Matt's Mormon Thread

[Newawd]

As a side note, Sir Bugsy, you believe in the Apostasy, but you may call it by a different name (or not call it anything at all). If you didn't believe in the Apostasy you would be Catholic. Among other things, it's the belief that certain important gospel truths were lost over the centuries. If there had never been such a thing, there never would have needed to be a Reformation.

 

[Newawd]

Wow. Interesting. I've never really done any research into what Martin Luther believed before. We (Mormons) believe he was a great man and that he was inspired, so it doestn't hurt any to read some of his writings. Anyway, here are a few experps from things he wrote:

"Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn't
stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone
asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without
ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an
unbeliever."

"Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!"

(both experps from "An excerpt from 'An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans'")

Lol. I think I like this guy. He has a way with words.

I honestly think that we believe the same thing on this point Sir Bugsy. According to Martin Luther, you can't have faith without works. It can't be done. For some reason, you seem to think that Mormons think that we save ourselves with our good works. We do NOT believe that. The only thing that can save us is the Grace of Jesus Christ. We do not merit that salvation if we do not have faith. I talk of the kind of faith that Martin Luther believed in and posessed. The kind of faith that is inseperable from works.

 

[ironduck]

Martin Luther was a rabid antisemite. Hitler had a 'way with words' too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_and_the_Jews

http://www.nobeliefs.com/luther.htm

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Though unlike Hitler he didn't quite put his antisemitic views into action. Also, at that time 'antisemitic' meant more a dislike of Judaism as a religion than as a people.

And that fact doesn't invalidate everything he said. He did put the 'works as an expression of faith' idea pretty well.

 

[CartesianFart]

Kinda strange argument

When a person utter,or write something that is a critique of Judaism or people that call themselves jews.They are called a anti-semite

When a jewish person or a person of jewish ancestory criticize judaism[or zionism,like Isreal].They are called a self-hating jew.

 

[ironduck]

You two clearly have no idea about Martin Luther's antisemitism. Maybe you should check out the links I just provided for you.

Publicly encouraging people to burn down the synagogues and schools, to raze their houses, to confiscate their property, and to throw them out of the country. If that is not rabid antisemitism I don't know what is.

That may be a 'strange argument' to you, good riddance!

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

It's not really an argument. I was just saying that just because Luther had a personal flaw (ie he was antisemite; he also had other biases I believe) that doesn't mean he didn't eloquently express the relationship between works and faith.

And since it will undoubtedly come up: Mormons are often accused of believing in salvation through works. This is decidedly not true. We believe that salvation comes through grace conditional on faith expressed by works. In other words, salvation comes only through the Atonement of Christ, but only to those who accept it through their works.

 

[CartesianFart]

I dont believe in burning down buildings or violently hurting someone because they dont hold the same belief.But i dont think it is right to censor hate propaganda that somehow jewish leaders tend to label it as so.There is a difference in writing and speaking than punching or burning houses down.

 

[downtown]

Luther wasnt always an antisemite you know. He kind of went crazy near the end of his life, and was saying all sorts of crazy things.

it doesnt invalidate his theological works. Nobody ever said he was perfect.

 

[Methos]

There are many great people in this world, both now and in the past, that were bad or evil in some way. That doesn't necessarily mean we should ignore everything they did or say. I don't like Hitler, nor anything he stood for, but that doesn't mean I don't feel I could learn from him. Do we toss out everything an individual did (including what is considered good), due to that individual being bad or evil? I think not.

Note: Off-hand I can't think of anything that Hitler did I could learn from, except possibly military tactics. I am merely using his name as he has already been brought up.

Question: Are Mormon beliefs somewhat tarnished by racist thought? Let me explain before I anger everyone. I've read a few books of the Book of Mormon so I recall some of their history. Originally the Mormons' believed there were two civilizations in North America. One of good, and the other of evil. The evil civilization killed off the good one and for their sins their skin was turned dark. Mormons believe (from what I recall) that the native Indians were descended from this dark-skinned race and therefore still carried some of the evil taint.

