Do LDS Believe Jesus Was Married?

[majick275]

No secret groups in the RCC. We don’t join the masons, we don’t have any ordinances that are secret. everything is out in the open. If you are referring to the mafia crimes then you should know that the RCC does not approve of the mafia or any other criminal group.

 

[paul_barlow]

no not mafia. church members. can not remeber there name but its a society in the catholic church

 

[majick275]

No secret groups exist with the sanction of the RCC. murdering bankers is not something the church does. If criminals happened to be Catholic it is no more an indictment of the church than Mark Hacking’s crimes are indicative of the LDS. Look poeple of all churches do bad things. That doesn’t make the church bad. The RCC doesn’t have secret groups nor does it engage in secret rituals.

 

[paul_barlow]

1982: ‘God’s banker’ found hanged
The body of a top Italian banker has been found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge in London.
Known as God’s banker for his links with the Vatican, 62-year-old Roberto Calvi was the chairman of Banco Ambrosiano in Milan and a central figure in a complex web of international fraud and intrigue.

He had been missing for the last nine days before his body was discovered by a passer-by hanging from scaffolding on a riverside walk under the bridge.

Police are treating the death as suicide.

Jail sentence

Mr Calvi became chairman of Banco Ambrosiano, now Italy’s largest private bank, in 1975 and built up a vast financial empire.

In 1978, a report by the Bank of Italy on Ambrosiano concluded that several billion lire had been illegally exported.

In May 1981, Mr Calvi was arrested, found guilty, and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment, but released pending an appeal. During his short spell in jail he attempted suicide.

Mr Calvi was due to appear in an Italian court next week to appeal against this conviction.

Later this month he was to be tried for alleged fraud involving property deals with Sicilian banker Michele Sindona, who is himself serving 25 years in America over the collapse of the Franklin National Bank in New York in 1974.

The Vatican is directly linked to Mr Calvi by Archbishop Paul Marcinkus, the Pope’s bodyguard, a governor of the Vatican and head of the Vatican bank which has a shareholding in Ambrosiana.

Missing millions

Now Ambrosiano is on the verge of collapse amid press reports that investigators found a £400m “hole” in its accounts. Last week the bank’s executive board decided to strip Mr Calvi of his authority.

The Italian Treasury dissolved the bank’s administration and the Bank of Italy is now a temporary commissioner.

Mr Calvi fled to Venice nine days ago after shaving his moustache to avoid being recognised.

From there it seems he hired a private plane to take him to London.

The day before he was found dead, his secretary committed suicide in Milan by jumping off the fourth floor of the bank’s headquarters.

Teresa Corrocher, aged 55, left an angry suicide note condemning her boss for the damage she said he had done to Ambrosiano and its employees.

In July 2003, Italian prosecutors said Calvi, a member of Italian freemasons known as Propaganda

no masons in your church!.

 

[majick275]

you’ve been reading too much dan brown. Italian masons is not the same as Catholic masons. This is the mafia case. These men were criminals acting without direction or sanction of the RCC. If we were to bring an LDS person who was a member of a white supremacist group and had committed crimes for them would that show that LDS uses these groups to do their dirty work? surely not. The actions of individuals is not an indictment of the church.

 

[paul_barlow]

i think you may find that there are groups within your church who would be happy with your arguement. but he was the vaticans banker and the question of your churchs involvement is still un resolved in this murder.

 

[paul_barlow]

majick275:

you’ve been reading too much dan brown. Italian masons is not the same as Catholic masons. This is the mafia case. These men were criminals acting without direction or sanction of the RCC. If we were to bring an LDS person who was a member of a white supremacist group and had committed crimes for them would that show that LDS uses these groups to do their dirty work? surely not. The actions of individuals is not an indictment of the church.

but you argued this with the danites.

 

[majick275]

That’s because the Danites were founded by the LDS church and (in the begining at least) acting under the direction of the church leadership. I haven’t gotten into the early Utah practice of castration because it appears to have been the practice of zealous individuals. (even thoug we have reason beleive that BY when made aware of it did nothing to punish the offenders)

 

[paul_barlow]

majick275:

That’s because the Danites were founded by the LDS church and (in the begining at least) acting under the direction of the church leadership. I haven’t gotten into the early Utah practice of castration because it appears to have been the practice of zealous individuals. (even thoug we have reason beleive that BY when made aware of it did nothing to punish the offenders)

i thought the leader of the danites was executed.
now the word jesuits comes to mind.

 

[majick275]

yes, as best we can tell the Danites outlived their usefullnes, got out of control and were disbanded.

If you think the Jesuits are a secret combination then you need to quit reading Jack Chick propaganda.

 

[Zakuska]

majick275:

That’s because the Danites were founded by the LDS church and (in the begining at least) acting under the direction of the church leadership. I haven’t gotten into the early Utah practice of castration because it appears to have been the practice of zealous individuals. (even thoug we have reason beleive that BY when made aware of it did nothing to punish the offenders)

If Im not mistaken… several of the first Century church fathers took christ “hand offend thee cut it off and cast it from thee” approach as well.

Origen comes to mind, casterated himself.

