57 Years Mormon

[gazelam]

petra22:

How could Jesus be born of a sinful woman?

Mormons believe that God had physical sex with Mary and that’s how Jesus was conceived. She was betrothed to Joseph at the time. Don’t we call that fornication or adultery or something. I don’t know … it’s just all weird.

This statement is in error. LDS believe Mary was a virgin before and after the birth of Jesus. I hope this helps…

 

[RebeccaJ]

Lemuel:

petra22:

How could Jesus be born of a sinful woman?

Mormons believe that God had physical sex with Mary and that’s how Jesus was conceived. She was betrothed to Joseph at the time. Don’t we call that fornication or adultery or something. I don’t know … it’s just all weird.

This statement is in error. LDS believe Mary was a virgin before and after the birth of Jesus. I hope this helps…

This is what you believe. Other Mormons believe differently. LDS Church “prophets” have taught contradictory teachings on the subject. That, combined with each individual LDS person going with what feels right for themselves…there is no definitive “Mormons believe”, regarding this subject.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, it’s widely understood by scholars the this doctrine is not found in the New Testament.

“Indeed, until Athanasius began writing, every single theologian, East and West, had postulated some form of Subordinationism. It could, about the year 300, have been described as a fixed part of catholic theology.” (R. P. C. Hansen)

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

There is no formal doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament writers, if this means an explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. (Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God: A Historical Study of the Doctrine of the Trinity (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972), 44

There is in them [the Apostolic Fathers], of course, no trinitarian doctrine and no awareness of a trinitarian problem. (JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, revised edition, (New York: Harper, 1978), 95.)

What does John 17:22 say? And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one

Christ specifically prays that His disciples become one as the Father and Son already are. What type of unity is Jesus hoping for His disciples? Consubstantiality? Or oneness of purpose? I say the latter.

I hope these posts help…

Take care and God bless you.

Besides the Mormon overlay being placed on the quotes you’ve mined here…this is an example as to why LDS are not Christians. You can’t reject the God who Christians worship, and then claim to be of the same religion. (IMO)

 

[Epsicron]

Hello! When I saw your post I knew you would be lambasted by non-Catholics. What I did not expect (after skimming through all the posts) was to see you holding your own so well. You have some amazing stamina.

May I ask you something totally unrelated to your background? I have read about people, like yourself, who were overwhelmed after witnessing the mass, almost like an instant conversion. For someone like me, a Catholic who has not been gifted with this experience, and who often feels a dryness at mass, I have a deep longing to understand what it might be like. Could you talk a little about experiencing such a powerful sense of God’s presence during the mass? Was there some detail in particular that brought it to life for you? I want so much to be able to experience this sense of unity with Christ for myself some day. You are not even out of RCIA and yet I have no doubt that you are a more genuine Catholic than I who have lived my whole life seeking after Catholic teaching.

Lastly, I just wanted to say that I cannot comprehend what it must have been like for you to change your core beliefs after 57 years. I admire you tremendously for it, because I don’t know how I could face that sort of realization myself.

 

[gazelam]

Besides the Mormon overlay being placed on the quotes you’ve mined here…this is an example as to why LDS are not Christians. You can’t reject the God who Christians worship, and then claim to be of the same religion. (IMO)

IMO Orthodox Christian overlays should not disqualify Orthodox Christians from being considered Christians. I believe it’s possible to reject specific aspects of the Bible regarding Christ and still generally embrace Christ as Orthodox Christians do.

 

[Lemuel]

This statement is in error. LDS believe Mary was a virgin before and after the birth of Jesus. I hope this helps…

The BOM says that Jesus was conceived “after the manner of the flesh.”

“Christ was begotten by an immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.”

Mormon Doctrine, 1966, p. 547

 

[Vonsalza]

gazelam:

This statement is in error. LDS believe Mary was a virgin before and after the birth of Jesus. I hope this helps…

The BOM says that Jesus was conceived “after the manner of the flesh.”

“Christ was begotten by an immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers.”

Mormon Doctrine, 1966, p. 547

Bingo.

