Mormon Terminology and Dilemma
Christian/Christianity
Mitt and the $10,000 Bet
Journal of Discourses 6:176; “Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell. The eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and then kicked on to the earth.” – Brigham Young
1 Nephi 14:9-10; “And it came to pass that he said unto me: Look, and behold that great and abominable church, which is the mother of abominations, whose founder is the devil. And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.”
1 John 3:14-5 says that we have a way to see who is saved and who is not: “We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.”
We thought it was interesting Mitt Romney used a very Christian word to describe a position he held in the Mormon Church. By telling all of America he was a pastor flies in the face of how they really feel about Christianity.
So has Christianity and all it represents hatched in hell or not? If it was then why use their terminology and why are you trying to look like them?
And why is Romney gambling when it’s a definite no-no to gamble in Mormonism? Wouldn’t a former bishop know these things?
This really is laughable.
Personally, I don’t think Mitt was serious in his bet. he was playing off of what Perry had said and laughing it away.
As to the term, there is nothing wrong with it if the person you are addressing does not have an understanding of the equivalent term in the LDS.
I could tell someone that I am an Elder’s Quorum President. But how many would actually know what I was talking about.
On the other hand I could say that I was a kind of pastor in my church, and the connection would be made in the minds of most people and they would have an understanding of what my position had been.
Now, since you don’t actually give a quote I can’t say anything else regarding what Mitt Romney said.
Shem please stop giving allowances for sin, even Perry wouldn’t choose to gamble. If you want to see what Mitt said about the “bet” go to the link below.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/yahoo-readers-rate-debate-10-000-more-people-044851269.html
What’s sad is how you’re so willing to turn a blind it to what Mitt has done. Would you do the same if another candidate would lie and gamble during a debate?
By the way here’s what you church believes about gambling.
“Gambling is motivated by a desire to get something for nothing. This desire is spiritually destructive. It leads participants away from the Savior’s teachings of love and service and toward the selfishness of the adversary. It undermines the virtues of work and thrift and the desire to give honest effort in all we do. ”
http://lds.org/study/topics/gambling?lang=eng
Christians know what Bishops are and what they do. He didn’t have to use the word Pastor… Americans would know what his position was if he had used the term Bishop.
We had a Bishop at the Christian church we attended in Illinois… There are Bishops in all types of Christian denominations.
I think he used the word Pastor so he could identify with the Evangelical Christians who aren’t too sure about his religion.
I have NEVER heard any Mormon EVER refer to themselves or anyone in the LDS church as a “Pastor”.
Isaiah 29: 20-21
“For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:
That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.”
It will be a glorious day indeed when people stop seeking out iniquity, and accuse others of sin because they disagree with their choice of words. I am not one to “make a man an offender for a [single] word.
Article of Faith 6 (from the LDS)
“We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.”
A pastor is an ordained leader in any Christian church. It is a term that is used by the LDS church to refer to local leaders, such as Bishops and Quorum presidents. It is not in common usage among us but it is still part of our religion.
For Mitt Romney to refer to himself as a pastor is perfectly true, and is in perfect harmony with the LDS doctrine and terminology; as well as being good wording on his part to reduce any misunderstandings. It was used to identify with Christianity in general, not any particular branch or denomination.
MICHELLE
I am well acquainted with what my church teaches concerning gambling. There is no need to point it out.
I am also well acquainted with the argumentative strategies of sarcasm, which you may want to familiarize yourself with.
This article of yours is a very good example of how you “watch for iniquity” and “make a man an offender for a word.” Be careful, or you will be among those who are consumed so that Jacob can look with joy on his people.
CAMDEN
A bishop is something different in each church, and thus to just use the phrase does not necessarily convey the same meaning. However, most everyone uses the term Pastor in the same way, and thus it is an effective way to convey his meaning.
Shem
You must be convicted my friend as I wasn’t necessarily speaking to just you about Mr. Romney’s comments. There are many people who visit our site and know nothing about Mormonism. Pointing out that they don’t condone gambling might be something new to the novice investigator.
