Saints Alive! Store

Saints Alive! Store
Saints Alive! Store. Click on the Starlight Doorway. Summer is coming, and whether you need a complete set of patio furniture, or just string for your weed cutter, we have it!
Showing posts with label cult. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cult. Show all posts

Saturday, November 19, 2011

What if the Mormons are Right? [Gasp! Horrors!!]

The subject of whether or not the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly Christian or an aberrant cult, is being done to death nowadays. I have written about it before, but this time I propose to address it from a slightly different angle: What If? Just for the sake of discussion, and not to be taken as perjorative in any sense, we might ask: What If we Mormons (LDS) are Christians and "Mainstream Christianity" (MSC for short) is the cult?

Let's look at some of the issues being raised. The first thing that comes to mind is the doctrine of the Trinity. MSC holds that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three manifestations of the One Triune God. LDS belief is that they are three separate beings, united in will and purpose.
On this question many MSCs are closer to the LDS than you might think. A quick look at the SaintsAlive! Store on this site will show you a number of books whose MSC authors do not accept the doctrine of the Trinity.

Here are just a couple (among many) of examples:

The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound [Paperback]
Sir Anthony Buzzard (Author), Charles F. Hunting (Author) Publication Date: August 1, 1998

Book Description [Copyrighted material cannot be copied; thus only the description is reproduced here]:
This important work is a detailed biblical investigation of the relationship of Jesus to the one God of Israel. The authors challenge the notion that biblical monotheism is legitimately represented by a Trinitarian view of God and demonstrate that within the bounds of the canon of Scripture Jesus is confessed as Messiah, Son of God, but not God Himself. Later Christological developments beginning in the second century misrepresented the biblical doctrine of God and Christ by altering the terms of the biblical presentation of the Father and Son. This fateful development laid the foundation of a revised, unscriptural creed that needs to be challenged. This book is likely to be a definitive presentation of a Christology rooted, as it originally was, in the Hebrew Bible. The authors present a sharply-argued appeal for an understanding of God and Jesus in the context of the original Christian documents.

One God & One Lord : Reconsidering the Cornerstone of the Christian Faith John W. Schoenheit (Author), Mark H. Graeser  Mark H. Graeser (Author).

Of course, volumes defending the doctrine of the Triune God are innumerable.
Click on any of these three images to see more.

The next thing we might look at is the insistence of the MSC that the Book of Mormon, since it was "added on," cannot be true. Yet they subscribe to one or more of the following Creeds, all of which are obviously "added on."

 Deuteronomy 4:2: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."
This of course, if taken literally, would obviate the OT after the Pentateuch, and the NT in its entirety.
Revelation 22:18-19  "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."
With these scriptures in mind, let's look at the following Creeds and their dates:

Symbolum Apostolorum (Apostle's Creed)
The present form first appeared in the 6th century in the writings of Caesarius of Arles (d 542), but prior versions can be traced back to 340 AD in a letter to Pope Julius I and even still further back to a circa 200 document containing the Roman baptismal liturgy. ... Instead of the continuous prayer as we have it today, each line was rather in the form of a question to which the catechumen gave assent indicating he both understood and believed. ... Eventually this question and answer style was modified into the prayer form as we have it today. A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who recite the Symbolum Apostolorum. ...
I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the third day He rose again. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty.
The Canons of the Council of Orange (529 AD) 
CONCLUSION. And thus according to the passages of holy scripture quoted above or the interpretations of the ancient Fathers we must, under the blessing of God, preach and believe ...  
The Synod of Constantinople  (Hiera, 753 AD)
Thirty-five years later, Irene, the regent for Constantine VI, called another council at which 350 bishops repudiated the decision documented above.
Council of Nicaea (7th Ecumenical,787 AD)
We, therefore, following the royal pathway and the divinely inspired authority of our Holy Fathers and the traditions of the Catholic Church (for, as we all know Holy Spirit indwells her), define with all certitude and accuracy that just as the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross, so also the venerable and holy images, as well in painting and mosaic as of other fit materials, should be set forth in the holy churches of God, and on the sacred vessels and on the vestments and on hangings and in pictures both in houses and by the wayside, to wit, the figure of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ, of our spotless Lady, the Mother of God, of the honorable Angels, of all Saints and of all pious people. ... and to these should be given due salutation and honorable reverence not indeed that true worship of faith which pertains alone to the divine nature; but to these, as to the figure of the precious and life-giving Cross and to the Book of the Gospels and to the other holy objects, incense and lights may be offered according to ancient pious custom. For the honor which is paid to the image passes on to that which the image represents, and he who reveres the image reveres in it the subject represented.
See the previous post, Of Temples, Churches and Crosses on this blog, and the page The Cross, the Cross Symbol, and Christianity by MSC writer L.D. Hannons.

