Almost all Mormon guys I’ve ever met are Nice Guys…
I can’t get on board with this one. I’ve eaten too many Relief Society meals after funerals, farewells, and our babies’ births to poke fun. Many nameless, beautiful hearts providing selfless service over the years.
I have to blame any perceived issues on LDS men for allowing feminism to get a strong foothold. Mock them publicly and you’ll lose what femininity remains in the church.
Btw I thought sitting in her car was just my mom’s thing sometimes 😂. That’s a common behavior, huh?
It’s wild that I’ve witnessed the church and members go from “it’s literal history that happened nearby” to “we funded it and looked, and didn’t really find anything” to “look at how many anachronisms have been proven wrong” to “who cares if there’s no archeological evidence?”.
This hits the nail on the head. All LDS belief eventually reduces to “the Holy Ghost witnessed to me”
…then often apostasy.
I agree with this 💯
“Well, even if it isn’t true, at least I will have lived a good life.”
I have been alive for nearly 1/4 of the LDS church’s entire existence, living almost entirely within one of the, if not the, highest concentrations of its members.
I have witnessed this lack of theology from Sunday school to deacons quorum to teachers quorum to priests quorum to elders quorum. I call it à la carte theology… which really means no theology as Fr Chris articulated.
Members can hold completely opposing views, as we’ve witnessed multiple times through polls on here. And they think each of their speculations is completely isolated from the rest of their version of Mormonism, as though worldviews work like that.
LDS “theology” is one of the nicest roads to atheism and misunderstanding of Christianity that you’ll ever find.
And I would bet that nearly every single one of them has voice the Mormon’s Stockholm Syndrome at least once to convince themselves to stay… “well, even if it isn’t true, at least I will have lived a good life.”
Years ago, I was having breakfast with an older Roman Catholic priest friend in Salt Lake City. I had salmon eggs Benedict in front of me, coffee in my hand, and we were talking about Mormonism.
He looked at me and said, “Father Chris, Mormonism doesn’t have theology.”
Then he changed the subject. I took another sip of coffee and went back to my breakfast, honestly puzzled. It is a religion. It calls itself Christian. Of course it has theology.
Only after years of encountering Mormon apologists online have I understood what he meant.
You may hear a Christian explain that Joseph Smith taught God was once a man, that human beings may become gods, and that there are generations of gods. Then a Latter-day Saint will look you in the eye and say, “I do not believe that, and I do not have to believe that.” They may not be lying. They may sincerely mean it.
Joseph Smith did teach in the King Follett sermon that God “was once as one of us.” The LDS Church’s own historical material acknowledges it. Their hymn, If You Could Hie to Kolob, still asks where “Gods began to be.”
Yet teachings once preached forcefully can later become embarrassing, minimized, or optional. Brigham Young taught Adam-God ideas. The Church later rejected them. Plural marriage was once defended as divine and necessary, then abandoned under enormous legal pressure. Black members were excluded from temple ordinances, and Black men from priesthood ordination, until 1978. Temple ceremonies once contained severe symbolic penalties, including gestures representing throat-cutting and disembowelment; those were removed in 1990.
That does not mean every Mormon is dishonest. It means Mormonism has no settled, received faith that even its prophet must obey. Joseph Smith could revise Joseph Smith. Brigham Young could contradict him. Later leaders could set Brigham Young aside.
This is why Joseph Smith had to persuade his followers that the historic Church had failed and that the creeds were corrupt. If the faith once delivered to the saints still stood, he could not simply create a new God, new priesthoods, new scriptures, and new doctrines whenever revelation required it. The creeds matter because they preserve the apostolic truth about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit against exactly this kind of confusion.
Christ gave His apostles a faith to guard, not a blank page upon which every generation could write a new religion. “The faith which was once delivered unto the saints” is Jude’s phrase. The Church received what she had been given.
I have gone back and forth with Mormonism myself: angry, shocked, offended, and sometimes convinced I was being lied to. Perhaps you have felt that way too. But we must not let frustration make us cruel. Pray for Latter-day Saints. Love them. Tell them the truth plainly.
The God revealed in Scripture and confessed by the Church is the eternal Creator, not an exalted man who once had to become God.
The video and comments… À la carte theology:
xitter.cf/nqpilot/status/2113985…
The LDS foundation is built on sand.
Jesus is uncreated intelligence when they want to counter the claim below. But he is also “created” when they want to argue against creation ex nihilo (see their app/website screenshot).
Why sand? You can’t build on sand because, like LDS’s doctrines and double meanings, it shifts when enough pressure is applied or when circumstances change.
Jesus will be both uncreated and created, resulting in Mormons and Christians inevitably talking past each other… one side shifts and the other doesn’t.
Moronic claim to say Mormonism is for white people just because it originated with white European descendants.
Mormonism is a wealthy social organization that does a lot of good in the world and brings many of its members peace and stability, that happens to have a number of similarities to Islam’s origin story.
