u/trownaway90

Today I realized that the Mormon Church is a very bad place for people who are mourning, especially who those who don't believe anymore.

My beloved non-member grandparent was dying and the first thing my institute teacher, who I barely know, told me that I could soon get baptized for him and I was devestated. I don't believe anymore in that nonsense and find it very disrespectfull for my non-member family. And most importantly I find hurtfull it that my loss is turned into weird do to list.

This Sunday in class we were forced to talk to our neighbour about a moment we didn't prioritize God in our week and I told my neighbour about the death, and how I found it hard to think about God. My neighbour forced me to talk about it in front the whole class, what I hated.

Other members didn't care much about my mourning either, which was dissappointing since I haven been to that ward for years and I thought that I had a connection with them.

As an ex-Mormon Christian, I never saw this until a fellow ex-Mormon (who is not a Christian by the way) brought up that the Trinity is the only correct understanding of God.. The person showed that it is the only way that Christians can have a personal relationship with Jesus. I would say that Christianity gives a much more coherent account of how Jesus can be personally present with, indwell, hear, comfort, and commune with believers while remaining distinct from the Father and Spirit.

Mormonism rejects the Trinity, instead they claim that it is a later invention and they claim that Mormonism is the restored Christianity. They teach that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are distinct personages who together form what they call the ‘Godhead’. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon also contains elements of modalism.

The poster claimed that Mormonism makes it impossible to have a personal relationship with Jesus because:

• Mormons are directed to pray to Heavenly Father, not Jesus.
• According to their theology the Holy Ghost provides answers, sometimes in the form of comfort, to our prayers.
• And Jesus is their advocate with the Father, which doesn't necessarily mean he needs to interact with us, He just needs to advocate for us.

The ex-Mormon states that if we look at the distinct roles of the Godhead, it becomes clear that Jesus is just the person "behind the scenes" and the Holy Ghost is the only one that interacts with us directly. How does one develop a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus under such theology? Mormons rationalize it:

• Jesus answers their prayers (when it really is the Holy Ghost, or some person directed by the Holy Ghost).
• Jesus comforted me (again, that is the Holy Ghost).
• Jesus enabled me to overcome. It is an external catalyst that invokes an internal response. Again, this implies the Holy Ghost directs others to say the right thing, the Holy Ghost "nudges" someone along and changes someone's heart. So really, Jesus is just directing the Holy Ghost behind the scenes, but you don't get that directly from Jesus. Jesus helped me feel clean after repenting (again, Holy Ghost does that).

The person likened this to a long-distance relationship with a rich ruler. The letters are written to the ruler, who hands them off to their head servant, who organizes the other servants to answer our request. We never interact with the head servant directly but are supposed to develop a "close and personal" relationship with the ruler.

He/she argues that developing a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus is very easy under Trinitarian theology. Jesus is there every step of the way!

2 Corinthians 13:14, Ephesians 3:17, Galatians 2:20 and especially Matthew 28:20 refute the Mormon view and confirm that Christians can have a personal relationship with both the Holy Spirit and Christ. John 14–16 also discredits the Mormon idea of a council like the Godhead:

>‘I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever’.

Consider John 14:10:

>‘I am in the Father and the Father is in me’.

Examples:

• Stephen prays directly to Jesus: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59).
• Paul describes Christians as those who “call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:2).
• Paul himself appeals directly to Christ regarding his “thorn in the flesh” (2 12:8–9).
• Revelation depicts the church calling directly upon Christ: “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev 22:20).
• Jesus promises: “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt 28:20).

What do you think?

As an ex-Mormon Christian, I never saw this until a fellow ex-Mormon (who is not a Christian by the way) brought up that the Trinity is the only correct understanding of God.. The person showed that it is the only way that Christians can have a personal relationship with Jesus. I would say that Christianity gives a much more coherent account of how Jesus can be personally present with, indwell, hear, comfort, and commune with believers while remaining distinct from the Father and Spirit.

Mormonism rejects the Trinity, instead they claim that it is a later invention and they claim that Mormonism is the restored Christianity. They teach that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are distinct personages who together form what they call the ‘Godhead’. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon also contains elements of modalism.

The poster claimed that Mormonism makes it impossible to have a personal relationship with Jesus because:

• Mormons are directed to pray to Heavenly Father, not Jesus.
• According to their theology the Holy Ghost provides answers, sometimes in the form of comfort, to our prayers.
• And Jesus is their advocate with the Father, which doesn't necessarily mean he needs to interact with us, He just needs to advocate for us.

The ex-Mormon states that if we look at the distinct roles of the Godhead, it becomes clear that Jesus is just the person "behind the scenes" and the Holy Ghost is the only one that interacts with us directly. How does one develop a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus under such theology? Mormons rationalize it:

• Jesus answers their prayers (when it really is the Holy Ghost, or some person directed by the Holy Ghost).
• Jesus comforted me (again, that is the Holy Ghost).
• Jesus enabled me to overcome. It is an external catalyst that invokes an internal response. Again, this implies the Holy Ghost directs others to say the right thing, the Holy Ghost "nudges" someone along and changes someone's heart. So really, Jesus is just directing the Holy Ghost behind the scenes, but you don't get that directly from Jesus. Jesus helped me feel clean after repenting (again, Holy Ghost does that).

The person likened this to a long-distance relationship with a rich ruler. The letters are written to the ruler, who hands them off to their head servant, who organizes the other servants to answer our request. We never interact with the head servant directly but are supposed to develop a "close and personal" relationship with the ruler.

He/she argues that developing a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus is very easy under Trinitarian theology. Jesus is there every step of the way!