MSC holds that Joseph Smith and his successors cannot be called Prophets, since as "everyone" knows there can be no prophets in our day.  But the Prophet Amos wrote "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Amos 3:7.
Are we to infer that, since there can be no prophets today, God will do nothing? If this is the case, why do we waste our time in prayer?
In the Temple, Mormons pledge their time, effort and substance to the Lord. MSCs find this particularly offensive, but who among them, if called upon, would not give all that they have in service to the Lord? Mother Theresa comes to mind.

How dare they call themselves Saints? 

Church Discipline By: Pastor Vincent Nicotra
Church discipline was never intended to drive a sinning saint away or to execute judgment on fallen saints. ...At this point the sinning saint should recognize the seriousness of their offense. ..., for the purity of the church and the good of the sinning saint. . . .  Paul commonly addresses the Christian community as "saints." (Acts 9:13, 32; Rom 1:7; 12:13; Phil 4:22; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1), especially the community in Jerusalem (15:25; 1 Cor 16:1).

To return to our original question, What if? What if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints turns out to be the truly New Testament religion? We would never apply the term "cult" to other denominations, but just ask yourself: What If?

Friday, October 21, 2011

What Is the Place of Religion in American Political Life?



Does the Constitution really call for the "separation of church and State?

If so, where, and what does it mean? I don't claim to be a Constitutional scholar, but to be honest, I've never been able to locate this phrase there. Everyone, or nearly everyone, knows that it is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. 


Interestingly enough, in light of the current question as to which denomination is Christian and which a cult, Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson because they felt they were being denied certain rights because of their faith. In other words, Baptists were in a cult!


Danbury is in Connecticut, and fell within the northern reaches of the Anglican Church. The States, roughly from Connecticut to Virginia, taxed their citizens for the support of the Anglican (Church of England) Church, without regard to membership therein. 


For fuller information, click on Founding of The Episcopal Church Part I , Tony Knapp.


It is in this light then that Jefferson's famous letter was written, and by which we can see more clearly the meaning of Article One of the Bill of Rights.


Article I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.  

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,  (the famous "Establishment Clause"). The federal government cannot force you join, attend or otherwise uphold or support any one denomination. Neither can it levy taxes for that purpose. States? Counties? That's a different question, and one which seldom if ever comes up.

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This part is less clear-cut. A few days ago a man half-strangled his little boy and threw him out of the car, abandoning him on the roadside. He did this, he said, because God told him to. 

Are we eager to elect this man to public office? Article Six of the Constitution states:

no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. Not even for axe murderers, child abusers, and their ilk? How about headhunters? Or can it be that these are not really religious questions?

There must be something else involved here. Whether we recognize it or not, are we in fact living under a higher law?
 Is America a Christian nation?

No. We are not a Christian nation. But we are, undeniably, a Judaeo-Christian Nation. That doesn't mean that only Jews and Christians are welcome here. But it does mean that anyone living here must abide by those principles. Those who shed innocent blood, steal their livelihood from the weak, do not honor those who came before, are not contributing to our society and cannot be tolerated here or anywhere.

