A Catholic Look at Mormanism

  • Thread starter Thread starter suzie2787
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Janderich said:
Yes, I do trust Joseph Smith’s and Oliver Cowdery’s vision. However, it is not unverified. All writtings in the Doctrine and Covenants have also been fully reviewed and approved by Joseph Smith himself, others of his time, and our modern day Prophets and Apostles. I do find the information you have provided interesting. I hope no one tells me that I believe many people lied etc. etc. Because we do not have John here himself, this is simply a disagreement.
Click to expand...
You may not say it…but a conclusion that can be derived is someone lied…or deceived someone.

Well…here is the quote you provided…[SIGN]And the Lord said unto me: John, my beloved, what desirest thou? For if you shall ask what you will, it shall be granted unto you. And I said unto him: Lord, give unto me power over death, that I may live and bring souls unto thee. And the Lord said unto me: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, because thou desirest this thou shalt tarry until I come in my glory, and shalt prophesy before nations, kindreds, tongues and people. (D&C 7:1-3)[/SIGN]

I think you would agree that God is eternal, all knowing and all knowledgeable…so why did Jesus not say this to John at the Last Supper, and if He did, why did not John write about it? Or leave a paper trail about it?

And why would the Lord wait 1800 years to tell someone? Kind of suspicious, isn’t it?

This kind of makes John, in leaving something for two early church fathers in St. Augustine and St. John Crysostrom…to conclude thus….But S. John himself, as S. Aug. and S. Chrys. observe, took care to tell us, that Christ said not so…a liar, isn’t it?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janderich
TexanKnight, I don’t believe that John was preaching or baptizing. If he was among the people at all they likely did not know who he was.

My Response:
Ah. So you believe John disobeyed Jesus and cared nothing for Jesus" orders?

Janderich has not responded
 
Janderich said:
Kathleen, We don’t necessarily condemn all ancient Christian sources. As a matter of fact I asked you to point me to a few a number of posts back. But you didn’t reply so I’m thinking Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers as maybe a good place to start.

However, in the case of John we have direct revelation on the subject so we will have to disagree. Joseph Smith asked specifically about this issue of John remaining on the earth. Here is the answer,

Quote:
And the Lord said unto me: John, my beloved, what desirest thou? For if you shall ask what you will, it shall be granted unto you. And I said unto him: Lord, give unto me power over death, that I may live and bring souls unto thee. And the Lord said unto me: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, because thou desirest this thou shalt tarry until I come in my glory, and shalt prophesy before nations, kindreds, tongues and people. (D&C 7:1-3)
Click to expand...
Direct revelation from a made up book with a made up reply from God does not mean that John remained alive for hundreds of years and walked the earth.
 
Janderich…home for a little bit then go out for a little bit longer…

check out www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/

This is a great article that immediately begins with references to the whereabouts of St. John the Evangelist following his exile.

If he were alive for over 100 years…then where are the documents, the witnesses?..

This is the problem with Mormonism…rejection of Christianity…but belief in events that cannot be supported.
 
This is a great article that shows how a Protestant was confronted by Mormon missionaries, and in turn got him to search deeper for the truth, how he came across obvious contradictions in Mormonism to the issue between Catholics and Protestants…

Catholics believe in the continual interaction between God and man through the Holy Spirit and His Church, where as the Protestants essentially believe that God created this world…and then left it alone…leading us to Sola Scriptura…after the apostles died, no succession, same as Mormons…yet the Mormons place the Protestants in the same boat as Catholics…

And it finally ends on going back to the early Church Fathers…who were indeed imbued with the same Holy Spirit at Pentecost…and carried on after the death of St. John the Evangelist.
 
OMG, Kathleen, that was beautiful! It was very long, but well worth the read. Thank you, so much, for posting it. 👍
 
Telstar said:
OMG, Kathleen, that was beautiful! It was very long, but well worth the read. Thank you, so much, for posting it. 👍
Click to expand...
Just read it…amazing story. I can use part of the article against the claims of the JWs too…I think.

God bless, Kathleen.
 
Janderich said:
Kathleen, We don’t necessarily condemn all ancient Christian sources. As a matter of fact I asked you to point me to a few a number of posts back. But you didn’t reply so I’m thinking Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers as maybe a good place to start.

