I Have Officially Resigned From The Mormon Church

[AnthonyB]

Erik,

There has been some good discussions on the nature of God on these boards.

You profile says little about yourself, could I ask some questions....

Are you advocating we should believe in God as revealed in the Bible?

Or do you have a creed or set of creeds as your benchmark (Apostle's, Nicene, Chalcedon)?

If your believe people should believe in God as expressed in say the Nicene creed, are you happy to also assert along with that creed for "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins"? If not, why are some parts of creeds fundametal and some not? If the councils were inspired in their creed writing, where they also inspired in their church structure decisions?

Would you be happy to assert the following?

Father is eternal God, Jesus is eternal God, Holy Spirit is eternal God and they are one God. God exists as both spirit and exalted human.

From what I understand, the words above would be affirmed by the LDS. Of course what LDS and non-LDS Christians may mean by the above statement is vastly different due to our presuppositons, and we would both want to say more to make our differences clear. (eg We see only one exalted human as God, they see two.)

[prisonchaplain]

Appreciate the response, prisonchaplian. And let me be clear as well. I don't hate Buddhists, Mormons, Muslims, etc., either.

Question, prisonchaplain, just so I know where you're coming from. Do you affirm the Trinity? I understand some Pentecostals (i.e., Oneness Pentecostals) don't...

--Erik

Yes...classic Trinitarian Pentecostal here.

[Dale]

"Therefore I consider all your precepts to be right; I hate every false way." (Psalm 119:128)

Is this the God you have in mind, Dale, the one who advocates hatred of "every false way?" Seems like this is not merely the God of some "evangelical" religion--but rather the God proclaimed in the Bible...

But perhaps I've misinterpreted "hate" to mean hate...

;0)

--Erik

I feel God hates the counter-cult movement. I do not see their God as the God of the bible. To me if God tells a group of men to do something wrong it is not God to me at all. I sense genuine hate from some LDS critics. Some just passionately disagree with my Community of Christ/RLDS beliefs. But counter-cultism clearly hates Mormonism. They hate what they feel God hates. To me i see the counter-cult movement as being of man, and the Devil. I do not blame God for inspiring such ministries.

I feel many Evangelicals have the true God, and will be saved. My condemnation of people i feel who are listening to the wrong God is not a condemnation of all Evangelicals. with six hundred million Evangelicals the counter-cult movement though annoying is not the fault of all Evangelicals.

And i do not see having legitimate significant differences with LDS, Community of Christ, as meaning i feel the person will die unsaved. I judge individual critics of the restoration by fairly sizing them individually. I feel God can save persons who i feel are wrong about religion.

I have been taking witnessing to Mormons and Community of Christ study. Tonight i was reading out of Reorganized Latter Day Saint Church: Is it Christian? by Carol Hanson. The topics were polygamy quotes , God issues, and salvation issues. I frequently re-read the same materials as i have topics i work on regularly. I took a break to get out of my room which was starting to feel like a prison cell.

[rameumptom]

The question, "Are Mormons Christian?" is a difficult question. Why? Because everyone has their own view of what connotes the perfect Christian person and belief. Whose job is it to draw the line, or define the terms involved? And where should that line be drawn, if anywhere?

The term can be as general or specific as the individual wishes to define it. If I say anyone who believes Jesus was a historical person is a Christian, then most people would be Christians. If I say that one must believe him to be a teacher of righteousness, then fewer people would be Christians, but this would still include Gandhi and many others. If I say that one must believe in the resurrection of Christ, then it limits it even more. If I say that a Christian must believe in the Godhead, then I possibly have dropped the list down to only a few dozen million. If I say that a Christian is defined as someone who believes in Jesus' resurrection and his transportation to a heavenly planet named "Bob", then perhaps there is only a handful of people in psych wards that would fit the description.

Am I a Christian? I believe so. Am I a classical Christian? Suddenly, there's a defining term attached that narrows the description, so that I can easily state that I am not. But then, Roman Catholics could claim that Protestants are not Classical Christians, either. Once again, it is all in the definitions used.

