Is it possible to metaphorize Joseph Smith's beliefs and visions?
- Thread starter Francisco_Fernando
- Start date
po18guy
Well-known member
The Church today, to be true, must substantially be the Church of the first century. All forms of "Protestantism" have vectored off from the original church, in style and substance. The physical presence of Christ is gone. Most of the sacraments are gone. Sacramentals are gone. Devotions are gone. The re-presentation of the sacrifice is gone. It has devolved into nothing more than strongly held ideas, thus an ideology.
Excuse me, but the Church has entered the third millennium, and God is not only what God has always been – God is also always new. Remembering the way shows that we are not senile – but that we are now older children.
And I fear that your “argument” here is an argument of romantic rebels. Why do I say that? For a very simple reason: we still know almost nothing about the Christians of the first century. They were an underground church. I would not say that we are an underground church today. Although in some parts of the world we still have to be.
As far as I know, the argument “Back to the roots of the first century” is a typically Protestant argument.
Maranatha.
?
?
?
?
That is a typical argument used by atheist right-wing extremists and left-wing extremists. If I remember correctly, I explained very clearly somewhere here why the Christian religion is not an ideology. And I am sure that if you take the time to think about it, you will realize for yourself that the Christian religion in general cannot be an ideology.
I wish you a nice Advent now. I hope the journey to Bethlehem will not be as challenging this year as it has often been in the past. But may God guide us all - his will be done. Well, actually, they say you shouldn't even want God's will. May he guide us all on the right path.
Not so the Lutherans, for example. If you see Lutherans as Protestants, then this view of the world is wrong from your position. The problem is that the church is broken and not enough people want to heal these wounds. In fact, there is only one God, one truth, one church. But far too many people think that this is a question of right or wrong and that whoever wins is right. But right and wrong are far from the same as winning and losing. Right and wrong are a question of understanding.
I have been largely staying out of this discussion, as there is really nothing I can add to it, but to assert, as you seem to be doing, that Lutherans are not Protestants, is something I have never heard before. Could you elaborate on why you see them as not being Protestants, and further, if they are not, then how exactly would one define a "Protestant"?
This said, from a purely liturgical and architectural standpoint, I see more "Catholic" in some Lutheran churches, than I do in Catholic ones.
Lutherans are Protestants – they profess the Christian faith, so their main structure is not a closed ideology. In the case of Lutherans and Catholics, the problem is not the Christian faith, but questions of organization but also prejudices. Example: Many people around the world are against the Catholic Church without really knowing anything about it. Incidentally, all Christian churches are catholic and based on the Gospels.
And here is an example of one of the “problems”: When I was very young, I heard the Lutheran version of the Apostles' Creed for the first time in my life, in which “the holy Catholic Church...” was replaced with “the holy Christian Church...”. I was ashamed that we had changed this text. Many years later, I found out that we hadn't changed the text – they had changed it because of their anti-Catholic stance.
Last edited:
I was just going by your comment "If you see Lutherans as Protestants...".
As a kind of side note, I'd be interested to know how you define "the Christian faith". The points on which Catholics, Orthodox, and mainline Protestants all agree?
That begins to sound like CS Lewis's "mere Christianity". In the meantime, such things as papal primacy, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, Marian devotion and seeking of her intercession, purgatory, and so on, either go out the window entirely, or are seen as not essential but optional, as free opinions. Some Christian believers accept these things and some don't. Do they become less important because there is no unanimity?
As a kind of side note, I'd be interested to know how you define "the Christian faith". The points on which Catholics, Orthodox, and mainline Protestants all agree?
That begins to sound like CS Lewis's "mere Christianity". In the meantime, such things as papal primacy, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, Marian devotion and seeking of her intercession, purgatory, and so on, either go out the window entirely, or are seen as not essential but optional, as free opinions. Some Christian believers accept these things and some don't. Do they become less important because there is no unanimity?
Really?
Seems to me the majority of the New Testament took place at that time.
We have the Didache, as well as many other writings.
There is a lot of information there. One just has to go to Catholic sources to get it.
-----
Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”
-----
Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Jesus the Christ
Sorry. I wasn't talking about our own sources. I was thinking about historical science. For example, I suspect – but I don't know – that when the temple was destroyed around 70 BC and all the Jews had to flee, they received help from Christians throughout the Roman Empire. That's what I mean by underground church, for example.
There is much we do not know – especially what was good. Good deeds are as invisible as God himself.
Are you asserting here that there is some kind of "super-Christianity" that is over and above the Catholic Faith, which bridges the various divisions between Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants, and is the real "bottom line"?
That concept would play right into the hands of those who deny things that the Catholic Church teaches, and that no one else does, at least not in the plenitude with which she teaches them, as if to tell Catholics (and even Orthodox), "oh, all that extra stuff you believe in, it's not central to the Christian message".
po18guy
Well-known member
Joseph Smith Distilled: Be your own God and have lots of babes.
There is no separation between Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians – it's that simple. One God, one truth, one church. The strange thing is that in most cases, real-life Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians have no problem with each other. For example, I remember a special service for married Protestant Christians here nearby years ago. Because some of the people crossed themselves, the priest asked, “May I ask which of you are Catholic?” About a third of the people raised their hands.
It is a shame that we cannot agree – and as I said, that is not the fault of the truth, which is God. It is the fault of all of us and our problem. Another example: I have heard that the atheist Donald Trump (“divide et impera”) is currently splitting the Catholic Church in the US into two parts. If that is the case, how can it be? This man has absolutely nothing to do with the Christian religion.
It sounds like you are claiming there is no one true church.
Is that your intention?
Or is it your intention to highlight that everyone is a child of God?
There is a critical distinction to be made here.
Whether the various Christian believers have no problem with one another's communions on a personal level is beside the point. There is, indeed, one God, and one truth, as well as one Church, the Catholic Church. Orthodox and Protestants may be in a kind of imperfect communion with it, the Orthodox divided from it by schism, and the Protestants divided from it by material heresy, but the fact remains, there is only one true Church, and it is the Catholic Church. There is no one "super-church" comprised of all Christians of which the Catholic Church is only a part. Protestants may assert this (Orthodox certainly don't), but that doesn't make it true.
No. You don't understand or don't want to understand what I've said here. I suspect you're used to thinking that the truth is what most people think. But it's not. Even all people together can be wrong. The truth is independent of us. Perhaps it's good to think about what I heard yesterday for the first time in my life. I didn't know that before. Now I “know better” what I may have already ‘known’ the day before yesterday in a more non-verbal way. Father Josef Wallner said a very simple, fascinating sentence on television: “The dogma of all dogmas is love. God is love.”
Last edited:
I suspect I do. And you wisely have chosen not to double down on the statement.
I have moved the posts regarding Trump's and Putin's alleged atheism to their own thread.
Let's keep the discussion factual, and avoid making allegations about someone's internal forum that, in the end, only that person knows. Such allegations are mere speculation.
Let's keep the discussion factual, and avoid making allegations about someone's internal forum that, in the end, only that person knows. Such allegations are mere speculation.