 

[Zakuska]

majick275:

No secret groups in the RCC. We don’t join the masons, we don’t have any ordinances that are secret. everything is out in the open. If you are referring to the mafia crimes then you should know that the RCC does not approve of the mafia or any other criminal group.

Are you sure about that?

The Post was originally presented by Dr. Petersen… It was on the JPII thread in which some were using the death of the pope to lambast Mormonism and temple ceremonies. It was in the middle and was a discussion between he and Ave Maria.

Here it is:

According to H. Mulder, the early Christian church had certain secret practices that were not to be made known under any circumstances, whose secrecy was sometimes maintained by an oath. He believes that, in the taking of these oaths, “the church may have imitated” the practices of certain Eastern religions that “contained a number of secret ceremonies . . . related especially to the initiation, [which] had to be kept quiet under all circumstances by the adherents. Sometimes an oath was required at the initiation; at other times the death penalty was pronounced in the eventuality of a breach.” (H. Mulder, “Arcani Disciplina,” in Edwin H. Palmer, ed., The Encyclopedia of Christianity [Wilmington, DE: National Foundation for Christian Education, 1964], 390; compare G. Anrich, “Arkandisziplin,” in Hermann Gunkel and Leopold Zscharnack, eds., Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart [Tübingen: Mohr, 1927], 1:523-533. Kees W. Bolle, Secrecy in Religions [Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1987], 10, on the other hand, sees the origins of such practices arising from within the Christian communion itself. Compare Arthur D. Nock, “The Christian Sacramentum in Pliny and a Pagan Counterpart,” The Classical Review 38 [1924]: 58-59; Stephen Benko, Pagan Rome and the Early Christians [Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986], 12-13.)

fairboards.org/index.php?showto…%20Death&st=142

 

[Zakuska]

Curse of Cain as taught by 18th century Christianity:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain

Early Christian interpretations
According to some scholars, some early interpretations of the Bible in Syriac Christianity combined the “curse” with the “mark”, and interpreted the curse of Cain as black skin. (Goldenberg, p. 180). Relying on rabbinic texts, it is argued, the Syriacs interpreted a passage in Book of Genesis 4:5 (“And Cain was greatly saddened and his face fell”) as implying that Cain underwent a permanent change in skin color. (Id.)

**
The curse as a justification for the African slave trade**
The curse of Cain has been used as an explanation for the dark skin shades of people in various parts of Africa, and a justification for racism and slavery, and a ban in interracial marriage. These racial implications are closely linked to the related implications derived from the curse of Ham doctrine, which has a much longer history, and has often been combined (or some would say conflated) with the curse of Cain doctrine, as well as the “curse of Esau” doctrine.

An early American reference to the curse of Cain doctrine in the context of modern racial issues was in a poem by Phyllis Wheatley, herself a black slave, who wrote in 1773, “Remember Christians, Negoes black as Cain/May be refined and joined the angelic train”.

[edit]
Adoption of the doctrine by some Protestant groups
Most 19th and early 20th century Southern Baptist congregations in the southern United States taught that there were two separate heavens; one for blacks, and one for whites.

The doctrine was used to support a ban on ordaining blacks to most protestant clergies until the 1960s in the U.S. and Europe. It is significant to note that the Coptic, Ethiopian, Orthodox, Thomasite and the Catholic church did not recognize these interpretations and did not participate in the religious movement to support them. Certain Catholic Diocese in the Southern United States did adopt a policy of not ordaining blacks to oversee, administer sacraments to, or accept confessions from white parishoners. This policy, was not based on a Curse of Cain teaching, but was justified by any possible perceptions of having slaves rule over their masters.

Until the mid-20th century, nearly all Protestant groups in America had supported the notion that black slavery, oppression, and African colonization was the result of God’s curse on people with black skin or of African descent through Cain, or through the Curse of Ham. Today, however, official acceptance of the doctrine among Protestant ogranizations is limited almost exclusively to churches connected to white supremacy, such as the Aryan World Church and the New Christian Crusade Church.

Yes the next is the Mormons but lets Jump down to what catholics are saying since Paul already gave a lengthy discourse on it.

Catholic exegesis
The Catholic Church teaches that the curse of Cain was given by the earth, not God, to Cain, as a punishment for having to “opened its mouth and drunk the blood of thy brother.” The Church teaches that Cain’s punishment was not having to wander, as he founded a City, but that he wouldn’t have the “strengh” of the earth in his agricultural endeavors, but that the Earth would still produce for him. The Church also teaches that he was to be banished from the land of his parents as a result of his curse.

As for the mark of the curse, the Catholic Encyclopedia states, “No indication as regards the nature of this sign is given us.”