You said; “A pastor is an ordained leader in any Christian church. It is a term that is used by the LDS church to refer to local leaders, such as Bishops and Quorum presidents. It is not in common usage among us but it is still part of our religion.
For Mitt Romney to refer to himself as a pastor is perfectly true, and is in perfect harmony with the LDS doctrine and terminology; as well as being good wording on his part to reduce any misunderstandings. It was used to identify with Christianity in general, not any particular branch or denomination.”
No Shem, Romney used that word pastor on purpose. For those reading this blog and just now learning about the nuances of Mormonism, don’t be fooled. They NEVER EVER use the term pastor, this is a ruse to try and blend in with the body of Christ.
For almost two CENTURIES Mormonism has gone out of its way to cut itself off from any affiliation with the Christians worldwide. They’ve never wanted it to be misunderstood that they’re just another denomination in the “whore of Babylon”. They’ve made a point out of differentiating themselves and when you Shem go to church this Sunday and open your Book of Mormon to condemn the body of Christ even further remember what you’ve said here today.
Additionally, I’m not the one that lied on stage and then so quickly putting out a hand to ensure a gambling deal. I’m not going to excuse nor accept his lies or the lies of someone professing to be something they’re not.
If he can’t tell the American people the truth about a simple position he held in his church what else would he lie to you about? About the gambling – what goes into the body doesn’t defile a man, but what come out of the mouth condemns him indeed. He can be exposed to little quips about “I’ll bet you a million bucks” because “that’s what everybody does” all day long, but isn’t it interesting how quickly he stuck his hand out to do it? It makes one wonder what is in that man’s heart.
Simple observations.
Michelle
MICHELLE
Of course he used it on purpose. I never said otherwise. In fact I congratulated him on choosing that particular word.
To those reading this, why not let the writings of the LDS church show you how wrong Michelle is, and how much she doesn’t know or understand LDS doctrine or terminology.
In the index to our Triple Combination you will find the term Pastor listed. Synonyms are also listed: See also Bishop and shepherd. Under Bishop it says to see Pastor, as it does under the listing of Shepherd.
I have pointed out that it is listed in the Sixth Article of Faith as part of the organization of the church.
If you look in our Bible Dictionary (in print for many decades) you will find a listing for the “Pastoral Epistles” which are described as “The name given to the epistles to Timothy and Titus, because they deal with the pastoral office and the duties of the shepherds or ministers of the Church.”
If you read in the Bible only the books of Jeremiah and Ephesians actually use the term Pastor. So, why do we refer to these epistles as pastoral? Because it is in these epistles that we get a description of the positions of Bishops and Deacons, who are pastors.
With all this as evidence against what Michelle has tried to claim, I remain firm in my declaration that the term is very much a part of the LDS vocabulary, though not a common one, and Mitt Romney was perfectly accurate in using it.
Michelle’s argument that we “NEVER EVER” use the term is proven false in our most basic scriptures and only shows how little she actually knows concerning us.
Again, I warn, as Isaiah did, against those who would make a man an offender for a word and seek out iniquity. This is all that is being done in this article.
Shem
In all the weeks I’ve allowed you to post here on this blog and get your side of things in I’ve only asked one thing.
That you do not insult. I find it interesting how that when you’re corresponding with a male on this blog you tell them you both have different opinions or understandings of one issue or another.
Yet, when you respond to either me or Melissa you insinuate by your choice of words that I either don’t understand, implying that I’m stupid.
I understand Mormonism all too well unfortunately. How many times I’ve wished I knew nothing about it is immeasurable. Because we disagree doesn’t mean I know little to nothing about Mormonism so you need to grow up now.
I promise you that if you cannot be nice this is your very last chance here with me. Ive literally had it. I’ve allowed you a longer rope than others because I want the reading audience at large to get the true understanding of how misled the teachings of Mormonism are and the effects of such on the human spirit when you reject God. You’ve done a great job in proving my point.
