Help with debating a Mormon

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am in Firefox and have the other tab still open! Woooops… I will paste that in the other thread and delete this post…
 
dianaiad said:
this refers to the original authors of the scriptures…Matthew, Mark, Luke, John…et.all, not the men who chose which of these writings to include in the canon.

We may be circling it–(and circling is the correct word for the problem I keep encountering…)

The above sections of the catechism refer to what happens after these writings have already been accepted as scripture; why we should pay attention to them. The assumption is that, of course, they ARE scripture.

While section 1117 seems to come closer to answering the question I asked, it still doesn’t quite land on it, because it too is about exegesis of already determined scripture, not about the process of discerning whether a specific book or letter actually is scripture.

In other words, the above sections make perfect sense if they refer to already accepted scripture, such as Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians.

They do not address the process by which it was decided that this particular letter is scripture in the first place.

This may sound like a quibble…but it’s not, since the question is about how one comes to believe that a certain piece of writing IS scripture or not. Once it is declared to be scripture, the approach to it becomes very, very different indeed.

Does this make more sense?
Click to expand...
I guess I am reading 1117 differently than you are.

I see it as stating that the spirit guided the canon, *and *the Doctrine of the Faith.
 
The Holy Spirit is the one who determined the canon of Scripture. Just as the Holy Spirit worked through fallible men to write infallibly, so he worked through fallible men to infallibly decide which books belong in the canon.

There were three main qualities used by the early Church to decide which books belonged in the New Testament: apostolicity, catholicity, and orthodoxy. Did an apostle write the book or did it have apostolic authority backing it? Was it used in the majority of the churches founded by apostles? And did it conform to the traditions faithfully passed on by the apostles? The criteria of apostolic tradition was the determining factor."

Did a voice come down from above and say “This one, not that one, this one…”? No. The early Catholic Church was promised the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The canon was decided by men using the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e. intelligence, reasoning, facts, etc.
 
twopekinguys said:
I guess I am reading 1117 differently than you are.

I see it as stating that the spirit guided the canon, *and *the Doctrine of the Faith.
Click to expand...
I guess I need some straight on statement of it, equal to the statements emphasizing the level of scholarship and thought involved.

Y’see, the problem I have is that I too believe that the choices were guided by the spirit…the problem I have is that I don’t get the feeling that this part is emphasized–and sometimes not even acknowledged, by those who were actually involved. Credit is given to God in general…but not specifically, y’know?

I’m having major problems expressing myself here.
 
ricko said:
The Holy Spirit is the one who determined the canon of Scripture. Just as the Holy Spirit worked through fallible men to write infallibly, so he worked through fallible men to infallibly decide which books belong in the canon.

There were three main qualities used by the early Church to decide which books belonged in the New Testament: apostolicity, catholicity, and orthodoxy. Did an apostle write the book or did it have apostolic authority backing it? Was it used in the majority of the churches founded by apostles? And did it conform to the traditions faithfully passed on by the apostles? The criteria of apostolic tradition was the determining factor."

Did a voice come down from above and say “This one, not that one, this one…”? No. The early Catholic Church was promised the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The canon was decided by men using the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e. intelligence, reasoning, facts, etc.
Click to expand...
Ricko, THANK YOU!!!

You have articulated VERY succinctly the viewpoint I was referring to. “The canon was decided by men using the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e., intelligence, reasoning, fact, etc…” but there was no ‘voice’ from above saying 'this one, not that one…this one."

Facts, reasoning, intelligence, scholarship—those are NOT 'gifts of the spirit." they are very human gifts that everyone has; the Spirit can guide their use, but they are human tools. This is precisely the sort of thing I was gleaning from the writings of the early church fathers; they sifted through writings, using their intelligence, their reasoning, ‘fact,’…but did not allow for the possibility of direct divine guidance; no voice saying ‘here, not there.’

No tentative decisions brought to the Lord for final confirmation. No direct prayers about the matter. No expectation of a direct divine word on the choice. There is an acknowledgment of general guidance supporting the reasoning and the research, but no declaration of 'thus saith the Lord" going on.

…and I believe, when attempting to discern the difference between divine scripture and just really valuable spiritual writing, we really ought to have that.
 
Bataar said:
I’m having a friendly debate with some Mormon friends and the argument they kind of have me stumped on is their concept of continuing revelation. Obviously, as Catholics, we believe that everything we need for salvation has been revealed by the Deposit of Faith and that we don’t need ongoing revelation.

I mention the fact that Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would guide the church and they say that means the Holy Spirit would continue to provide revelation to the church and the fact that the Catholic church relies on councils to determine things proves that we don’t have the spirit revealing the truth to us.
Click to expand...
The Mormon understanding of revelation appears to be very odd. For example if a man dies and you move into town, a Mormon would think the only way you could learn what the man thought or believed would be through ‘revelation.’ Even though you could learn about him from neighbors, friends, and family a Mormon would think ‘revelation’ was involved.

