Originally posted by Annee


Where do the Masons claim their's came from?

It began as a very basic and rudimentary form in England in the middle ages, and evolved over time. The major components of modern Masonic ritual (which Joseph Smith was familiar with) originated in 17th century England.

The Masonic ritual is the result of a collaboration between various philosophers, poets, and liberals over time.

Originally posted by brotherforchrist


That is a view espoused from people who speak from an intellectual luciferian worldview. Yes I know the claims that it was allegorical to a fallen Babylonian king.It is just all dependent upon your theological beliefs.

Not at all. We know for a fact that the Prophet Isaiah was prophesying the downfall of Babylon in that passage.

If you say that this passage is not about a fallen angel, then basically you deny the existence of Satan as an entity as well

Not necessarily. Traditional Jewish scholars, from the time of Isaih unti now, have interpreted the "Lucifer" character as referring to Tiglath-Pilaser, the king of Babylon. However, they also believe in a satanic entity.

Without Lucifer's fall you have no Satan. without Satan you have no Garden of Eden, without the Garden, you have no original sin or fall of man,without a fall of man,

I would still have to disagree. In reality, man can get himself in a heap of trouble all by himself, without any extra help.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by Annee


Where do the Masons claim their's came from?

It began as a very basic and rudimentary form in England in the middle ages, and evolved over time. The major components of modern Masonic ritual (which Joseph Smith was familiar with) originated in 17th century England.

The Masonic ritual is the result of a collaboration between various philosophers, poets, and liberals over time.

Kind of reminds me of the Declaration of Independence. Much of it was borrowed from other already established writings.

IMO - this is one of the greatest lines ever spoken in a movie or anywhere - and is so true:

A person is smart. People are dumb. Everything they've ever "known" has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, they knew it was flat. Fifteen minutes ago, you knew we humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

[edit on 7-6-2007 by Annee]

I'm an active Mormon and have been through the temple ceremony many times.

And yes, it is annoying to see people treat my beliefs with so little respect. As you can see, there are no dark secrets, no satanic worship, no child sacrifices as is so often claimed. It is simply a very sacred ordinance that I went through, and as such, it is very personal, and not something I would discuss with anyone who i wasn't extremely close with. Not secret. Sacred.

But of course, asking those who are not members to simply leave it alone and let us worship in peace is apparently asking too much. Then we get labelled a cult. Interesting, isn't it?

As for our "magic underwear", I really fail to see how wearing a physical representation of our faith in god is any different from a Jew wearing a Yamaca, a muslim wearing traditional garb, or a catholic priests robes and collar. Yet we're continually mocked and disrespected for it.

But you tip your hand too quickly brotherforchrist, by claiming Mormons aren't christians, and innocently posting something you've researched for years and asking if it's accurate. You know full well it's accurate. You just don't like mormons. Which is fine I suppose, if you want to be a bigot you're welcome to be one, it's just sad to see that no matter how tolerant of your beliefs I will be, you will never show that same respect. And then you make gross misrepresntations of our beliefs, saying we get our own planets, etc.

Pretty rediculous.

The definition of a christian is one who believes in Christ. If reading the temple ceremony didn't give you the impression that we believe in Christ, then I don't know what will. What you're really saying is, we aren't christians based on your narrow definition of what it is to be christian. I'd even wager to guess you are a evangelical christian. So my question is, I've accepted Jesus Christ as my savior. I know he's the only way I can return to heaven, is through his suffering for my sins. This is the core concept in mormonism. So by your definition, doesn't that mean all mormons are going to heaven? What difference does it make if we don't drink, or wear "magical underwear", so long as we accept Christ into our hearts, aren't we OK? And I find it curious that you're so quick to condemn a religion that believes ceremony is important, when Christ himself in the bible taught about the importance of the baptism ceremony when he stated:

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:4-5)

As for the Joseph Smith, Masonry connection, I know he was a mason, but the details are a bit sketchy. The first documented instance of him joining the masons is when he was in Kirtland Ohio, in 1939. But the first temple endowment ceremonies were done in the Navoo temple in 1931. I'm not saying it's impossible that he was a mason prior to revealing the temple ceremony, but there's no historical documentation to prove it. As Annee pointed out, Mormons will believe that it was divinely inspired, and that the Masons carried the tradition down from Solomon's Temple, while Masons will believe he stole it from them. You're going to have a really hard time proving it one way or the other.