It’s like what Dr. Walter Martin said; “Mormons attack you (the Christian) to hide the anger and guilt they carry inside of themselves”.
I’ve never insulted you Shem nor have I ever attacked your character. Your behavior is classic cult behavior that so many members suffer from.
You and I have different opinions but it doesn’t mean I’m stupid – the one person I feel most sorry for is your wife. How sad for her that you probably treat her the same way and from previous posts think of her nothing more than a baby machine to build up your own kingdom with your own planet someday.
Someday Shem God is going to ask you what you think now that you’ve found out there is no other God beside Him (Isaiah 43:10-11). I pray that before the time comes you’ve accepted the truth and renounced Mormonism. Regardless of how arrogant the Mormon people are my heart still hurts for them as I used to act just like them and you. God in His infinite mercy changed me and that’s my prayer for you as well. I’m certain under all that animosity and anger a real person exists.
Michelle
The funny thing is Shem it was legitimate Mormon references that led me out of Mormonism and to Jesus Christ. So telling people to ignore what Michelle has to say in lieu of Mormon materials might just blow up in your face.
I really wish Mormons would find a new song to sing because the ones you’re singing are getting really old. Just because someone isn’t a True Blue Mormon doesn’t mean they know nothing about Mormonism. And just because someone doesn’t put the positive spin on Mormon Doctrine doesn’t mean they don’t “understand” your doctrine.
You need to remember your place here Shem, you’re a guest. If you want to give praises to J.Smith and your human god you can create your own blog for that purpose, It’s really quiet easy to do. Until then show a little respect to Michelle she’s shown you a lot of patience more than I would have. – Melissa Grimes
MICHELLE
First, I have never thought that anyone here was stupid, and I apologize for giving that impression. Ignorant, maybe, but not stupid. The difference between these two is that the ignorant have the ability to learn from their errors and correct them, while the stupid don’t.
As to your not so subtle claims to my being sexist, I will point out a simple fact: I have always allowed anyone their own beliefs. When comparing your beliefs with that of the LDS I am perfectly willing to simply compare and leave it at that.
The problem is that you are not comparing beliefs. You are asserting what we believe, and the fact is that you are wrong. You may think you are right, but you aren’t. As such, I am not willing to simply let it go as different beliefs, because in doing so I would be giving credibility to the false ideas that you are trying to spread.
If you wanted to state what we believe and then say we are wrong, I am fine with that, and I will simply give you my reasons for saying we are right. But when you claim we believe something when we don’t (or that we don’t when we do) I will always argue the point and I will be very vocal in it.
This particular article is the perfect example. It has been stated that we do not use the term Pastor. I have provided several references that prove it is a term used by the church, and yet you still try to insist it isn’t. I am sorry, but you are wrong and I will continue to assert that you are wrong. Will you admit that you are wrong? We’ll see.
MELISSA
It doesn’t really matter why you left the church. The very things you read have and will continue to be the very reasons hundreds, and maybe thousands of people embrace the church. I am not so paranoid as to avoid something simply because one person didn’t like what they read. I have yet to read anything that in anyway shakes my faith or deters me from my chosen path. I do not understand it all, but I do know this: Joseph Smith is a prophet, as are all the men who followed him; Christ has spoken again to men on Earth, revealed his will, and has fulfilled his Father’s will. The Book of Mormon is just as much his word as the Bible is, and the same is true of the doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. These things I know, and all the promises and blessings that are contained in them are real and true. It doesn’t matter what else I read; it doesn’t matter if someone once made a strange comment; it cannot void the truth of this work. You might as well tell me that the sun does not exist as tell me these things are not true.
Concerning this blog, I know my place as a guest, and in that role I have never addressed anything that was not brought up by my host.