[Shell72]

I see a temptation in trying to fit in with groups of men who hate Mormonism. I am Community of Christ/RLDS. But if i listened to my Evangelical friends i feel that would effect my relationship with God. I know they don't have a better God so i am going to keep my God. Their God tells them to hate Mormonism and mine tells me to keep my beliefs.

Seeking answers and truth are great, but do not seek the confusion of men.

I don't understand the "their God, my God" thing.. There is but one God - and it is our personal relationship with him that matters - no matter which Church you choose to worship Him in. If Man is telling you something that you feel contradicts what has directly been told to you in the Bible - then you need to step back and think and not blindly follow. Blind faith in man's words open one up to deception.

[Guest tomk]

I don't understand the "their God, my God" thing.. There is but one God - and it is our personal relationship with him that matters - no matter which Church you choose to worship Him in. If Man is telling you something that you feel contradicts what has directly been told to you in the Bible - then you need to step back and think and not blindly follow. Blind faith in man's words open one up to deception.

I agree with the "what matters most" is the relationship with God, specifically, the person of Jesus Christ.

But that is where my agreement ends, for while there are many roads to truth, in the end, there is only one truth, and it is embodied in ONE Church, not thousands. That Church has Priesthood and specific ordinances and covenants that are taken upon ourselves in a specific place, the Temple. So I can't go around agreeing that "it mattereth not what church you join" when it does matter.

I don't want to contend against other faiths. I don't want to tell them "they are wrong". All I have is my personal witness of which church I believe to be THE true Church. In my view, other faiths serve good purposes. They teach a basic belief in God WHICH IS A GOOD THING. I would never want to dissuade them from that. But they do not have the ordinances and covenants God has said are needful. They do not have the Priesthood.

Now, members of those other faiths don't need to prove me "wrong" or "right". I am not posting to debate it. Just to declare my witness.

[Shell72]

I agree with the "what matters most" is the relationship with God, specifically, the person of Jesus Christ.

But that is where my agreement ends, for while there are many roads to truth, in the end, there is only one truth, and it is embodied in ONE Church, not thousands. That Church has Priesthood and specific ordinances and covenants that are taken upon ourselves in a specific place, the Temple. So I can't go around agreeing that "it mattereth not what church you join" when it does matter.

I don't want to contend against other faiths. I don't want to tell them "they are wrong". All I have is my personal witness of which church I believe to be THE true Church. In my view, other faiths serve good purposes. They teach a basic belief in God WHICH IS A GOOD THING. I would never want to dissuade them from that. But they do not have the ordinances and covenants God has said are needful. They do not have the Priesthood.

Now, members of those other faiths don't need to prove me "wrong" or "right". I am not posting to debate it. Just to declare my witness.

The Bible is quite clear

"No one comes to the father except through Me".

So the way I see it, the Church in itself is a tool, where we go to learn, worship together and seek truth. The personal relationship with Jesus is the key, not the Temple, not covenants, not anything that any single religion practices in my opinon. Live by the word of God, and the rest seems insignificant in my eyes.

[Kirajo]

Haha, yeah okay. Good luck Holly.

[MichaelPAGuy]

All I have to say is good luck in the future. As long as you are happy, that is all that matters.

[ErikJohnson]

Yes...classic Trinitarian Pentecostal here.

Good to hear. And while I'm not particularly charismatic--you'll get no arguments from me.

Thanks prisonchaplain.

--Erik

[ErikJohnson]

Erik,

There has been some good discussions on the nature of God on these boards.

You profile says little about yourself, could I ask some questions....

Are you advocating we should believe in God as revealed in the Bible?

Or do you have a creed or set of creeds as your benchmark (Apostle's, Nicene, Chalcedon)?

If your believe people should believe in God as expressed in say the Nicene creed, are you happy to also assert along with that creed for "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins"? If not, why are some parts of creeds fundametal and some not? If the councils were inspired in their creed writing, where they also inspired in their church structure decisions?

Would you be happy to assert the following?

Father is eternal God, Jesus is eternal God, Holy Spirit is eternal God and they are one God. God exists as both spirit and exalted human.

