Well I happen to agree with what allweather has said and your assertions are the ones with "a lot of hot air and no substance. That makes two against one na na na.
You should not be wasting your time here when you could be out plying your nonsense on unsuspecting ignorant mindsExactly! It is facinating to see the powers of evasion working in z’s (mind) writings. He should wish to accept Catholic truth and put all that evasion aside in order to expend his obvious talents in a more usefull way by teaching ignorant minds about the true Jesus. Not a decieving jesus that is a mirror of himself.Good morning.
Thank you for your answer to my comments on God existing outside of time, and your not wanting to venture there. That’s fine. It explains quite a lot about the Catholic viewpoint, and there’s more that follows out of that concept. But it can indeed be a difficult concept to grasp, so you’re in good company.
I’ve presented God’s existence outside of time to many people before. Sometimes they get it right away and react with “wow, suddenly a lot of things make sense.” :tiphat: Sometimes they ask me to repeat it slowly, several times, then gradually the light comes on.And sometimes they look at me with a strange expression and change the subject.
Moving on, regarding the blind man and the question “who sinned”, spiritual pre-existence could be inferred from that I suppose, but you’re the first person I’ve ever seen make that suggestion. There is another explanation which comes straight out of scripture.
The disciples weren’t thinking of spiritual pre-existence, they were instead remembering God’s words about multi-generational retribution for sin:
Numbers 14:18 The LORD is slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, forgiving iniquity and transgression, but he will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of fathers upon children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.
The Jews believed that physical deformity was the result of sin. Yet they knew the family involved, and knew them to be righteous people, so they were at a loss on this one. Hence their question to Jesus: God is obviously making this family pay a sin-penalty. What is their secret sin? Who did it? Was it the man’s father, or perhaps one of his grandfathers?
No spiritual pre-existence is needed to understand this verse. They thought the man was born blind because his father or one of his grandfathers was a sinner, and the price for that sin was that the family would be burdened with a handicapped son.
Nan
Nan S, it is an interesting idea but it seems to me to be sort of like the Trinity, a construct whose main purpose is to explain some tricky points. This isn’t any debate of your idea and would probably make a good paper, but it just doesn’t seem credible to me.
I think it’s a possibility. I really don’t know and I don’t really spend any time thinking about this. But it does seem to be a subject of intense interest to people who are not Mormon, this I will freely admit. I think we’ve already been through the discussion where Zerinus and I have both stated that it is not official doctrine.
I would hardly consider imprimatured encyclopedic material, or the Catechism, to be “uncorroborated.” Moreover, your use of Scripture is poorly done, in the extreme. Your interpretations are yours alone. They don’t jive with any mainstream thought, let alone with the magisterial teachings of the Church. The teachings of the RCC are in writing, and are not subject to interpretation by anyone, let alone a Mormon. You said I was wrong in saying that there is no pre-existence. I gave you chapter and verse showing how I am right. You lose.
How the Mormons do run away from their doctrine! Anything not mainstream, anything embarrassing to them, anything they cannot explain, they deny as being non-doctrine. They are like people living in a dream. Or, perhaps, a nightmare.
Well said, and very true. Zerinus will make an outstanding Catholic someday. Just like Saul of Tarsus, who thrived on doing the dirty work of the Jews, persecuting Christians, I positively believe that Zerinus will someday have a real conversion experience of his own, where he will realize his blunders, repent of his religion, and get onto the road. In the meantime, he serves the purposes of the Lord quite nicely, displaying the illogic, prevarications, and denials so characteristic of Mormons, for all onlookers to see. Thanks, Z. If not for you being here, Mormonism wouldn’t be as handily exposed to the light as it is.
Frustrating, isn’t it Nan? I don’t know how more clearly it could’ve been given than how you did it, yet he ignores your words and insists on having his error, no matter what. There is a clouding of the thought processes at work, that is plain to see. All Mormon investigatores, take note! See how your missionaries befuddle, and are befuddled.
Wrong. You completely ignore the belief that the sins of the fathers are visited upon the following generations. I understand that this flows out of a denial of original sin, which is itself an utterly illogical denial, yet, one which Mormons are stuck with considering Joseph Smith’s article of faith regarding it. Because you ignore this FACT of Jewish, and even orthodox Christian belief, you are stuck in a fallacy. You insist on some harebrained notion of a pre-existence, a pre-existence NOT taught by the Jews, by Jesus, or by the Christian Church. This misreading of Scripture is very typical of Mormonism. Investigatores… take note.
If that is true, then why, oh why, did you attribute the phrase to Colossians, and not to Nan?
Except that I quote you chapter and verse of scripture (supported by the ECFs), and you quote me the Catholic Encyclopaedia! There is hardly a comparison. I think that I win, and you loose. You Catholics are like the old Jews: “Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” (Mark 7:9). “Commandment of God” and the “word of God” here are equivalents. You reject the obvious meaning and sense of the word of God in order to uphold your false traditions. That is an abominable thing to do.
Do you believe God was once a man just like you? This question seems to be a yes and no question. Do I believe in the Father,Son and Holy Spirit? Yes! See how easy it is to answer. The faliure of these Mormons to answer this simple question speaks volumes. Thank you Nan for the question.
It was a subject of intense interest for me, when I was Mormon! I knew the LDS church taught that God was once a man, and I knew that the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Spirit testified that God has always been God.
Zerinus,
Amen! It’s difficult to understand how a person, like Z, who seems so intellegent would read one of the sayings of the early christian writers and fail to look at the others. Is not it wounderfull that Origin could hold that erronous opinion so we could all learn from it in this day and age. If only Joseph Smith would have had access to the early Church Fathers.