But I think you should learn your place as a host. It is not a hosts place to make a statement and then complain when someone counters them. It is not a hosts place to demand that their word be accepted as absolute, with no chance of error. But this is exactly what has been demanded here. I have been told that I have to accept that whatever you or Michelle says about my church is true, and that I have no right to even try to correct errors (as there obviously isn’t any).
You are right that one who isn’t a “True Blue Mormon” can know concerning the church. I have not denied this, and I am perfectly willing to accept that you do know some things. But then, just because someone was a member at one point in their lives is no guarantee that they know all that much. I have posted on many blogs and I find this is the most common reasoning used to justify the attitude of absolute understanding. “I used to be a member so I know.” Well I am a member, and for you to tell me you know more than me is pure arrogance on your part.
I never said I “knew more than” you about Mormonism Shem. I simply look at things from a different point of view now. No looking am I bound to put things through the “Mormon filter” to make sure it doesn’t put my temple recommend in jeopardy, and fully agrees with what has already be said by my Mormon leaders.
Yes it’s true like many people before them the lost will always be drawn to doctrines that tickles their ears. Those who like the idea of being able to receive a pat on the back for their “good deeds” will love the works righteous system Mormonism has set in place for them.
It will make them about feel good and they will buy into the lie that they’re a good person, and not a sinner. They will believe the lie that they are righteous because of their own works and not because of the work Jesus did for them on the cross.
Well the sun, something God actually created does exist. And the extra books are nothing more than the work of J. Smith not the work of God. It took me awhile to figure out that too.
MELISSA
Yes, you do think you know more, and I really don’t care. You supposed point of view may not have the bias of the church (which isn’t what you make it out to be) but it does have the bias of your own animosity towards the church. You have lost your faith in it, which has caused you to become hostile to it, and to anyone who would dare defend it, which is clearly manifested by the mere existence of this blog and your activity on it.
In this I am speaking from a psychological perspective, not a religious one. A person who has no animosity or hostility does not devote as much time and effort as you have in an attempt to destroy something.
As to your comments about the church, the thing that you don’t understand is that a person can be a sinner and still be a good person. I never deny my sins, and I will always admit that I am far from perfect. But it does feel nice when I feel the Spirit of God telling me that I am doing well and that He is pleased with my efforts. Those who try to deny that Christ and Heavenly Father are not pleased when we work righteousness do not understand the gospel or the Bible.
Shem – There is no hatred or animosity towards the LDS church. Michelle and Melissa are pointing out the differences between what Biblical Christianity teaches and what Mormonism teaches.
We are trying to witness to members of the LDS church about the joyous life found in a personal relationship with Jesus. Biblical Christianity and Mormonism differ in their answers to the 2 biggest questions in life…
Who is Jesus?
How are we saved?
If you and I had the same answers for both of those questions, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But we don’t have the same answers, hence the reason for this blog-site.
You believe that Jesus is a created being
I believe that Jesus is not a created being
You believe that Jesus had to attain his god-hood
I believe that He is God Eternal. No begining and no end.
You believe that Jesus is one of the 3 gods in heaven
I believe that there is only one God, manifested in 3 persons
You believe in a grace+works system
I believe we are saved by grace alone, through faith.
You believe that through your works, you can get to the highest point in the Celestial Kingdom
I believe that there is nothing I can do to be more right with God
CAMDEN
There is most certainly animosity in those writing these blogs. The very fact that they need to pick apart every word said by members and search for something to use against us proves this.
Again, this particular article is the prime example. They are angry because Mitt Romney used the word pastor; a word they want to reserve to themselves. Thus they have claimed that it is a term that is alien to the LDS church, trying to show Mitt Romney as a deceiving, conniving man who is only trying to disguise his beliefs to get elected. This is not a comparison of their beliefs to ours, but an unprovoked malicious attack on our faith; made even more so by their stubborn refusal to admit that the term is very much an integral part of our religion, and resorting to personal threats and insults to cover their error.
Now, there have been plenty of other examples in the past few months that showed this same animosity. They are hostile to the church and to anyone who dares defend it. If they weren’t they would have no problem with me commenting and explain the LDS doctrine. But they do have a problem with this, which they had told me more than once.