From what I understand, the words above would be affirmed by the LDS. Of course what LDS and non-LDS Christians may mean by the above statement is vastly different due to our presuppositons, and we would both want to say more to make our differences clear. (eg We see only one exalted human as God, they see two.)

Hey AnthonyB--

Sorry, I'm new here and haven't figured out how to do a profile (I'm sure I will if/when time permits).

Regarding your questions, I would certainly advocate belief in the God of the Bible (the only God there is). I would not be comfortable asserting, "God exists as both spirit and exalted human." Yes, Jesus was fully man. Yes, Jesus possesses a resurrected body. Yes, God has exalted Him. But this does not make Him a mere "exalted human"--for He was fully God at all times when He walked the earth (Colossians 2:9). I could not reasonably infer that fact from your statement--so it seems like a half-truth to me.

Regarding the need to defend the ancient Christian creeds--let me answer you by borrowing a bit from John Piper (Thoughts on the Sufficiency of Scripture :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library)

My biographical message at the pastors’ conference this year was on Athanasius who was born in A. D. 298. So I spent a good bit of time studying the doctrinal disputes of the fourth century. The main dispute was over the deity of Christ. Arius (and the Arians) said that the Son of God was a creature and did not always exist. Athanasius defended the eternal deity of the Son and helped win that battle with the wording of the Council of Nicaea: “We believe in . . . the Son of God . . . of the essence of the Father, God of God, and Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.”

One surprising fact that I did not expect to find was that the heretics protested most loudly over the non-scriptural language of the orthodox creed. They pointed out that the phrases, “of one essence with the Father,” and “one substance with the Father” were not in the Bible. The heretics demanded “no creed but the Bible” precisely so that they could use biblical language to evade biblical truth. For example, they would happily call Christ “Son of God,” and then argue that, like all sons, he must have had a beginning.

...

There are many today who would demand “no creed but the Bible” the same way the Arians did. But we should learn from history that biblical language is not enough when it comes to defending the meaning of biblical language. R. P. C. Hanson explained the process like this: “Theologians of the Christian Church were slowly driven to a realization that the deepest questions which face Christianity cannot be answered in purely biblical language, because the questions are about the meaning of biblical language itself”

I think Piper makes a lot of sense here, and defends the creeds as well as anyone I've read. And I've come to agree with him.

Does that help?

--Erik

[Dale]

I don't understand the "their God, my God" thing.. There is but one God - and it is our personal relationship with him that matters - no matter which Church you choose to worship Him in. If Man is telling you something that you feel contradicts what has directly been told to you in the Bible - then you need to step back and think and not blindly follow. Blind faith in man's words open one up to deception.

Evangelicals have a Holy Spirit thats either Gods Holy Spirit, or the Devil, or man. I cannot claim they have the same God as me if we have two different Holy Spirits. The critics of my belief hold i have the wrong God so while i am not confessing i have the wrong God i see us as claiming two different Gods. I stopped trying to convince them we had the same God, so i adopted the "their God, my God" thing. Your approach is simpler, but it does not work to claim the same God with vocal counter-cultists.

[prisonchaplain]

I'm a bit confused. The Holy Spirit is God. He certainly is not the Devil or man--such would run dangerously close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit. So, other than evangelicals believing that the Holy Spirit is of the same essence as the Father and Son, I'm not sure how our beliefs differ.

[rameumptom]

I'm a bit confused. The Holy Spirit is God. He certainly is not the Devil or man--such would run dangerously close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit. So, other than evangelicals believing that the Holy Spirit is of the same essence as the Father and Son, I'm not sure how our beliefs differ.

I think Dale is suggesting that while most Christians are guided by the Spirit of God, not all those that claim to be Christian are guided by that spirit. IOW, they are guided by a different spirit, for even Satan can appear as an angel of light, no?

In 3 Nephi 27, Jesus teaches the Nephites that there are things of God, of man, and of Satan. The things of God are everlasting, while the things of man and the devil will give happiness for a season, and then comes misery. For example, things of men can include getting that new Porsche, which brings joy to zip down the road. But when you get that $500 ticket for reckless driving, and your Porsche is wrapped around a telephone pole, suddenly, it isn't as joyful as it once was.

