M
MtnDwellar
Guest
This is a good comment, but, why did it take so long???
- Status
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Buddhism does indeed address questions like “How did all this come about?” or “Why is there something instead of nothing?” But that’s a topic for another thread.
–
Ahimsa, you are wise and asked the right question.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=8062771#post8062771
“Buddhism fails to ask the most basic questions about our existence, such as: how did all that is come about? Why not nothing?”
but you are wise, have asked the question about our existence: ’ How did all that is, come about?’
:hug1:
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Uh, I have a life?
Stephen168
New member
So the Two Great Commandments are part of the new covenant
P
ParkerD
Guest
Stephen,
Yes–that’s what I was saying. That means the “new covenant” included part of the “old covenant”, which means that the analogy used by Paul about marriage doesn’t mean the “old marriage” stopped at the death of the husband. It means parts of the “old covenant” stopped (were fulfilled through Christ), but parts certainly were not, so the analogy doesn’t demonstrate that there is no such thing as “eternal marriage”. (That is what SteveVH and Soren1 were trying to demonstrate by pointing out that analogy. You may look at the other thread and see their comments, which were very specific.)
In fact, if one looks deeply at the analogy and at what the house of Israel was being asked to do before all the lesser law was established, then one could see that those parts of the “old covenant” that were retained within the “new covenant” were the eternally significant parts. “Eternal marriage” fits within that view of how the “old covenant” became more perfect with the “new covenant”, with more to it that was eternally significant.
R
rainman10
Guest
I don’t think Mormons can truly know what Mormon Doctrine is, because it can change at any given time. Yesterday it was doctrine because JS said so, today, it may be doctrine, tomorrow? Nope, President so and so received a new revelation, we never really believed that. It was just JS or BY’s opinion. One of the most confusing “religions” I have read about.
B
BYUChemAlum
Guest
**Luke 24 (NIV)
37They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost.
38He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
39Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”
40When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 42They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43and he took it and ate it in their presence. **
Christ’s resurrected body has flesh and bones. So you’re saying that the flesh and bones are not material? What does it really mean to be bodily resurrected? Obviously our bodies will not be the same as they are now, but will be glorified, however I fail to see how that means that they are not material, especially when Jesus contrasts “spirit”/“ghost” with His resurrected body. This article from this very website states that-"But it does seem that heaven has something corresponding to space. It may not be anything remotely like space as we experience it, but heaven does seem to have the ability to receive bodies into it. Christ took his body with him to heaven when he ascended. Mary took her body when she was assumed. A few others—such as Enoch, Elijah, and perhaps Moses—also seem to have their bodies with them in heaven." There are many more examples of such statements by Catholic apologists and clergy. It is quite clear from this that Heaven has at least some degree of “where” because of the bodily resurrection and the bodily assumption of various persons to Heaven. Thus my previous points.
:yawn: Which really isn’t relevant, but I do understand the need to poison the well. We are comfortable in our belief in Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God who is our Savior, and that it is only through His atoning sacrifice that we may receive eternal life. Feel free to believe as you wish.
B
BYUChemAlum
Guest
No, we know what the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ is. Sure, policies and practices may change (I’d assume Catholics would be familiar with this concept, what with issues such as married clergy, etc). And there is no need to put scare quotes around “religions”. We are a religion.
B
belovucic
Guest
Our priests won’t marry. Amen.
You don’t have anything so sacred that you need a sexual purity for it.
You are an unchristian religion, that sure.
B
BYUChemAlum
Guest
I never did say that your priests would marry. Would I was referring to was the allowance of married men to become priests. This is allowed in the Eastern sui iuris churches of the Catholic Church, and clerical celibacy in the Latin rite is regarded as a practice, which could, in theory, be changed at any time (and if I remember correctly, celibacy was not always the rule in the West in the first place).
See above. And also, this seems to be setting up sex as “impure”. Certainly there is no basis for such a belief, since, among other reasons, sex was designed by God.
No, that is not sure. You are entitled to your opinions. What is sure is that Latter-day Saints regard Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God, our Savior, through whose atoning sacrifice we may receive eternal life. We are followers of Jesus Christ, strive to follow His commandments and examples, and believe that it is only through Him that salvation is possible. We really aren’t concerned with the varying definitions of “Christian” that seek to exclude various groups, depending on who is speaking (some of which, as I’m sure you’re aware, even seek to exclude the Catholic Church).
