https://www.quora.com/What-do-Protestants-and-Catholics-think-of-Mormons/answer/James-Hough-1

  • Thread starter Thread starter lokisuperfan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So the 3 definitions are as follows:

a) that relationship which God was pleased to establish between himself and the Israelites in preference to all other nations

b) the nature and condition of the true disciples in Christ, who by receiving the Spirit of God in their souls became sons of God

c) the blessed state looked forward to in the future life after the visible return of Christ from heaven

I’m guessing the LDS version of the bible is translating it as c) and the Catholic version is translating it as b)
 
The definition is

Definition
1. adoption, adoption as sons
  1. that relationship which God was pleased to establish between himself and the Israelites in preference to all other nations
  2. the nature and condition of the true disciples in Christ, who by receiving the Spirit of God into their souls become sons of God
  3. the blessed state looked for in the future life after the visible return of Christ from heaven
It’s not supposed to mean “election”
 
Last edited:
IHi TOm - here are several edited examples of LDS teaching on the subject of Jesus and Lucifer as brothers:

According to LDS doctrine, the two oldest sons of God were Jesus and Lucifer. Lucifer convinced one-third of his brothers and sisters to join him in rebellion and were expelled from Heaven. The other two-thirds became the humans born on our earth. This doctrine is mainly drawn from Joseph Smith’s revelations in the Book of Abraham and the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price .
——
This is discussed in the current LDS Sunday School manual for children ages 8-11:
  1. In the premortal life we were spirit children and lived with our heavenly parents (Hebrews 12:9).
  2. Jesus was the firstborn spirit child of Heavenly Father (D&C 93:21) and is the older brother of our spirits.
  3. Lucifer, who became Satan, was also a spirit child of Heavenly Father.
    ——-
    This doctrine was further explained in the June 1986 LDS magazine Ensign . The question was asked “How can Jesus and Lucifer be spirit brothers when their characters and purposes are so utterly opposed?” Jess L. Christensen, Institute of Religion director at Utah State University, Logan, Utah, responded:
On first hearing, the doctrine that Lucifer and our Lord, Jesus Christ, are brothers may seem surprising to some — especially to those unacquainted with latter-day revelations. But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers. Jesus Christ was with the Father from the beginning. Lucifer, too, was an angel who was in authority in the presence of God, a son of the morning. Both Jesus and Lucifer were strong leaders with great knowledge and influence. But as the Firstborn of the Father, Jesus was Lucifer’s older brother.
. (“I Have a Question,” Ensign, June 1986)
————
Apostle John A. Widtsoe explained:

The story of Lucifer is the most terrible example of such apostasy. … He pitted his own plan and will against the purposes of God. He strove to gain the birthright of his Elder Brother, Jesus the Christ. When his proposition was rejected, he forsook all that he had gained, … He was no longer Lucifer, bearer of truth, who walked in light, but Satan, teacher of untruth, who slunk in darkness. He became the enemy of God and of all who try to walk according to the Lord’s commandments. One-third of the spirits present in that vast assembly supported Satan and became enemies of the truth that they had formerly cherished. With him these rebellious spirits lost their fellowship with the valiant sons of God. ( Evidences and Reconciliations , p. 209)
———-
Much more can be found here:

http://utlm.org/onlineresources/ldsteachingonlucifer.htm
 
Yes, @SunshineGrandma, this is true. LDS do believe that Lucifer and Jesus are brothers. But as I said before in my previous post, siblings can be quite different. My sister and I, for example, are more different than any two siblings I’ve ever met. My sister is overtly cruel, atheistic, and makes an active effort to sin because she enjoys hurting other people’s feelings. I, on the other hand, am respectful (not always, I’ll admit, but I try to be…she doesn’t even make an effort), religious, and I go out of my way to help people whenever I can. We never get along, but I respect her views and beliefs, even though I can’t say the same for her feelings toward mine. I am the older of the two of us, so one could say we give a pretty good example of Jesus and Lucifer (not to compare myself to Jesus or my sister to the devil, but I do believe this might help you to understand 🙂
 
lokisuperfan said:
So the 3 definitions are as follows:

a) that relationship which God was pleased to establish between himself and the Israelites in preference to all other nations

b) the nature and condition of the true disciples in Christ, who by receiving the Spirit of God in their souls became sons of God

c) the blessed state looked forward to in the future life after the visible return of Christ from heaven

I’m guessing the LDS version of the bible is translating it as c) and the Catholic version is translating it as b)
Click to expand...
It is a compound of two words. One means ‘sons’ and the other means “to set/place/set/fix establish” which has been translated to mean adoption in this case.