But let’s all be charitable. Our Mormon friend is just wrong. As we all often are.

 

[Vonsalza]

The fact that I’m on a Catholic forum connecting and engaging proves you wrong. I have no disconnect with anyone. Your answers are starting to sound very predictable

Well, it’s probably because Catholic theologians have existed for 2k years and there probably aren’t any new questions as it pertains to this stuff.

I used to be a hard-core Baptist and would use the very same arguments you use now; so I understand somewhat.

I recommend that you challenge your assumption that the title “first-born” immediately demands the existence of a “second-born”, particularly in light of the patriarchal status afforded to the eldest males in ancient Jewish society.

Jcrichton is on-point when he reveals the interesting fact that Mary was left in the care of John upon the death of Christ.

Had Jesus had other, biological brothers, then allowing Mary to abide under the care of someone from outside the household would have been a huge and gossiped stain upon the honor of their house.

When you read “brothers” in the NT, you need to read the word in quotes because it has many, many meanings. Particularly in ancient (and very clannish) Jewish society, the sons of your aunts and uncles were your “brothers” as well.

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Hope!

The problem with that interpretation of Scriptures is that it ignores everything including Jewish customs.

Can you imagine an older sibling or even a younger (as in my case) who takes care of his mom while all others refrain from assisting her demand, upon his death, that a “friend” take charge of his mother?

Would that mother’s heart not be broken at witnessing the rapture in the family… witnessing her son keep all of her “many other children” from being responsible (caring) for their mom?

They make such assumptions based on etymology or the face value of a word term–reason does not need to be factored in.

Here’s one example of how this application fails.

Is Jesus to sit by the Father, at His Right Hand, forever or only till a certain period of time or event?:

44 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool? (St. Matthew 22)
34 For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. (Acts 2)

So is Christ only to be Lord until His enemies are defeated; once Christ’s enemies are defeated is He to give up the Seat at the Right Hand of the Father?

Clearly, there must be a different understanding of the use of the term “until,” mustn’t there? If not, does that rule not necessitates that Jesus must cease seating at the Right Hand of the Father?

Do you see the mess that is created when we hold to stern and inflexible eisegesis?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Hi!

So according to you and the material you’ve quoted (I don’t read much–I seldom venture to follow links), the New Covenant Writings are not the Word of God (Divine Revelation)?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Raxus]

IMO Orthodox Christian overlays should not disqualify Orthodox Christians from being considered Christians. I believe it’s possible to reject specific aspects of the Bible regarding Christ and still generally embrace Christ as Orthodox Christians do.

Relativism is truly one of the devil’s greatest weapons against unsuspecting souls.

You can no more accept Christ while rejecting parts of Him than you can be married faithfully to your spouse except for cheating on them on Wednesdays only.

 

[jcrichton]

Justin Martyr quote:

[T]here is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is called an Angel…. I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things – numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will.” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 56)

Can you clarify what you are quoting here?

This, aside from the erroneous interpretation of “Angel,” actually contradicts your argument: distinct: Number (Father, Son, Holy Spirit); not distinct in Will (One God).

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

…ok, so other than a new term being used and applied, how does not being found in Judaism is any valid proof of anything? Did you know that Judaism fights against itself? Did you know that the Pharisees and Sadducees hold contrasting views? Did you know that Jesus rejecting the errors that they taught as the Word of God? Did you know that Judaism rejects Jesus as the Messiah and the New Covenant as anything but not the Word of God? Are you Jewish?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Lemuel]

But let’s all be charitable. Our Mormon friend is just wrong. As we all often are.

Let’s also be honest. He skirted the point I made by saying that Mary was a virgin. Mormons justify her virginity by saying that she didn’t have sex with a mortal man. Having sex with God does not take away her virginity. That’s how they spin it.

 

[jcrichton]

So where in Scriptures is there a clue that the Virgin was ever pregnant, other than with Jesus?

You can’t have it both ways!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

What scholars are those?