About 1:24:00
“As man is, god once was. As god is, man may become.” was never about Jesus getting a body or Orthodox/Catholic theosis. Its meaning was infinite regress and there’s plenty of discussion support for that position from LDS general authorities.
You want to call it a hundred years of speculation? Fine. But don’t pretend as though the current position is not just new speculation.
This is where I get really frustrated with modern LDS “apologists” and think they are either ignorant of their own history or intentionally deceptive to gain acceptance… as for these panelists specifically, I believe it’s the latter.
They’re simply repeating the Mormon pattern of revisionist history that leads to so many lifetime LDS members leaving the church.
Mormonism is built on a bed of sand that’s partly washed away and replaced with each of its regime changes.
Overall a fun discussion. Sam’s always enjoyable to watch (and hard to follow at times).
youtu.be/8H8_5lolbZ8?is=XOKZ…
Dear LDS,
Please don’t support this typically bad LDS “apologist” argument, which has a formal name.
However, I may just start referring to it as the Mormon BUG (no, not the Mormon cricket). It stands for:
“But u guys…”
“I feel bad for the 1/4 of the world’s population that I lump all together and grossly mischaracterize to make myself feel better… anyways, here’s what they all don’t really believe, except kind of I think they do. And that’s why we’re awesome. Yay us!”
Dear LDS,
Please reject every LDS “apologist” that invents a monolith like this, trying to make LDS doctrines sound awesome. It makes you all look unintelligent or insincere, which you generally are not.
If you don’t weed out this type of behavior yourselves, you are as guilty of the same dishonesty used by anti-Mormons to misrepresent your beliefs.
Specify the religion. Use their specific doctrines. And, if LDS doctrines are so amazing, you will never feel the need to uncharitably describe that abominable religion’s beliefs.
By their fruits. This is bad fruit from a bad tree. Don’t water it and stop eating from it.
I feel bad for creedists who debate Mormons
Just compare the worldviews...
The one where heaven means singing hymns and playing harps on clouds - or the one where families and loving relationships endure forever?
The one where God is some 3-person-1-being concept - or a Godhead of 3 distinct persons united in love and purpose?
The one where God scripts every jot & tittle of human history before creating it out of nothing - or the one where we are co-eternal with God, and can choose for ourselves?
The one where God designs billions to suffer in Hell - or the one where a Father provides every child a genuine opportunity for salvation?
The one where salvation means remaining God's creatures forever - or one where a Father invites His children and their families to become like Him, sharing His joy and loving relationship?
What are we even arguing about?
Random thoughts/differences between LDS and Orthodoxy.
There was a wide but shallow lake. It touched many parts of the land, but didn’t penetrate deeply into the ground. Much of the lake’s water would dry up easily due to its shallowness, necessitating frequent replenishment from outside water sources to remain. With no outlets connecting it with other lakes, the evaporation resulted in accumulations of salt and other compounds that made the water uninhabitable regardless of how much water flowed into it. Nothing would grow around the large, shallow lake, leaving its surroundings barren, and it was poor for wash and drink.
Another lake, which appeared much smaller and simpler on the surface, was very deep. The waters entering its depth and hidden volume remained fresh and cool, saturating the lands around it and producing luscious greenery. Life thrived in and around the smaller but vastly deeper lake, and its waters fed many man-made wells for the nearby inhabitants. Many came to wash and drink from the lake, and were cleansed and nourished.
Former Mormon (LDS):
- I asked my priest what surprise doctrines/history I will run into… he had no frame of reference for what I was even asking. Other former long-term LDS that have been Orthodox awhile, including one of our Deacons, just laughed when I asked, because they knew exactly what I meant. FYI no surprises so far. Everything is talked about openly as far as I can tell.
- Learning that the Fall and Atonement aren’t about crime/punishment, but healing. It’s a different framework that has required changing how I think. It’s still too easy to slip into a crime/punishment/perfection mentality.
- Venerating icons, casual dress at church, church members drinking, not getting swarmed by gushy members as a visitor. All odd experiences for former LDS. All opportunities for me to overcome pride.
- Long prayers… evening prayers are tough when I’m tired and mentally ready for bed. Waaaay more praying and fasting.
- Some Saints lives and miracles might always be tough for me to swallow.
- An hour and a half of actual worship and realizing is not about me. I was craving the outward focus (away from myself and towards something greater), but coming from a religion that essentially uses church time and scripture as self-help resources was a pretty big change.
This isn’t necessarily a list of things that kept me away or almost kept me away. Just pretty big differences from what I had been taught religion and christianity was.
Luke and Hayden both seem like genuinely good dudes.
But speaking of ending up in hell, let’s imagine there are two buttons…
“Luke isn’t a trinitarian so he’s gonna burn in hell because he doesn’t agree with 4th century Greek categories of philosophy and metaphysics that Jesus nor the Apostles ever taught.”
Bro I’ll happily be in hell with Luke based on our rejection of your god’s backwards metaphysical theological requirements than with you in your god’s “heaven” any day.