However, in the case of John we have direct revelation on the subject so we will have to disagree. Joseph Smith asked specifically about this issue of John remaining on the earth. Here is the answer,
Click to expand...
Those sets are ridiculously expensive, especially the Ancient Christian Writers series. The ACW is more complete, and has better textual witness and attestation, but it’s over $5,500 for the 71 volumes currently in print. There are also many available in the Philokalia (for an EO take), and many available in the Classics of Western Spirituality series (if you’re looking for a specific text instead of a collection, i.e. the Triads of Palamas or De civitate dei by Augustine). I don’t really recommend the “excerpt” editions as are published by Penguin and Oxford Classics, as they put a few, at best, quotations in the space of several hundred pages, out of a corpus of probably one hundred thousand pages (ten thousand if one counts pre-Nicene fathers only). Anything that is so heavily excerpted or abridged is going to have a bias of some sort in the text itself, whether it be atheistical, Protestant, or Catholic, without the need for mistranslation or notes, based just on “selective selection” (like selective memory) of quotations. I learned this lesson in abridgment completely twisting the message of the original when reading a 1,200 page abridgment of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon, instead of the 3,600 page original - the difference is night and day between the message that Gibbon had, and the message that the abridger got across by cutting out 2/3 of the work.

The Early Church Fathers 38vol. edited by Philip Schaff has a good translation of the text, most of the most important fathers, but is liberally peppered with Protestant notes to attempt to steer the reader away from a Catholic interpretation of the text (it’s as biased towards Protestantism, often with tendentious annotation, as The Fathers Know Best is towards Catholicism, with natural annotation). However, the text is good, and the whole set can be had for under $250, or $6 per volume; it’s about 22,500 pages long. It includes most of the Fathers except for Origen (who only gets half a volume), with a special focus on Augustine (8 vols.) and Chrysostom (6 vols.) (those 14 vols. together are ECF Post Series 1, had for about $120). I recommend it for a start in to Patristics from the primary sources.
 
theidler said:
I absolutely guarantee that Mormons are using St. Irenaeus and St. Athanasius to substantiate their teaching of becoming gods. I saw an article on it just recently - I’ll have to find it again though.
The funny thing is, their use of our saints’ teachings is an oxymoron. They claim the Church was in apostasy after the last apostles died (oh, wait…except for John apparently:rolleyes:), so why are they using teachings from men who were, in the Mormon view, apostates and heretics???
Mormonism cannibalizes itself - its doctrines do not add up, do not substantiate each other, it is literally like watching a snake eat itself while in a twisted pretzel shape trying to avoid a flame. It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...
The Orthodox doctrine of theosis is far different than what Mormons teach by Exaltation, although based on rhetorical legerdemain and translation out of context, one can (as I assume the Mormons have) equate them.

Read about the doctrine of theosis on Wikipedia, or in the Philokalia. It’s not about becoming a god, it’s about drawing nearer to the one God, and becoming a partaker in the divine nature, and being subsumed in to the fire of love of the Holy Trinity.

It’s closer to the Buddhist doctrines of Nirvana than it is to the Mormon doctrine of Exaltation, but is worlds away from either. It’s a case, I think, of poor wording in the Catechism, which occurs in several critical places in the new edition, especially red softcover “US Catechism”, notably in the statements on theosis and those on Islam lifted from Nostra Aetate.
 
Janderich said:
Yes, I do trust Joseph Smith’s and Oliver Cowdery’s vision. However, it is not unverified. All writtings in the Doctrine and Covenants have also been fully reviewed and approved by Joseph Smith himself, others of his time, and our modern day Prophets and Apostles. I do find the information you have provided interesting. I hope no one tells me that I believe many people lied etc. etc. Because we do not have John here himself, this is simply a disagreement.
Click to expand...
Self-verification, and verification by leaders with a vested interest who were taken in by forgeries?

Do you have any idea of how many discordant, contradictory accounts of the first vision there are? How the “three” and “eight witnesses” saw the plates with their “spiritual eyes” and never actually saw them (although Mormons make a big deal of how none of the eleven, even ones who left Mormonism, later repudiated their testimony)? How they signed a pre-written statement instead of each writing a short statement of their own?