As for Jesus and Satan being brothers, yes, that is what we believe. We believe that Jesus, God, and the Holy Ghost are three seperate and distinct people, not an amorphous blog of a being. God created his spirit children and set up a plan whereby we could come to earth, receive a physical body, learn to have faith, and return to our heavenly father. But as a result of our fallen state, we would sin, which would require a savior to atone for our sins, Jesus Christ. This is what other people have vaguely been referring to when they speak of the "plan of salvation". Satan, or Lucifer, or whatever you want to call him, presented his own plan, whereby man would have no free will, no opportunity to choose for themselves to follow God, and he wanted all the glory for himself. God said no, and cast Satan and his followers from the heavens, where he became the devil and his demons. They hate those who chose to follow gods plan (i.e. come to earth and receive a body) and so spend all their time and energy trying to tempt man into sin.

That's kind of the general overview of the theology. And no, Mormons don't believe that God intended for Satan to rebel. God loves all of his creations, and would never create something to be evil, we simply all have the capacity for good and evil in us, and as individuals make that choice.

But before we get into any more angry and accusatory responses from those who for some reason can't stand Mormons, I'd just like to ask how many of you who are interested in learning about Mormons have actually sat down and read the Book of Mormon. Everything we believe is found in that book of scripture, so I'd invite you, if you're curious, to take a look, rather than surf the internet for anti-mormon websites with lies, half truths and false accusations.

And please, all we're asking for is a little respect for our beliefs. You don't have to believe what we do, but there's no need to be disrespectful.

Thanks Athenion

Greatly appreciate the Mormon's who entered this discussion.

I went through the endowment when I married. And I wore the garments for a while. A personal note: they're gonna have to update them before I ever wear them again. I doubt that's ever gonna happen - and of course I respect the reasons why.

I have great respect for Mormons and what they focus importance on. I am sad they are moving more toward the fundamental Christian right. IMO

I'm curious Annee,

In what way do you think they're straying from the "traditional teachings" and more towards conservative christianity?

My husband was born and raised in the Mormon faith. He is an avid reader with great detail retention.

We've spent many evenings in detailed discussion of Mormon doctrine and other writings.

As I said in earlier posts - I believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee who was given instructions to follow - which he did - then was trusted to bring higher level teachings to humans.

There are writings about other planets and god being a title - - that Earth has its own overseer god - - that we should only be concerned with our own god. Extremely metaphysical thinking for that time.

I also believe that Jesus Christ was either a hi-bred alien/human - or a very enlighted Contactee also. That he was given instructions to follow - which he did.

Interestingly I believe that Billy Meier's story is true - - that he was a Contactee and given instructions to follow. BUT - he did not follow those instructions and was cut off from contact.

I do not consider myself Christian by TODAY's interpretation. IMO - TODAY's Christianity is a Man Made religion.

IMO - Christ as a higher evolved enlightened being taught a more metaphysical belief - - of Love - Understanding - Acceptance - Self-awareness - Compassion.

Look what man has turned that into. Arguing over ridiculous details. It is MAN who has interjected - prejudice - hate - pettiness - jealousy - etc - - - into a belief - - attaching the name of Christ to it.

So - I absolutely believe Joseph Smith was contacted by higher evolved beings and shown the metaphysical way of faith.

But - mix MAN with all his pettiness - and power corrupts absolutely - - - and you have the direction Mormon leadership is moving toward today. I believe the Mormon church is probably the wealthiest of them all.

I see money and power and control of the Christian right - - and I see Mormon leaders keeping themselves in that ring.

Have you read about the Mormon Women's rights prior to Utah becoming a state? Did you know Mormon women gave up rights to be compatible with the thinking of the majority of the US at the time?

Mormon's have compromised in the past to fit better - - to belong. And IMO - - they are continuing that direction.

I honestly can not support a patriarch belief anyway - or one that treats homosexuals the way the Mormon church does.

Originally posted by Annee
As I said in earlier posts - I believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee who was given instructions to follow - which he did - then was trusted to bring higher level teachings to humans.

There are writings about other planets and god being a title - - that Earth has its own overseer god - - that we should only be concerned with our own god. Extremely metaphysical thinking for that time.

Well, this is a mixture of correct and incorrect doctrines/ideas. Joseph Smith claimed to have been visited by angels, and by God the Father and Jesus Christ, to restore the true church to the earth. I'm sure you're familiar with that story. Additionally, it is still taught and a benchmark doctrine that man has the potential to become like God. That God has many creations, innumerable children who he loves, etc. So this doctrine hasn't been changed at all. It's an interpretation that you can find traces of in the writings of Josephus and other early christian scholars, and what many believe the scripture in Romans 8:17 was alluding to when Paul wrote:

And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Originally posted by Annee
I also believe that Jesus Christ was either a hi-bred alien/human - or a very enlighted Contactee also. That he was given instructions to follow - which he did.