B
belovucic
Guest
Yes, it is allowed in the Eastern Catholic Church but in the Roman Catholic Church it is not. It a practice which cannot be changed at any time. It’s a practice which has existed for centuries and something which is so old (since the Middle Ages) cannot be simply abolished. It is not like in your Church where everything is changeable.
Sex was designed by God? Maybe because He also has a mistress and loves to make love and to produce with her us? That’s LDS belief, I think.
God was forced to allow a sexuality to people because of human sinfulness. He knew that before everything. I don’t want to discuss about the celibacy.
I think that angels and other heavenly beings don’t do sexual acts.
Mormons are more Christians that Scientologist and other sects and cults, but there is a great difference between Christianity and Mormonism. Christianity is a religion which was founded near the present-day Palestine not in the forest of America. It’s the religion for all people and it is not of American centralism. It’s the religion of a faith in one God, in the Holy Trinity, in the Eucharist as a central sacrament etc. And it’s the religion only of the Bible. There are no other scriptures. Someone very intelligent and clever can write a theologically correct (or incorrect like Joseph Smith Jr.) book and to claim that a validity of it.
But I always say: better Mormonism with unallowed sexual acts before the marriage then Protestantism with all that lustful practices. (homosexualism, sexual freedom etc.)
That’s why I really respect Mormons.
B
BYUChemAlum
Guest
This is completely incorrect. Apologists on this very site have said otherwise:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=89362
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=14623&highlight=history+celibacy
Here’s an article from the Catholic News Agency that says the same:
catholicnewsagency.com/resource.php?n=1265
Priestly celibacy in the Roman Catholic church can in theory be changed over time. Your own apologists have said so.
Also, in my Church, everything is not changeable. That is your own caricature.
You mean your caricature of Latter-day Saint belief.
God was forced to allow sexuality? Is this stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church?
By this logic, Protestants are not Christians, are they? And you say that we are more Christian than others, yet we are not Christians…:doh2:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a religion for all people, and is found world-wide. There are more Latter-day Saints outside of the United States than inside of it.
Not all Christians would agree with that, including Protestants that your Church accepts as Christians.
Yes, I am aware of your view.
“Unallowed sexual acts before the marriage”? The Church of Jesus Christ teaches chastity outside of marriage, and therefore sex is not allowed outside of marriage.
I do think you need to learn more about what we actually believe from actual Latter-day Saints.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Individual Catholics can and do have their own opinions, including those here and in Catholic media. However, Pope Paul VI declared without equivocation that priestly celibacy is a practice of the Church that will not change, for many good and holy reasons.
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis_en.html
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis_en.html
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Eastern Catholics (who are part of the Church) have married priests.
R
roselily
Guest
:angel1:
I too have to think about it, Ahimsa she have to think about it also.
I do not know many things! …
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Yes, I know. I was addressing the comment made towards the practice in the Latin church.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
OK. I now see that you wrote that priestly celibacy is a practice in the Church, not the only practice in the Church.
B
belovucic
Guest
Vada retro!!! I know that you want to destroy the Catholic Church with immoral and sexual-practicing clergy. That’s what caused so many fraction of Protestants. This is not something new. That wanted Protestants and they were all excommunicated.
I have never said that that’s a doctrine. That’s a practice. It cannot be simply abolished. Think about consequences in the Catholic world.
What’s about the poligamy? B. Young had many wives… And that practice disappeared! And many also!
Everybody knows about your fallacies and heresies. Heavenly Mother, Kolob, Exaltation… Best to me are the Temple Garments!
Was Jesus in America? That is stated in the fairy tales of LDS Church.
No that was not stated in the Catechism. God created the sexuality as the temptation of the chaste people. If you do not practice sexual act you go to the Heaven. You should try it!!!
Protestants are Christian because they inherit many from the Catholic Church. And they believe in the one God, in the Trinity, some of them in the Real Presence, and they accept the Church councils. I said LDS is more Christian than Scientologist. More in the manner of Christianity.
Yes, but everything goes to Salt Lake City. All money, money, money, money, money from misguided believers.
I already know very much about Mormons and I think that you have too much free time and I think that your leaders sent you to misguide all these devout Catholics.
And the Bible is the only one. The Book of Mormon and other books are just fantasies, science fiction etc.
You should more eat crackers and drink water with your friends in your temples. Leave us Catholics alone. You are very trained to make people very nervous. That’s HOW your gospels are spread all over the poor world.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
OK, so back around to the OP.
Smith was gnostic. This teaching reflects that.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Could you define “gnostic”?OK, so back around to the OP.
- Status