The things of Satan are addicting and enticing and bring instant self-gratification. But they leave us spiritually in shambles.

For those counter-cultists whose sole purpose is to try and destroy decent people (like Mormons, Catholics, or Jehovah's Witnesses), they are possibly following a hating spirit, not the Spirit of God.

[Hemidakota]

Which university do you teach? Just curious.

[Mullenite]

I think your from Berkeley. is that right Holly.

[Hemidakota]

I think somewhere midwest.

[Dale]

I just meant what i meant as a discernment issue. Those in the counter-cult movement hold i have a false God, Jesus, and Holy spirit. They arn't intending to insult Deity, nor was that what i meant either. They just hold i have a heretical ideas of Deity so that proves my God isn't the true God.

2 Corr.11:4 different Jesus concern of Paul is behind what i wrote. Its possible to have another God, and Holy spirit.

[Hemidakota]

Dale, not many Saints will stand up and offer their own advice with the differences between the Deity we believe or know, in comparison of others.

[lilered]

It seems to me in my simple way of looking at things that when we are baptized we covenant to take upon us the name of Christ. We make this covenant with Heavenly Father. 1st we take on his name, then intuitevly it follows that if we do indeed take upon us the name of Christ, we then call ourselves Christians.

Why? Because we believe in Jesus Christ and that he is our redeemer.

It doesn't have to be any more difficult to understand than that. It is only when those critics outside the church start to define Christians differently that the arguements start.

[Mullenite]

Most violations of God's law committed by earnest followers of Christ are transgressions which are errors or mistakes due to human weakness. These are not sins.

The Doctrine of Divine Grace

Along with developing perfect love, the atonement made possible the principle and doctrine of divine grace. Grace is God’s goodwill to forgive infractions, transgressions(error, mistake) or inadequacies due to human weaknesses and qualify His children for heavenly glories. Transgressions due to human weaknesses reside in a different category than willful disobedience(sin), which requires repentance. At Ether 12:27, we read that weaknesses are given to men to make them humble. That fact that this scriptures implies that men were given weaknesses and men did not create the weaknesses themselves and that actually God instilled those weakness must require God to forgive those transgressions that are caused by human weakness.

Further, Ether explains this that Christ’s grace is sufficient to overcome personal weakness and be forgiven.

“And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness, I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them”.

Even though an individual may not be fully accountable for transgressions, they will be required to experience the consequences of these transgressions such as Adam and Eve did in the Garden and must be justified under the law through restitution and forgiveness to and from the victim. However, the transgression committed and the consequences experienced provides growth and strengthening for the transgressor, which is the reason of personal weaknesses.

[lostnfound]

I just wanted to let you all know that about a week or so ago, I sent in my resignation letter to the Mormon headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah.

I have decided that I no longer wish to be a member of the Mormon Church and I totally understand all the "consequences" of resigning. I know that the effects of my baptism will be canceled and that any temple recommends I had will also be canceled but I didn't have any temple recommends. Even if I did, I wouldn't care if they were canceled.

I simply find myself no longer able to agree with the tenants of the Mormon faith. I have nothing against Mormons themselves. I only have something against what the Mormon church believes. The most important of which would be the unorthodox view of the Trinity that the Mormon church holds.

I hope that none of you will be angry with me for resigning my membership in the Mormon church and please know that I hold nothing against any of you. My decision to resign was not the result of anything anyone said on these forums or anything of that sort. It was a result of my own choosing.

The headquarters did mail me back and told me that my decision would have to be handled by local priesthood leaders. I did not know this at the time that I mailed my letter to the headquarters.

Anyway, may God bless you all and may you all someday find the truth which I personally do not believe is found in the Mormon church.

Can you talk about why you are leaving? if you can't post it are you able to send it privately? I have tons of questions for you..

[ztodd]

The last we heard from her is that she was re-considering mormonism.

Well everyone, I just thought I'd stop by to say that I am reconsidering Mormonism but I still have many questions. If anyone would be willing to chat with me in Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, or AIM, I'd appreciate that.

[Teancum18]

I feel extremely and exponentially confident that this is not true; that someone is making up stories.