Interestingly I believe that Billy Meier's story is true - - that he was a Contactee and given instructions to follow. BUT - he did not follow those instructions and was cut off from contact.

This was never a Mormon doctrine. I'm fine if this is your intepretation, but I've read all 26 Volumes of the Journal of Discourse, the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Seven Volumes of History of the CHurch of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Mormon Doctrine, Jesus the Christ, Doctrines of Salvation, and many, many other books written by the early church leaders, and not once does it mention Aliens, or Jesus being an Alein/human hybrid. Quite the opposite in fact. Joseph Smith on several occasions denounced the idea of alien visitations as evil and pernicious doctrines.

Now I'm not saying you shouldn't believe what you do. I'm just saying there's zero evidence that the early church once taught doctrine like that, and that those kinds of teachings have since been removed. I'm curious, are you getting a lot of those ideas from The Keys of Enoch?

Originally posted by Annee
I do not consider myself Christian by TODAY's interpretation. IMO - TODAY's Christianity is a Man Made religion.

...

So - I absolutely believe Joseph Smith was contacted by higher evolved beings and shown the metaphysical way of faith.

But - mix MAN with all his pettiness - and power corrupts absolutely - - - and you have the direction Mormon leadership is moving toward today. I believe the Mormon church is probably the wealthiest of them all.

I agree that man made religions will always have problems, but that's the crux of the Momron faith, that Joseph Smith, in an effort to find which religion was true, prayed to God and was visited and told to join none of them, because they were all wrong and had distorted the true teachigns of God, and that it was through divine intervention that the truth was restored to the earth. And that his true church was to be restored through his new prophet.

As for the Mormon religion being the wealthiest of them all, well, i think that's a bit naive. Yes, the Mormon church is wealthy, very wealthy, but compared to the holdings of the Vatican, it's a drop in a bucket.

But regardless, the reason the church has so much, is because of the piety of its members. And how's that money used? Well, we have over 100 temples now dotting the planet, over 27,000 wards, each with their own meetinghouse, 2,700 stakes with stake centers and all the costs of the upkeep for those buildings, millions of copies of the book of mormon are printed and given away free of charge each year. Not to mention the massive church welfare program, and both national and internation aide. One of th emore interesting talks I've heard in the past few years was given byone of the Diplomats from Indonesia thanking our church for providing food, shelter, emergency health supplies, and hundreds of thousands of body bags to regions affected by the Boxing Day Tsunami, not to mention Hurricaine Katrina releif, etc.

The nice thing about the church, is that if I want to know how the money is being spent, I can request a comprehensive annual expendature report which tracks every cent the church takes in, and then how it's spent.

Originally posted by Annee
Have you read about the Mormon Women's rights prior to Utah becoming a state? Did you know Mormon women gave up rights to be compatible with the thinking of the majority of the US at the time?

I honestly can not support a patriarch belief anyway - or one that treats homosexuals the way the Mormon church does.

Yes, I have. And it's unfortunate that women's rights had to be compromised so that the Mormons would not be wiped out by the U.S. government with another extermination act like the one in missouri. But you're right, Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were very progressive for their time. Many like to paint the church racist for not allowing African Americans to hold the Priesthood until the 1970's, but few know that at a time when most Christian religious leaders were debating wether or not blacks even had souls, Joseph Smith taught that they most certainly had soles, that slavery was evil, and that the slaves should all be freed and given their own country on U.S> soil, because he feared there would not be equality even after the slaves were freed unless there was a long struggle. And lo and behold, he was right. Much more progressive and modern than even the most ardent abolitionists at the time.

As for how Homosexuals are treated, they are treated (or at least should be) exactly the same way as anyone else who sins, such as those who commit adultry, fornicate, use the lords name in vain, or are prideful. They should be helped back onto the path that leads towards god. Love the siner, hate the sin. This is not always the case, sadly, but this is what is taught to all of the church leadership in all of the handbooks.

You can believe in Angels - - I believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee.

You asked what I thought. I told you. There is no debate.

My husband's the Mormon - I just married him.



What I believe - is revealed to me. It's like I feel or absorb words and information.

Other then that I can't explain it.

I've been like this from birth. Some one - some thing - - guides me.

I don't know who - I don't know how.


I HAVE TO ADD: ABSOLUTELY I ADMIRE AND SUPPORT - that Mormons put Family and Charity as priority.