2 Corinthians 13:14, Ephesians 3:17, Galatians 2:20 and especially Matthew 28:20 refute the Mormon view and confirm that Christians can have a personal relationship with both the Holy Spirit and Christ. John 14–16 also discredits the Mormon idea of a council like the Godhead:

>‘I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever’.

Consider John 14:10:

>‘I am in the Father and the Father is in me’.

Examples:

• Stephen prays directly to Jesus: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59).
• Paul describes Christians as those who “call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:2).
• Paul himself appeals directly to Christ regarding his “thorn in the flesh” (2 12:8–9).
• Revelation depicts the church calling directly upon Christ: “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev 22:20).
• Jesus promises: “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt 28:20).

What do you think?

A ex-mormon gave an excellent argument why is the trinity is the only correct way

As a ex-mormon Christian, I never saw this, until a fellow ex-mormon (who is not a Christian by the way) brought up that the trinity the correct. The person showed that is the only way that Christians can have a personal relationship with Jesus. I would say that Christianity gives a much more coherent account of how Jesus can be personally present with, indwell, hear, comfort, and commune with believers while remaining distinct from the Father and Spirit.

Mormonism rejects the trinity, they claim that is a later invention and they claim that Mormonism is the restored Christianity. Instead they falsely teach that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are distinct personages, together in a council which they call 'The godhead'. Although the Book of Mormon contains modalism.

The poster claims that Mormonism makes it impossible to have personal relationship with Jesus because:

Mormons are directed to pray to Heavenly Father, not Jesus.

According their theology the Holy Ghost provides answers, sometimes in the form of comfort, to our prayers.

And Jesus is their advocate with the Father, which doesn't necessarily mean he needs to interact with us, just needs to advocate for us)

The ex-mormon states that if we look at the distinct roles of the godhead, it becomes clear that Jesus is just the guy "behind the scenes" and the Holy Ghost is the only one that interacts with us directly. How does one create a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus under such theology? Mormons rationalize it:

• Jesus answers their prayer (when it really was the Holy Ghost, or some person directed by the Holy Ghost)
• Jesus comforted me (again, that is the Holy Ghost)
• Jesus enabled me to overcome. It is an external catalyst that invokes the an internal response. Which again implies the Holy Ghost directs others to say the right thing, the Holy Ghost "nudges" someone along, Holy Ghost changing someone's heart. So really Jesus is just directing the Holy Ghost behind the scenes but you don't get that directly from Jesus)
• Jesus helped me feel clean after repenting (again, Holy Ghost does that).

The person likens this to a long distance relationship with a rich ruler. The letters are written to the ruler, who passed the letter off to their head servant, who organizes the other servants to answer our request. We never interact with the head servant directly but are supposed to develop a "close and personal" relationship.

He/she argues that developing a "close and personal" relationship with Jesus is very easy under trinitarian theology. Jesus is there every step of the way!

2 Corinthians 13:14, Eph 3:17, Gal 2:20 and especially Matt 28:20 refutes the Mormon view and confirm that Christians can have a personal relationship with both the Holy Spirit and Christ. John 14–16 also discredites the Mormon idea of a council like the Godhead:

>I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever

And John 14:10:

>I am in the Father and the Father is in me

Examples:

• Stephen prays directly to Jesus: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59).
• Paul describes Christians as those who “call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:2).
• Paul himself appeals directly to Christ regarding his “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:8–9).
• Revelation depicts the church calling directly upon Christ: “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev 22:20).
• Jesus promises: “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt 28:20).

What do you think?

https://preview.redd.it/jxdcm9nmexnh1.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a52e15063bbec82521ed689617b59fe7e79fbf69

https://preview.redd.it/2f8qn9nmexnh1.jpg?width=1027&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f636d983c3bee703905bacee70e4ff484a06e30e

https://preview.redd.it/320pjbnmexnh1.jpg?width=603&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=41af112d4affbe45a25ceb23d7e509ae04f3a835

https://preview.redd.it/utitbynxexnh1.jpg?width=889&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e9d0d81574c6e4a5c42ff9eb0233ff76423430ec

https://preview.redd.it/uefkmynxexnh1.jpg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3394323b36a82667ddeb5a8e5dab8aa119e251c7

IK BEN NIET GEK! Ik ben niet gek! Ik weet dat hij die nummers heeft verwisseld! Ik wist dat het 1601 was. Een jaar na de slag bij Nieuwpoort. Alsof ik ooit zo'n fout zou kunnen maken. Nooit. Nooit! Ik kon het gewoon - ik kon het gewoon niet bewijzen. Hij - hij verborg zijn sporen, hij liet die idioot in de copy shop voor hem liegen. Denk je dat dit iets is? Vind je dit erg? Dit? Deze zwendelarij? Hij heeft veel slechtere dingen gedaan. Dat billboard! Vertel je me dat een man toevallig zo valt? Nee! Hij zette het in scène! Gerbert! Hij poepte door een schuifdak! En ik heb hem gered! En dat had ik niet moeten doen. Ik nam hem mee naar mijn eigen advocatenkantoor! Wat dacht ik? Hij zal nooit veranderen. Hij zal nooit veranderen! Zo was hij al toen hij 9 was! Kon zijn handen niet uit de kassa-lade houden! Maar niet onze Gerben! Kan niet onze lieve Gerben zijn! Ze achter hun rug om bestelen! En hij wordt advocaat!? Wat een gestoorde grap! Ik had hem moeten stoppen toen ik de kans kreeg! En jullie - jullie moeten hem stoppen!