eliminate the possibility of a "plurality of gods".  There is onnly one God; there is none else. 

 

Or consider this scripture that rules out the idea that God was ever taught by another god:

 

 

Quote

For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?

- 1 Corinthians 2:16 

 

In other words, nobody taught God how to be God.  He doesn't have instructors.  He has always been and always will be God. 

 

Or consider another scripture that rules out the idea that Heavenly Father is the child of another god;

 

 

Quote

All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

- Matthew 11:27

 

If no one knows the Father except the Son, then this means Heavenly Father can’t have any divine relatives.  If Heavenly Father had his own Father and Mother then this means they'd know him as well.  But Jesus didn't say Heavenly Father is known by anyone except the Son. 

 

Consider your own scriptures. D&C 130 affirms the idea that God exists timelessly, and therefore rules out the idea that God has a past history:

 

 

Quote

  all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord.

- D&C 130:7

 

... and so on.  Clearly, we have good scriptural grounds for rejecting Joseph Smith's ideas about a "plurality of gods"/"god was once a man".

 

So what do you guys think?  Do you believe there is only one God or do you believe in a “plurality of gods”?  Do you really believe there are infinitely many Gods greater than Heavenly Father?  If so, then how do you reconcile your idolatrous beliefs with the scriptures listed above?

 

 

Edited by idontknow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, idontknow said:

ugh, why is there no preview option on this website

I'll quote this instead of the other one above it because that one was kinda messy...

I answered that question on my very first paragraphs on my very first post on this thread.

There is no difference between the general Christian understanding of the 3 Persons in the Christian Trinity to the 3 Persons in the LDS Godhead.  They are 3 Persons in ONE GOD.

Where the Trinity and the Godhead differs is in the SUBSTANCE (ousia) of those 3 Persons.  In Trinitarian belief, what makes them One is their substance which is what makes them God.  The Person of The Father, then, does not have a body, neither does the Person of The Holy Ghost.  The Person of Christ has a body - perfected in the resurrection.  All 3 Persons is One Physical Substance which is the God substance.  The LDS Godhead belief is that what makes the 3 Persons One is not their substance but their WILL (state of being) that makes them God.  The Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, therefore have each their own perfected bodies.  They are One God through their perfect unity of WILL formed freely with perfect Knowledge, the WILL that is GOD.  Baal, therefore, is a false God, not because he has a different physical substance as God but because his WILL is not in perfect unity with the will of God.  As such, God's greatest gift to man is Free Will - that which can allow us to freely choose to be in perfect unity of the will of God, thereby allowing us to be gods as was expressed in heartfelt prayer by Christ in Gethsemane.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, idontknow said:

Again, I arrived at the conclusion that the Bible is the word of God in pretty much the same way I arrived at the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is the word of God: By reading the book and judging for myself whether I think it is inspired or not.  In both cases, the inspiration of the book is something that can be *felt*.  As a child of God I have some kind of spiritual faculty that allows me to discern inspired from non-inspired writings.

That is what everyone was looking for.  So, inspiration, and spiritual faculty which you have been given as a child of God allows you to learn truth, hopefully through studying it out, and then praying for confirmation or help understanding what God is trying to teach you.  (Without prayer, it's just logic and rational thought, which are my bread and butter and natural way of existing, but in a fallen world, are not enough alone - we need prayer and personal revelation to help us.)

That same pattern can be used to learn what God wants you to do next, or how to reconcile things which appear to be irreconcilable.

10 hours ago, idontknow said:

how do you reconcile your idolatrous beliefs with the scriptures listed above?

That statement right there tells me there's no point answering your question - any answer I give, unless it's what you already believe to be correct, will be rejected.

But that's OK, because what I say, think, believe, and even know are all irrelevant.  The way for you to learn truth is the way you already stated in the first thing I quoted from you.  Turn to God in all humility, sincerely desiring truth and to do his will, regardless of your current understanding and your own will, and God will lead you along.  Trust that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, idontknow said:

Again, I arrived at the conclusion that the Bible is the word of God in pretty much the same way I arrived at the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is the word of God: By reading the book and judging for myself whether I think it is inspired or not.  In both cases, the inspiration of the book is something that can be *felt*.  As a child of God I have some kind of spiritual faculty that allows me to discern inspired from non-inspired writings.

I'd daresay "again" was unwarranted.  The additional portion in bold is the important part that you left out.  And it was this part that I wanted to emphasize here -- FOR YOUR BENEFIT.  

You have continued to bear testimony that the Book of Mormon is the word of God.  But you then continue to resist the path it would lead you down.  Let go of your fears and proceed in faith.  You know this is true.  Just walk down the path.  You'll pick things up as you go.

Quote

Doctrine and Covenants 50:17-21

 17 Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

 18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God.

 19 And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

 20 If it be some other way it is not of God.

 21 Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth?

 22 Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.

The thing is that you're looking for answers to Divine truths on a website.  While we can give you guidance on mundane things and where to go to find the missionaries and so forth, the Spirit is what will convince you of the truth of the words we speak regarding the gospel.  And that is best received person-to-person, not computer-to-computer.

You received the truth by reading the words of prophets.  We are not prophets -- not in the sense that we write scripture.  Thus our written words will not have the same place in your heart as scriptures would.  But when we bear testimony in person, our testimony will bring the Spirit to you.  And you will know the truth of it.

Continuing to explain things here may clarify things if you're proceeding in faith.  But right now, you're really still clinging to your old ways.  And that's not something that can be fixed on a website.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, idontknow said:

Again, I arrived at the conclusion that the Bible is the word of God in pretty much the same way I arrived at the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is the word of God: By reading the book and judging for myself whether I think it is inspired or not.  In both cases, the inspiration of the book is something that can be *felt*.  As a child of God I have some kind of spiritual faculty that allows me to discern inspired from non-inspired writings.

That's fantastic.  

12 hours ago, idontknow said:

Now the Bible paints a very different picture of God than the ‘god’ of the The King Follet Discourse.   

 

 

Why are you spending so much time worrying about King Follet?  That's uber not important.

What is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT is, if you hear the voice of the Lord calling, do you follow it.

Edited by Jane_Doe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share