Each one of those is a strike against reliability. Combined, they’re evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
I was shown a magazine put together by those in the film industry who focus on documentaries, and particularly work to define what makes a credible witness.

One, two or three testimonies to an event is not considered…there must be atleast 10 witnesses.,.and I assume those cannot not share same bias…for an event to be credible.

Furthermore…Janderich…were you able to read the link I just gave you?..

It pretty much addresses the foundational problems of Mormonism as well as Protestantism…which is the primary dismantler of Christianity…and the family…focus on individual, divorce if desired, protest…contraception…then humanistic to atheistic/materialistic secularism…and then death of the culture.
 
I would greatly encourage all here to read the link on post 296…it regards foundation of breakaway beliefs based on the search for truth written by a former Protestant.

I am planning to read it several times to gain a better grasp of concepts.
 
Theider,
Code: 
 Here is a link, Deseret News, August 2011....it is also interesting to read the comments....by both Mormons and Catholics alike...I note they put an R/C star on the commentator...don't know if the Mormons ID any others....one Mormon poster said because of the internet, 'milk before the meat' is obsolete....
www.deseretnews.com/article/700168175/Joseph-Smiths-restoration-of-theosis-was-miracle-not-scandal.html
Code: 
I went to Mass this morning, First Friday and we paid homage to the Sacred Heart of Jesus...I reflected on the Mormons listening to the reading by John....1 John 5:5-13....It regards the reality that if we can accept human testimony, how much is God's testimony even greater...
It is the Spirit Who testifies, the Spirit is Truth…Spirit, water, blood, three of one accord…again this reference to the Trinity…the concept of communion…essence of God Himself and our participation in grace in the life of God…this Life is in His Son…Whoever possesses the Son has life…

And anyone who thinks otherwise is not in the truth.

Jesus, in His Spirit, fulfills the revelation of God Himself…no mortal, no hidden plates or beliefs that define Christianity as corrupt can be taken any where near the source and essence of truth – God Himself.

Christ said He is Truth to Pilate…only God is truth and reveals truth …
 
KathleenGee said:
Theider,
Code: 
 Here is a link, Deseret News, August 2011....it is also interesting to read the comments....by both Mormons and Catholics alike...I note they put an R/C star on the commentator...don't know if the Mormons ID any others....one Mormon poster said because of the internet, 'milk before the meat' is obsolete....
www.deseretnews.com/article/700168175/Joseph-Smiths-restoration-of-theosis-was-miracle-not-scandal.html
Code: 
I went to Mass this morning, First Friday and we paid homage to the Sacred Heart of Jesus...I reflected on the Mormons listening to the reading by John....1 John 5:5-13....It regards the reality that if we can accept human testimony, how much is God's testimony even greater...
It is the Spirit Who testifies, the Spirit is Truth…Spirit, water, blood, three of one accord…again this reference to the Trinity…the concept of communion…essence of God Himself and our participation in grace in the life of God…this Life is in His Son…Whoever possesses the Son has life…

And anyone who thinks otherwise is not in the truth.

Jesus, in His Spirit, fulfills the revelation of God Himself…no mortal, no hidden plates or beliefs that define Christianity as corrupt can be taken any where near the source and essence of truth – God Himself.

Christ said He is Truth to Pilate…only God is truth and reveals truth …
Click to expand...
That link just ruffles my feathers:mad: - how dare the Mormon church ever use our saints to somehow substantiate their doctrines! They hold all of Christendom to be heretical, apostate, and an abomination to the Lord, and yet have no problem mining the teachings of these so-called apostates to somehow support their bizarre teachings. That really ticks me off.:mad:
Mormons - make up your mind already. Either Christendom since the time of the apostles is apostate or it is not. Figure it out already.:mad:
 
This is why I don’t put too much into responses…you do alot of work…but with Mormon thought…you never really know how they are interpreting things…

You can’t use the English Webster dictionary or any other to define words whose context are not intended for Scripture…

So that is why the Catholic Catechism and its definitions can stand up to logic, reason…truthfulness…and no deflecting…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top