As AngelaMarie said its definition is “adoption as sons.”

It seems to me the difference between A, B & C is how its used in the Bible not Mormon vs Catholic. Galatians 4:5, Romans 8:23, Ephesians 1:5 seem like it happens in the future. Roman 8:15 seems like it is in the present. Romans 9:4 is referencing the Israelites.

What is biblical is that Christ is the only begotten son, while we become sons by adoption. Christ was born God; the incarnation. Humans will never be God only adopted by him.
 
So when a Mormon tells you the the early church had no limits on what it meant to become god, we can see that isn’t true.

God the Father is the uncreated creator (Genesis 1:3, Psalm 33:6, Psalm 33:9, 2 Maccabees 7:28) who created from his Word. This is the Judeo-Christian God.

The Mormon god is a creation, a man. The Mormon god lived in a world created by someone/something else. The Mormon god is not found in the bible.

God’s Word became flesh (John 1:1-14). Jesus Christ, the Word, the Son, was the only begotten son of the Father (John 3:16); he was God when he was born. He did not become God by living a sinless life. We partake in the divine nature (2Peter3:4) by adoption (Galatians 4:5, Romans 8:23, Ephesians 1:5).

The biblical limit to becoming a god is that we might become adopted sons of God, we don’t become the uncreated creator. The other biblical limit is that there is only one God. If we become God, that would mean there are millions of Gods. The rational limit to becoming God is that there can only be one uncreated creator of all things, and the Bible agrees.

So when Joseph Smith said he gazed in the heavens and saw something contrary to biblical Christianity, he was not looking at the rational Judeo-Christian God. When I was 14 and my Mormon friends were telling me the story of the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, I had to reject it because I knew the objective claims of Joseph Smith were false, therefore I could not believe his subjective claims. Joseph Smith is the founder of the Latter-Day-Saint movement. I believe if his claims are false, the whole movement is false.
 
I think it is important to remember that the original poster is 14 and not get caught up in circular arguments and quoting out of context.
I have some basic questions.
The translations of the Bible are all in the contemporary language of the day. Why is the Book of Mormon which was written at about the same time as Tom Sawyer in King James English?
What is the eternal fate of an unmarried woman?
 
Yes according to Mormonism.
Another question why can’t we call them Mormons anymore?
 
Mi_Rose said:
I think it is important to remember that the original poster is 14 and not get caught up in circular arguments and quoting out of context.
Click to expand...
Hopefully she will have good mentors in her real life that can walk with her as the years pass.
 
Mi_Rose said:
Yes according to Mormonism.
Click to expand...
According to Mormon theology, if a woman lives a good life and keeps her covenants, if she does not marry in this life, she will have the opportunity to be sealed to a righteous man in the next life, thus guaranteeing her exaltation.

In Mormonism, a person, male or female, can’t receive the highest level of the celestial kingdom alone. A person has to be “sealed” to a husband/wife
 
Mi_Rose said:
Yes according to Mormonism.
Click to expand...
Mormons believe that a woman, who by no fault or choice of her own, who is unable to marry in this life but remains faithful to her covenants, will be entitled to all the blessings of those who did marry. Basically, God will fix all of that and she will be married to someone in the next life and be able to be a goddess and have spirit children with her god husband. The same can be said of others who, by no fault of their own, were unable to marry in this life. That would include those who were handicapped or disabled in some way, died before the appropriate age, or for whatever reason, marriage wasn’t in the cards for them.
Mi_Rose said:
Another question why can’t we call them Mormons anymore?
Click to expand...
Who says we can’t? I still call them Mormons or Mormonites. Since they believe in a different Christ than I believe in, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to invoke my Savior’s name when referring to their church. It just feels wrong to me.
 
Last edited:
I have in a storage box that I can’t access at this time, a copy of a young woman’s manual from about three years ago.
It teaches that women who do not marry will become servants in the next life.
 
SunshineGrandma said:
It teaches that women who do not marry will become servants in the next life.
Click to expand...
I joined the Mormon church when I was 15, so part of the young women’s program. A Mia Maid to be exact.

We were never taught that when I was in young women’s. I would be curious to know exactly what it says. I have never, ever heard that as a Mormon, nor did any GA ever taught that when I was a Mormon.
 
I still don’t know why the Book of Mormon is written in King James English.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top