Mormonism is based on a hatred of Catholicism, so I would not be surprised if you had a Mormon tell you Catholics having Ecumenical Councils proves the Holy Spirit is not with the Catholic Church. “Did you walk to school or carry your books?” makes sense to someone grasping to condemn the Catholic Church. Listening to some Mormon you get the feeling they knew all the ancient Patriarchs personally and could look into the minds and hearts and condemn them.
 
dianaiad said:
Ricko, THANK YOU!!!

You have articulated VERY succinctly the viewpoint I was referring to. “The canon was decided by men using the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e., intelligence, reasoning, fact, etc…” but there was no ‘voice’ from above saying 'this one, not that one…this one."

Facts, reasoning, intelligence, scholarship—those are NOT 'gifts of the spirit." they are very human gifts that everyone has; the Spirit can guide their use, but they are human tools. This is precisely the sort of thing I was gleaning from the writings of the early church fathers; they sifted through writings, using their intelligence, their reasoning, ‘fact,’…but did not allow for the possibility of direct divine guidance; no voice saying ‘here, not there.’

No tentative decisions brought to the Lord for final confirmation. No direct prayers about the matter. No expectation of a direct divine word on the choice. There is an acknowledgment of general guidance supporting the reasoning and the research, but no declaration of 'thus saith the Lord" going on.

…and I believe, when attempting to discern the difference between divine scripture and just really valuable spiritual writing, we really ought to have that.
Click to expand...
Who said that there no direct prayers about the matter? This is what we assume is happening at every Ecumenical Council, as they are guided by the Holy Spirit.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5691604&postcount=138
 
Stephen168 said:
The Mormon understanding of revelation appears to be very odd. For example if a man dies and you move into town, a Mormon would think the only way you could learn what the man thought or believed would be through ‘revelation.’ Even though you could learn about him from neighbors, friends, and family a Mormon would think ‘revelation’ was involved.

Mormonism is based on a hatred of Catholicism, so I would not be surprised if you had a Mormon tell you Catholics having Ecumenical Councils proves the Holy Spirit is not with the Catholic Church. “Did you walk to school or carry your books?” makes sense to someone grasping to condemn the Catholic Church. Listening to some Mormon you get the feeling they knew all the ancient Patriarchs personally and could look into the minds and hearts and condemn them.
Click to expand...
This seems to be the case (at least partly). It’s like if she KNOWS that no prayer was involved in Ecumenical Councils, because they didn’t talk about it. The interesting question is, what makes the Bible different from the Gnostic Gospels, for example? Is it because they prayed about it and God said “no”? Is that how God always works? Hinckley didn’t seem to think so. I wonder why the Bible is part of Mormon standard works, i.e. the King James Version. What was the process involved in that?
 
As usual, Mormons looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

No wonder they don’t accept the Bible as the infallible Word of God.
 
dianaiad said:
Ricko, THANK YOU!!!

You have articulated VERY succinctly the viewpoint I was referring to. “The canon was decided by men using the gifts of the Holy Spirit, i.e., intelligence, reasoning, fact, etc…” but there was no ‘voice’ from above saying 'this one, not that one…this one."

Facts, reasoning, intelligence, scholarship—those are NOT 'gifts of the spirit." they are very human gifts that everyone has; the Spirit can guide their use, but they are human tools. This is precisely the sort of thing I was gleaning from the writings of the early church fathers; they sifted through writings, using their intelligence, their reasoning, ‘fact,’…but did not allow for the possibility of direct divine guidance; no voice saying ‘here, not there.’

No tentative decisions brought to the Lord for final confirmation. No direct prayers about the matter. No expectation of a direct divine word on the choice. There is an acknowledgment of general guidance supporting the reasoning and the research, but **no declaration of 'thus saith the Lord" going on.

…and I believe, when attempting to discern the difference between divine scripture and just really valuable spiritual writing, we really ought to have that.**
Click to expand...
And I believe the Holy Spirit can prevail without having to say “thus saith the Lord”.

I think ParkerD said it best in this
ParkerD said:
Then I would say we differ profoundly on how the Holy Spirit provides (or withholds) divine inspiration to people seeking to know and apply God’s will in leadership roles they may have.
Click to expand...
I would also add that I don’t think you have an understanding of our view on the gifts of the Holy Spirit and how they have lead the Church in all things, or the respect we have for the natural(God given) gifts of intelligence and reasoning.
 
dianaiad said:
It is generally a mistake to assume something is happening when it is not mentioned.
Click to expand...
No assumption is needed. Prayers always open any meeting of true Christians whenever they are assembled to discuss anything concerning the Church, or any other matter

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem.
 
Javl said:
No assumption is needed. Prayers always open any meeting of true Christians whenever they are assembled to discuss anything concerning the Church, or any other matter

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem.
Click to expand...
I agree. And mormons are christian since they open their services with a prayer to Heavenly Father and close in the name of Jesus Christ. 🙂
 
Javl said:
No assumption is needed. Prayers always open any meeting of true Christians whenever they are assembled to discuss anything concerning the Church, or any other matter

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem.
Click to expand...
True, and all Ecumenical Councils include Mass of course (I was reading about this yesterday). I’m sure there are intercessory prayers invoking the Holy Spirit to guide the proceedings, since again, it is the Holy Spirit’s presence that makes all Ecumenical Councils doctrinally binding, for both Catholics and Orthodox (and at least some of the Councils for some Anglicans and Lutherans, etc).
 