Now, I have never seen any animosity in you, and for that I am grateful.
As to your list of our beliefs:
“You believe that Jesus is a created being
I believe that Jesus is not a created being”
Actually, if you know LDS doctrine, we do not believe he was a created being, only that his physical body was created in the same way as our were. However, if want to modify this and say that we believe he came after the Father you would be more accurate.
“You believe that Jesus had to attain his god-hood
I believe that He is God Eternal. No begining and no end.”
Again, we believe he is also God Eternal, meaning that he had all the authority and power of God. However, as he did not have a physical body until after his birth he was not in the state of godhood that comes to immortal, exalted beings.
“You believe that Jesus is one of the 3 gods in heaven
I believe that there is only one God, manifested in 3 persons”
This one you are perfectly correct on, and I am eternally grateful to have the truth, rather than the confusion.
“You believe in a grace+works system
I believe we are saved by grace alone, through faith.”
Again, not completely accurate. We believe salvation is gained through the grace of God, and that our faith and works actually carry no power in themselves. However, his grace will only work for those who have faith that has been proven by their works.
“You believe that through your works, you can get to the highest point in the Celestial Kingdom”
Again, it is not exactly through our works, but through the grace of God given to those who have proven their faith and devotion.
“I believe that there is nothing I can do to be more right with God”
Which is said, because God loves you, and every time you choose to do good he is pleased, just as any Father would be. What you can’t do is do anything that would result in your salvation; this does not mean you cannot please God.
I don’t love one of my kids more because they did their chores or their homework. Sure I am more pleased with them when they do what they are supposed to do. And of course there is chastening when they don’t.
What I am saying is that my performance will never make God love me more. My love for my kids and grandkids will never change, I love them unconditionally. Just because I may be dis-pleased with one of them for their actions, doesn’t mean I am going to “write them out of my will”.
Accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior gets our names in the Lamb’s Book of Life. Good works (or fruit) are what proceeds out of my changed heart. Remember Jesus’ answer to “What must we do to do the works of God?” Jesus replied, “Believe in the One whom He has sent”.
Look at David and Solomon. They had many wives and concubines, which was an abomination before the Lord. When David and Bathseba’s child died, David got up, washed up, and started to eat. His servants were amazed. He said that he knew he would see him again… I know that David is Heaven singing; Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty. We fail as humans to live up to God’s standard everyday. We “miss the mark” and “fall short”. But we have complete forgiveness through the Blood of Jesus. Through faith, we are credited to righteousnous and our good works are as “filthy rags” when compared with His Holiness.
CAMDEN
You have made one of the biggest errors concerning our doctrine. To say that God’s love is dependent on our actions is blasphamy, and anyone who claims this is what we believe is either a liar or is ignorant asto our doctrine.
God loves all his children unconditionally. I will go so far as to state that he loves Satan just as much as any of us, because Lucifer is one of his chilrden.
However, his acceptance and his reward is not based on his love. These things are not unconditional. They can’t be or it would destroy the justice of God.
Even in your own doctrine this is conditional. It is conditioned on accepting and professing him. Those who do no accept him are cast out. Does this means he loves them any less? I would venture to guess you would say no, because such an idea is ludicrous.
However, God cannot allow sin, and those who engage in such cannot enter into his house or he would not be just. Using your idea of a will, would it be just to give an inheritance to one that is unrully and disobedient. No.
Consider the parable of the Prodigal Son. Yes the father still loved his younger son and celebrated his return; but he tells the elder that “all that I have is thine.” the younger had gone agains the will of his Father and had lost his inheritance. Even though he returned is sorrow and his father received him, he was not written back into the will.
Also consider the parable of the talents. Three servants given talents; when the master returned those servants who had been faithful were rewarded, while the one who had not lost hat had been given to him.
None of this means that God loves us less; only that he is unable to accept our chosen life.