Now from observation (if I'm remembering the above correctly, please state any discrepancies please), than it sounds as if the 19th century Mormons were a little racist. It appears they looked on the Indians as desendants of an evil race and stereotyped them. I won't expand further as I want to make sure I've remembered everything correctly. It's been years since I read parts of the Book of Mormon.

Edit: Using the word 'racist' is probably not the best choice. Only I couldn't think of anything else to use. Please do not get offended as I didn't mean it that way. I guess the best choice would be more racial stereotyping? I'm not for sure really.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

The Book of Mormon does speak of two people, both of them the descendants of Lehi and his family who came from Jerusalem. It does not say explicitly that these two groups were ever the only people in the New World or that all American Indians were descended from them. It does say that the descendants of Lehi's wicked sons, known as Lamanites, were given dark skins as a curse while descendants of his good sons, known as Nephites, had lighter skin. In fact, the dark skin itself was not the curse, but only a sign of it, and a way to distinguish the two groups.

However, the Nephites were not always more righteous than the Lamanites, and after Christ appeared to both groups following his resurrection, the two groups freely intermixed, ending such distinctions, until several hundred years later the term 'Nephite' and Lamanite' began to be used again to distinguish the righteous from the unrighteous. Eventually, the Lamanites wiped out the Nephites.

Thus, although it may not be literally true, Mormons tend to speak of any descendants of American Indians (including Hispanics) as 'Lamanites'. The catch is that although we speak of them as being descended from a wicked people, they do not bear the responsibility for the sins of their fathers and in fact, the Lord promised great things for them. Thus 19th Century Mormons actually tended to have a better view of American Indians than most, seeing them as a 'promised people'. This is also the reason we give for the fact that our church growth is highest among Hispanics, who we see as at least the symbolic descendants of the Lamanites. I don't have the exact verses for all of this, so if anyone else does that would be appreciated.

 

[downtown]

the lamenites shall blossom as a rose?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That verse may actually be in the Doctrine and Covenants, although I can't seem to find it at the moment. The Book of Mormon also speaks of the descendants of the Lamanites 'not being punished for the wickedness of their fathers'.

 

[ironduck]

Luther wasnt always an antisemite you know. He kind of went crazy near the end of his life, and was saying all sorts of crazy things.

Martin Luther lived from 1483-1546.

To quote from wiki (we can look at other sources if you prefer):

Luther's first known comment on the Jews is in a letter written to Reverend Spalatin in 1514 he stated:

I have come to the conclusion that the Jews will always curse and blaspheme God and his King Christ, as all the prophets have predicted....For they are thus given over by the wrath of God to reprobation, that they may become incorrigible, as Ecclesiastes says, for every one who is incorrigible is rendered worse rather than better by correction.

At that time he was 31 years old. Is that late in his life? In the following years he wavered back and forth, mentally disturbed as he was.

it doesnt invalidate his theological works. Nobody ever said he was perfect.

I should hope not. He was one messed up person who continued to believe that judgement day and the 'second coming' was right at hand. All this talk of 'faith and works' was the same as blood and murder in Luther's world. Doing the work of god meant slaughtering the peasants.

So let's have a look at some of Luther's other works, shall we?

How about "Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants" (1525). In this little gem of a book Luther states that the lords who kill the peasants will be saved because they are doing their god-giving duty against the rebellion (which he considered anti-god). In other words, slaughter away!

A quote:

Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before God and the emperor; and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well.... Therefore let everyone who can, smite, slay and stab, secretly or openly, remembering that nothing can be more poisonous, hurtful, or devilish than a rebel.

A few sources:

http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ503.HTM

http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/litlbook.htm

http://www.bartleby.com/66/27/37027.html

 

[Newawd]

Wow Ironduck. You appear to know a LOT more about Martin Luther than I do. If your sources are indeed valid, I'd say he had some issues. I shudder to think of what he would have said if he'd been around during the Revolutionary War.

Having said that, I still agree with the way he described Faith and Works.