ThuriferAcolyte said:
This seems to be the case (at least partly). It’s like if she KNOWS that no prayer was involved in Ecumenical Councils, because they didn’t talk about it.
Click to expand...
Yes, some of us were raised with the idea that ‘talk is cheap’ and results are the measure of your character. It seems to some Mormons that ‘talk is everything’ and results hardly matter. The Catholic Church canonized the New Testament while the Mormon Church canonized works of fiction believing they were non-fiction. And the logic applied: The Catholic Patriarchs used reason to determine the canon, so it could not be a revelation from God. “Did you walk to school or carry your books?”

The most amazing part of this current discussion, as a Christian, is to see someone claim to look into the hearts and minds of these ancient leaders of Christianity, like Athanasius of Alexandria, and know what they were thinking and how they felt. As Christians we may judge a man’s actions, but to have the arrogance to judge a man’s heart and mind is just amazing. Maybe this is common in Mormonism. And Athanasius is being judged from silence. Just amazing.
ThuriferAcolyte said:
I wonder why the Bible is part of Mormon standard works, i.e. the King James Version. What was the process involved in that?
Click to expand...
That is an interesting question.
 
Originally Posted by ThuriferAcolyte
I wonder why the Bible is part of Mormon standard works, i.e. the King James Version. What was the process involved in that
Click to expand...
When writing the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith copied much of the KJV of the bible
into it. This is one reason why the BOM supercedes the Bible. The Bible ( KJV version )
is used as a back-up, as far as the bible is correctly translated according to the LDS.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Javl said:
When writing the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith copied much of the KJV of the bible
into it. This is one reason why the BOM supercedes the Bible. The Bible ( KJV version )
is used as a back-up, as far as the bible is correctly translated according to the LDS.

Shalom Aleichem
Click to expand...
JAVL,
You have misunderstood in so many ways. The Book of Mormon includes some of the passages from Isaiah, that great Old Testament prophet, because Isaiah talked so much about the scattering and gathering of Israel (including the gathering in the last days) and the mission of the Savior on earth among men. Those passages were taken from the Brass Plates that the Nephites brought with them to the new world. The Savior also quoted from Malachi when He visited the Nephite/Lamanite righteous people. Of course the prophets in the new world would be excited about the Isaiah passages. Those promises were for their posterity, their descendants, and for all the house of Israel.

The Book of Mormon prophets emphasize that the Bible is the word of God, and that the Book of Mormon testifies and bears witness that the Bible is true. The LDS use the Bible just as much as they use the Book of Mormon. It is true they use the King James Translation. It is not as a “back-up”. It is front and center, just as Ezekiel prophesied that both texts or “sticks”, the stick of Joseph and the stick of Judah, would be one in the hands of the gathered house of Israel in the last days.
 
RebeccaJ said:
Every Catholic who professes the Faith handed down once and for all, is witnessing the reality of Jesus Christ. Especially those whose witness was written in their own blood.

We understand, know and believe, that Jesus is the Perfect Word of God. What else do you believe needs to be added to this Revelation?

The Holy Spirit was given to the world to guide people, and Christ’s Church, to the Perfect Word of God. This Revelation, Jesus Christ, never ceases, and never changes.
Click to expand...
RebeccaJ said:
The writings of St. Paul are canonized because that is where the Holy Spirit guided Christ’s Church. The same Church that preserved and taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ for centuries before there was a canon. The same Church that has been guided to teach that there is no further public Revelation than the Perfect Word of God.

The same Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit today. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are not limited. The Church has approved many people as being true prophets, including more than a few Popes. All you have to do is read one of the most controversial teachings of the Church, Humanae Vitae, to find an example of prophecy in the Catholic Church in modern times.

Modern prophecies do not add or remove anything from the Perfect Word of God. They bring us to Him, in the circumstances of our place and time, as it has been since Pentecost.

You did not answer, what is it that you think you have to add to the Perfect Word of God, revealed in Jesus Christ?
Click to expand...
And it still have not been answered.
 
ParkerD said:
The Book of Mormon prophets emphasize that the Bible is the word of God, and that the Book of Mormon testifies and bears witness that the Bible is true.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church is the witness that the New Testament is true. Without the Catholic Church there would be no New Testament. The Book of Mormon is a work of fiction which has been proven not to be what Joseph Smith claimed it to be.
 
Javl said:
No assumption is needed. Prayers always open any meeting of true Christians whenever they are assembled to discuss anything concerning the Church, or any other matter

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem.
Click to expand...
Here’s the problem I have. It’s not that I don’t believe that the Holy Spirit was not present in those meetings. Oddly enough, I do.

It’s that the men who were actually doing the work haven’t given Him the credit. It is THEY who have emphasized scholarship, research, debate, learning and intelligence. It reminds me of Moses and the rock, frankly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top