Outsiders have no clue how much Mormons do in charity efforts. They work right along side Catholic Charities and the Salvation Army. They are often first on the scene in natural disaster aid. But they believe this is done for God - and do not request recognition from the media or anyone else.

Without a doubt - I greatly admire much of the Mormon beliefs.







[edit on 8-6-2007 by Annee]

What do we know about the Vatican?? Now there's a question.

I refer back to the line from the movie "Men in Black" - I put the Vatican in a completely different realm.

I know Catholic churches are closing and filing bankruptcy because of all the law suits. I know there is shortage of nuns - and I believe also priests.

I know that no one is paid in the Mormon religion - - except the higher ups and a few secretaries and accountants - some maintenance people and gardeners. I know they are extremely business savvy.

I know they are no longer building large temples - but smaller less expensive ones.

Assumption? Perhaps. Based on logic.

And my intention isn't to debate or argue, I was just curious to know more about where you're coming from, and I also just wanted to clarify some things for people who aren't overly familiar with the Mormon religion. I have no problem with you believing Joseph Smith was a contactee, and in fact, there are many who think that's the case. Have you ever read The Keys of Enoch, or The Chariots of the Gods, because both of those books are along those lines.

I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions, but that doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong.

As far as the "Higher Ups" being paid, that's actually kind of a misnomer. They actually live the law of concecration, something that was more common when the Church was first founded, but disbanded when the U.S. again threatened to kill all the Mormons in Utah unless they became a state.

but basically, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the First Presidency, and the first Two Quorums of Seventies (for those who don't know, that's essentially the leadership in our church, like the Pope and the head Cardinals of the Catholic religion), when they become Apostles or 70's, relinquish all of their worldly belongings to the church. In many cases, this is a significant amount of wealth, for instance Russell M. Nelson, one of the 12 Apostles, was a world renowned open heart surgeon, helped develop the procedure, and helped create the first heart-lung machine now commonly used in all open heart procedures. So basically, he was pretty wealthy when he gave up his professional career to work as an Apostle full time. All of his money and worldly goods were iven to the church, and now the church provides him and his family with what they need, so he can focus full time on running the church.

So to say they get paid isn't entirely accurate. He probably recieves significantly less form the church than he would if he were still a practicing surgeon.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your take on Mormonism. I find all opinions and relgious beliefs very interesting, so please don't think I'm trying to argue with you or debate you. I'm just curious is all.

Thank you too.

I may not use the right jargon or terminology but . . .

I do have great respect for the actual core belief of the Mormon faith. I say core belief - because man in his own nature is corruptable.

In other words - - I definitely 100% believe Joseph Smith was contacted - - and guided - - to bring about a "higher law" and/or better understanding.

I don't think it really matters who brought it to Joseph. The wisdom stands strong by itself.

It kind of bugs me when people refer to Mormon's as a cult. I find that really sad.

Here you have a beautiful faith and organization that you live 24 hrs a day. But no one tries to stop you from leaving. You really can come and go and/or be as involved or not - - to what ever degree you choose.

Originally posted by Athenion
Additionally, it is still taught and a benchmark doctrine that man has the potential to become like God.

Can you link, ideally quote in this thread, some more instances from the Mormon doctrine that teaches man has the potential to become like God?

That God has many creations, innumerable children who he loves, etc.

Joseph Smith on several occasions denounced the idea of alien visitations as evil and pernicious doctrines.

I find those two qoutes in an interesting juxtaposition. Joseph Smith gets word directly from God to love his creations, his innumerable children, yet he then says on several occasions to dismiss and ignore 'alien' visitations because they are evil. How do we know they arn't one of those innumerable beings we are supposed to be loving as God does? Are they evil because they sin? Weird.

I'm just saying there's zero evidence that the early church once taught doctrine like that, and that those kinds of teachings have since been removed

Umm...

So they removed all the zero evidence eh?

Too funny. Sounds like a covert operation to me. That doesn't surpise me though. The Roman Catholics suppressed/removed lots of texts/scriptures during it's early formation. Wait I mean... zero evidence here folks. Move along...

Originally posted by Annee

I don't think it really matters who brought it to Joseph. The wisdom stands strong by itself.

Doesn't really matter!?

Mormon: "Wait, so it wasn't God or aliens that inspired this new Church?"

Joseph Smith: "Hey the wisdom stands strong for itself By the way I will still be needing that %10 tithing. See you Sunday?"...