Every clan, village and nation in history has had the Ten Commandments. They may not be written out or enumerated, there may be six or 20 or 14, but those basic concepts are what it takes to make a society viable.

So to summarize:

 What Is the Place of Religion in American Political Life?

We can require that the office-seeker be honest, well-intentioned, educated. We want him to be responsive to the current national and world situation. We hope his personal behavior won't embarrass us on the world stage.

We cannot require that the office-seeker avoid cults or agnosticism or atheism.  

Religion is and must remain a personal choice. 

If no Comment Box appears, please click on "comment" in the box below.













Monday, October 10, 2011

Is "Mormonism" a Cult?

I hadn't planned to comment on this, nor on Mitt Romney's presidential aspirations, but sometimes the daily news overtakes common sense and forces writers to join the debate.

By now everybody knows what happened at the Values meeting, so I won't go into that. I will, however, attempt an answer -- not "the" answer, but "an" answer to the cult business.

Not being certain what exactly is meant by the term "cult," and having decided that "us-against-them" may be accurate, but is not comprehensive, I went to the Merriam-Webster (an Encyclopedia Britannica Company) Dictionary for help. Here's their take on it:

cult

noun, often attributive \ˈkəlt\

Definition of CULT

1: formal religious veneration  
Plea: Guilty as charged. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does practice religious veneration.
2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also: its body of adherents 
Plea: Guilty again. There is a system of religious beliefs and rituals, and there is a body of adherents.
3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also: its body of adherents 
Whooooa!!
Question: By whom? By what authority does one religious body call another "unorthodox?" 
Again, I'm not sure what "unorthodox" means. Call me "stupid" if you like, but I want to get this right.
 
Back to M-W: unorthodox  means "not orthodox". Now there's a shocker. So how about "orthodox"?

or·tho·dox

adj \ˈr-thə-ˌdäks\

Definition of ORTHODOX

1 a: conforming to established doctrine especially in religion b: conventional
2  capitalized: of, relating to, or constituting any of various conservative religious or political groups: as a: eastern orthodox b: of or relating to Orthodox Judaism
or·tho·dox·lyadverb

Examples of ORTHODOX

  1. He took an orthodox approach to the problem.
  2. She believes in the benefits of both orthodox medicine and alternative medicine.
  3. He is a very orthodox Muslim.
  4. I attend an Eastern Orthodox church.
  5. My grandmother is Russian Orthodox.
I'm guessing that by "orthodox," much of what we shall call "mainstream" Christanity means accepting and conforming to the Medieval Creeds. In brief, Trinitarians.

Latter-day Saints are not Trinitarians. We believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. We believe they are one in intent and purpose, but that they are not therefore different names for the same being. When Christ in the Garden said "Not my will but thine be done;" or on the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou  forsaken me?" it does not make sense to us to maintain that he was talking to himself.

Someone on one of the morning talk shows pointed out that the press and others are determined to bar religion from the public discourse. Sometimes people try to block Nativity scenes, or even have crosses removed from military cemeteries. But just let a Republican aspire to public office and -- Whammo! -- religious beliefs return with a vengeance. At this point we throw all our journalistic scruples out the window, along with any concept of fairness or truth.



The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not alone in having been labeled a "cult." Richard J. Mouw, President of Fuller Theological Seminary, an evangelical school in Pasadena, California, recalls "a reporter once asking me: 'Evangelicalism, is that like Scientology and Hare Krishna?'"
A family I happen to know is about equally divided between Baptists and Lutherans. At Holiday gatherings, theological differences were served up with the turkey. On one memorable occasion, a Baptist pointed out that, "You know, there really was a John the Baptist, but there has never been a John the Lutheran." The Lutheran's priceless comeback: "John the Baptist lost his head, and the Baptists have been running around without one ever since!"
So, is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Christian? (The name ought to give you a clue). Or is it a cult?  I'd say that's up to you. What do YOU  think a cult might be?

If no Comment box appears, please click on "comment" in the box below. We are anxious to hear from you.