The ones that deny that the Word existed from the Beginning, that the Word was God and that the Word was with God, from the Beginning. That nothing that exist came to be but by the Word the Created everything by Himself and for Himself? …or is it the ones that deny that Yahweh God is Spirit, that the Spirit of the Lord (Christ) is the Spirit of the Father and that that Spirit is the Holy Spirit: One Gospel, One Baptism, One Faith, One Spirit, One Lord, One God?

…yeah, they miss all of that in Scriptures don’t they?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Christ specifically prays that His disciples become one as the Father and Son already are. What type of unity is Jesus hoping for His disciples? Consubstantiality? Or oneness of purpose? I say the latter.

Wow, your theology is quite impressive… it seems that Jesus wants all to sing kum ba yah.

Sadly, it seems that this theology ignores anything other than it’s own construct.

Here’s what Jesus states:

17:21 May they all be one. Father, may they be one in us, as you are in me and I am in you, so that the world may believe it was you who sent me. 17:22 I have given them the glory you gave to me, that they may be one as we are one. 17:23 With me in them and you in me, may they be so completely one that the world will realise that it was you who sent me and that I have loved them as much as you loved me. (St. John)

There’s no “likeness of mind” or “equal understanding” or “of one mind.”

That they Be One as I AM in You and You in Me. Which brings us to the effectiveness of the Holy Spirit, the third Person of God:

14:16 I shall ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you for ever, 14:17 that Spirit of truth whom the world can never receive since it neither sees nor knows him; but you know him, because he is with you, he is in you. (St. John)

The world cannot Receive the Holy Spirit, because they Reject God’s Revelation:

12:31 And so I tell you, every one of men’s sins and blasphemies will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 12:32 And anyone who says a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but let anyone speak against the Holy Spirit and he will not be forgiven either in this world or in the next. (St. Matthew)
14:17 because the kingdom of God does not mean eating or drinking this or that, it means righteousness and peace and joy brought by the Holy Spirit. 14:18 If you serve Christ in this way you will please God and be respected by men. (Romans)
12:3 It is for that reason that I want you to understand that on the one hand no one can be speaking under the influence of the Holy Spirit and say, ‘Curse Jesus’, and on the other hand, no one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord’ unless he is under the influence of the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians)

Sadly, anything in Scriptures that denies your construct you must reject or contort to mean what you think it means.

May the Holy Spirit Enlighten your Path to the Truth, Jesus, your Lord and Savior!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[RebeccaJ]

gazelam:

Justin Martyr quote:

[T]here is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is called an Angel…. I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things – numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will.” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 56)

Can you clarify what you are quoting here?

This, aside from the erroneous interpretation of “Angel,” actually contradicts your argument: distinct: Number (Father, Son, Holy Spirit); not distinct in Will (One God).

Maran atha!

Angel

He’s misquoting Justin Martyr. The Dialogue with Trypho is an excellent example of Trinitarian belief. It’s really quite an amazing work.

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, Rebecca!

Not just your opinion, Yahweh God’s Mandate:

2:22 The man who denies that Jesus is the Christ-he is the liar, he is Antichrist; and he is denying the Father as well as the Son, 2:23 because no one who has the Father can deny the Son, and to acknowledge the Son is to have the Father as well. 2:24 Keep alive in yourselves what you were taught in the beginning: as long as what you were taught in the beginning is alive in you, you will live in the Son and in the Father; 2:25 and what is promised to you by his own promise is eternal life. 2:26 This is all that I am writing to you about the people who are trying to lead you astray. 2:27 But you have not lost the anointing that he gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you; the anointing he gave teaches you everything; you are anointed with truth, not with a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in him. 2:28 Live in Christ, then, my children, so that if he appears, we may have full confidence, and not turn from him in shame at his coming. 2:29 You know that God is righteous – then you must recognise that everyone whose life is righteous has been begotten by him. (1 St. John)

Anyone who rejects the Son, rejects the Father; anyone who does not Live in Christ, has nothing to do with the Father!

You are in Great Company (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Wait, so you can suck on a rock because it is mostly empty space?

Maran atha!

Angel