Seems like you have changed your position and attitude quite a bit as this thread has gone on. I wonder if the next pivotal point in your understanding will be realizing that Christianity means to follow the path of Christ...not the path of a Church. I don't mean to sound patronizing. I do like your attitude change.

It kind of bugs me when people refer to Mormon's as a cult. I find that really sad.

I was once asked: "What's the difference between a cult and a religion"

The religion got big.

Here you have a beautiful faith and organization that you live 24 hrs a day.

That is a beautiful opportunity for great people to come together and be a community. I agree. I have seen that numerous times from many different Churches...to be honest, maybe even more so with the Mormon Church.

However,

It's one thing to create a spiritual community for Christians. It's something entirely different to create a new religion in its guise under false pretense i.e Joseph Smith, as you entertained yourself, not getting his information from God. And then charge 10% tithing. AND, knowing this false pretense, he gives men total power of the women in the name of God. As was already said by a Mormon on this thread, the men hold the whole 'sacred name' over the womens head her entire life. No. I'm sorry. I think it does really matter who or what gave Joseph Smith his inspiration. Personally I think money was always the end to his means. Oh and maybe the whole power over the opposite sex thingy.

[edit on 17-6-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]

I have not changed my position in any way.

I may have used different wording - but I have not changed my position.

I may respond to different people differently - but I have not changed my position.

I may choose to see something from a different viewpoint within the text of the conversation - but I have not changed my position.

You are choosing to interpret - what you "think" I am saying.

Softening my stance on certain issues - - as courtesy and respect when speaking with someone of real faith - - is not changing them.

Originally posted by Annee
Softening my stance on certain issues - - as courtesy and respect when speaking with someone of real faith - - is not changing them.

Hahaha please. How convienant. So how "soft" can you go before you leave the realm of courtesy and enter the realm of "dodging"

Fine, fine. Your stance didn't change it just got really, really soft.

I applaud your concern about respect, but I think this has more to do with the fact that you knew a rebuttal was coming about your "softened" stance

Don't be childish.

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger

Originally posted by Athenion
I'm just saying there's zero evidence that the early church once taught doctrine like that, and that those kinds of teachings have since been removed

Umm...

So they removed all the zero evidence eh?

Too funny. Sounds like a covert operation to me. That doesn't surpise me though. The Roman Catholics suppressed/removed lots of texts/scriptures during it's early formation. Wait I mean... zero evidence here folks. Move along...

I would conjure that what was meant by that comment was that there was no evidence of the early Church teaching such things; that perhaps they were added later, i.e. not by the Church Fathers, and consequently removed.

Don't be so anxious to burn someone that you miss the point.

Originally posted by Annee
I have not changed my position in any way.

I may have used different wording - but I have not changed my position.

I may respond to different people differently - but I have not changed my position.

I may choose to see something from a different viewpoint within the text of the conversation - but I have not changed my position.

Anyways, you have softended your position to the point of change. And I am talking about your stance on Joseph Smith recieving inspiration for the Mormon Church directly from God.

I have no problem believing that Joseph Smith was a contactee - - was provided this information - - and instructions to follow.

They gave him the Temple Endowments.

If you all want to insist it was stolen from the Masons - - Fine.

Go to LDS.org - - - and get the official version.

In other words what your saying implies the Mormons official version is the official Truth. That Joseph Smith was, like Mormon doctrine says, inspired directly by God to make the Church.

I personally believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee and was given knowledge by higher level beings. This coincides with the actual Mormon belief that Joseph Smith received the laws directly from God by revelation.

That doesn't coincide with Mormon belief. As far as official Mormon doctrine is concerned, Joseph Smith was not contacted by aliens but God directly.

but then again I believe he was a Contactee and could have received the Endowment ritual directly from "those who came from the sky".

As I said in earlier posts - I believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee who was given instructions to follow - which he did - then was trusted to bring higher level teachings to humans.

So - I absolutely believe Joseph Smith was contacted by higher evolved beings and shown the metaphysical way of faith.

You can believe in Angels - - I believe Joseph Smith was a Contactee

The Mormon doctrine doesn't say he was contacted by aliens. So this is in opposition to the earlier quote when you refered the reader to LDS.org for the True version! This right here is a change of position.

In other words - - I definitely 100% believe Joseph Smith was contacted - - and guided - - to bring about a "higher law" and/or better understanding.

So you went from the Mormons holding the truth about Mormonismm as could be seen on LDS.org, to effectively saying you believe 100% Mormons are wrong... since you said you 100% believe Joseph Smith was actually an abductee. That's a pretty soft change.

[edit on 17-6-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]