@Methos: A few years before WWII (1939), Hitler was given the Time Magazine "Man of the Year" award for all of the 'great' things he was doing in Germany. Looks like the mainstream media hasn't changed much in 60 years. One of his 'great works' sited was the Autobon. Oh, and Joseph Stalin was named man of the year twice! 3 cheers for the media!

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Yes, I concur with my statement that he described the relationship between faith and works very well. Apparently, however, everything else he said was messed up. I already disagreed with the support he gave the nobility during the Peasant's Revolt.

By the way, CS Lewis, who as far as I know never said anything inflammatory against any race or class, also said that works would stem naturally from true faith.

 

[Merzbow]

I've starting reading the Book of Mormon recently and just came upon this passage that relates to judgment of works:

1 Nephi 15:

32 And it came to pass that I said unto them that it was a representation of things both temporal and spiritual; for the day should come that they must be judged of their works, yea, even the works which were done by the temporal body in their days of probation.

33 Wherefore, if they should die in their wickedness they must be cast off also, as to the things which are spiritual, which are pertaining to righteousness; wherefore, they must be brought to stand before God, to be judged of their works; and if their works have been filthiness they must needs be filthy; and if they be filthy it must needs be that they cannot dwell in the kingdom of God; if so, the kingdom of God must be filthy also.


I'm 0% qualified to comment on the theological implications here but it does seem to emphasize being judged based on your works. What you guys said above about good works being a necessary accompaniment to true faith (and vice-versa) I suppose is evidenced elsewhere in Mormon scripture (or perhaps in the Bible, depending whose theologians you believe).

The Book of Mormon is a pleasure to read, BTW - regardless of whether or not one considers it scripture it's a great, well-written story.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

That's it exactly. We are judged by our works, but salvation comes from grace.

I'm glad you like reading the Book of Mormon, by the way. I think it is always a good idea to learn more about the beliefs of others, even if they are not your own, because at the very least it promotes understanding.

 

[Newawd]

I wonder where Bugsy went. I was honestly curious about how Lutherins viewed that passage from the Epistle of James, as well as what he thought about those statements by Martin Luther. I've asked those questions before and nobody has really answered them. If somebody else besides Bugsy knows the answer to that question, please feel free to chime in.

By the way, it's been a pleasure chatting with all of you.

 

[Sir Bugsy]

I've had some personal things to deal with. A good friend passed away yesterday.

I'll be the last one to say Luther was a saint. He wasn't a prophet. The Lutheran church doesn't recognize him as anything more than a guy with 95 really good ideas. If you read the 95 theses and his testimony at the Diet of Worms, you will have read almost everything he contributed to the Reformation.

Essentially, they say that the church (at the time he meant the Roman Catholic church, today we believe that extends to any church including our own) cannot act as a intermediary between a person and God. Especially in the forgiveness of sin.

He also dismissed:
- papal infalliblity
- indulgences
- purgatory
- the concept that earthly priests can do anything for the dead
- if you do not have more than you need, you shouldn't be giving it to the church, you should be taking care of your family
- no sin is beyond the forgiveness of God

A great deal of this logic was not his alone. There was some guy a decade or so earlier that lost his life for saying many of the same things. Here is a link:

www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/web/ninetyfive.html

What endears Luther to Protestants everywhere is his courage. His courage to stand up against the establishment and say what the establishment is doing is wrong.

At the Diet of Worms, he defended his writings with logic. Here is a link to his defense:

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/lutherwords.html

The other major work of the Reformation was the Augsburg Confessions. Ole Martin Luther didn't have anything to do with them. The Augsburg Confessions are the heart and soul of Lutheran beliefs. They use Scripture and logic to lay out the foundations of our faith. They extend the Nicene creed. (Oh BTW, the word "catholic" in the creed means universal, it has nothing to do with what happens in the Vatican.)

Here is a link to the Augsbug Confessions:

http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.html#article4

Oh, and it is well documented that Luther was an anti-semite. You will not hear a defensive of him from me.