We also know that Chirst had a disdain for Cananites. Called them dirty dogs not worthy of even the crumbs of the Gospel.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Dear Zakuska;

Wikipidia is not entirely correct. Here’s what the Catholic Encyclopedia says about Cain…

Cain
The first-born of Adam and Eve. His name is derived, according to Genesis 4:1, from the root kanah, to possess, being given to him in consequence of the words of his mother at his birth: “I have possessed a man by the favour of the Lord”. No very serious objection can be urged against this derivation. The Book of Genesis, interested in this section in the origin of the different occupations of men, tells us that Cain became a husbandman while his brother Abel tended flocks. They both offered to the Lord a sacrifice, acknowledging, in a manner analogous to that later prescribed in the law, the sovereign power of the Creator. Cain offered of the fruits of the earth; Abel of the “firstlings of his flock and of their fat”. By some means not indicated in the sacred text, perhaps, as has been thought, by some such sign as the fire which consumed the offering of Gideon (Judges, vi, 21) or that of Elias (III, Kings, xviii, 38), God manifested to the brothers that Abel and his sacrifice were acceptable to Him; that, on the contrary, he rejected Cain and his offering. We are not told the reason of this preference. Among the conjectures on the subject one that has found most favour among commentators is that which is incorporated in the Septuagent version of the words of God to Cain in verse vii: “If thou didst offer well but divide badly, hast thou not committed sin?” This implies that Cain committed the fault of presenting to God imperfect gifts, reserving to himself the better part of the produce of the land. However, St. Augustine, who was under the influence of the Septuagint, understood the division in another way. Cain, he tells us, gave God a part of his goods, but he did not give Him his heart (De Civitate Dei, XV, vii). This is in keeping with the cause more generally assigned for God’s preference. The sequel of the story shows us the evil disposition of Cain’s heart. St. John says that Cain slew Abel because his works were evil, while those of his brother were just (I John, iii, 12), and we read in Hebrews that “by faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain” (Heb., xi, 4).

Cain is angered by the Divine rejection. In verses 6 and 7 of chapter iv of Genesis we have God’s rebuke and warning: “Why art thou wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou dost well, is not thy countenance raised up? If thou dost not well, sin crouches at the door. Its desire is towards thee, but thou rule over it.” Sin here is represented under the figure of a wild beast crouching at the door of the heart ready to pounce upon its victim. Cain is able to resist temptation. But he does not, and the Bible story goes on to relate the terrible crime born of his anger and jealousy. He slays Abel. Questioned by the Lord as to the whereabouts of his brother, he answers defiantly that he knows not. To avenge the blood of Abel, God pronounces a curse against the first homicide. The Hebrew text of the curse may be translated either: “Cursed be thou by the earth which has opened its mouth and drunk the blood of thy brother” etc., or “Cursed be thou from the earth” etc. The former translation refers the sentence to the words which follow: “When thou shalt till it, it shall not give thee its strength” i.e. its produce; the latter, to the banishment related afterwards. This banishment from the country where his parents lived and where, as we learn from such passages from the present one, God continued to manifest his presence in some special way, is spoken of as “going out from the face of Jehovah” (verse 16). The country of Cain’s banishment, where he was to lead a wandering, vagrant life, is called, in the Hebrew, the land of Nod, and is said to be east of Eden. As we do not know where Eden was, the location of Nod cannot be determined. The punishment seemed to Cain greater than he could bear; in answer to his words expressing fear that he might be killed, God gave him a promise of special protection for his life, and put upon him a sign. No indication as regards the nature of this sign is given us. The only event of the subsequent life of Cain spoken of in the Bible is the founding of a city, called Henoch after a son of that name. A good many authors find that this tradition, which makes of Cain the first city builder, is not compatible with the story just related, which they say is best understood as a popular account of the origin of the wandering desert tribes. If we do not put into the history of the author of Genesis elements of which he seems to have been altogether unconscious, there is no reason to suppose he was wrong in regarding the words of the curse as consistent with the “building” of a city by Cain. Conservative commentators are probably right in their judgment that this “city” of Cain was not of notable extent or importance.

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

I just posted this on another thread in this forum, and I see it might also be well received here…

Please remember that if you are quoting another text, that you do so in an ‘abridged’ manner.

In other words, please do not post an entire passage, article, or story. You should create your comment or your debate point in your own words FIRST, then use various references to back the point up.

Several posters (not just on this thread) have taken the route of flooding their post with quotes from various texts.

We believe that this practice would be more condusive to quality dialogue.

Please feel free to quote certain passages from texts that support your arguments… But make sure it’s just a paragraph or two. Generally speaking, most points can be refuted or supported on just a few sentences.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Rachel Malloy:

I just posted this on another thread in this forum, and I see it might also be well received here…

Please remember that if you are quoting another text, that you do so in an ‘abridged’ manner.

In other words, please do not post an entire passage, article, or story. You should create your comment or your debate point in your own words FIRST, then use various references to back the point up.

Several posters (not just on this thread) have taken the route of flooding their post with quotes from various texts.

We believe that this practice would be more condusive to quality dialogue.

Please feel free to quote certain passages from texts that support your arguments… But make sure it’s just a paragraph or two. Generally speaking, most points can be refuted or supported on just a few sentences.

I usually try to abridge my quotes as you suggest, but in this particular case, I felt that the full text was required, insofar as an earlier poster presented his own “abridged” version in a manner that misrepresented Catholic position. Hence, my only point was to present the full text to cut off any further misquoting.

Sincerely yours,
-Robert in SD.

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

So noted Robert, thanks!