Is Mormonism Christian ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Pick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Arandur said:
Atemporal existence? Now you’re getting somewhere. Thought, imagination, soul; we do not know that these are bound by time. Ideas don’t seem to be. As for what can be conceived of the human mind, that really gets deep, into the reality of what it means to be created in the image and likeness of God. For our very ability to imagine things that we have not observed and indeed, that run contrary to our observations, is an act of creation that is godlike in a sense. I think it’s obvious that the human mind can conceive of things that, based on our experience, are impossible and do not exist. That we have even conceived of the possibility of “infinity” or “outside time” shows that we are not limited by our frame of reference. We can conceive of many things, even paradoxes; the degree of our understanding, however, may be limited. Thus why God is ultimately a mystery, whether you like that idea or not :).
Click to expand...
I think you are right on the money. Right on the MONEY. We need to talk more about this. We participate in his creation through ideas. I totally agree. 100%.

(If you think I agree, you’d be right) 😉
 
Arandur said:
Ah, but in the sense that we define “public revelation,” the Church did not decide that it was public revelation! In fact, the Church believes that it cannot truly declare something “public revelation” (using its own narrow definition of that, meaning essentially “correcting” or “adding necessarily” to Christ’s Revelation). The Church does not tell its members that we should believe in the visions of the children of Fatima. It says that it appears they were genuine, truthful, private revelations, but that Catholics need not accept them.

Merely declaring a private revelation to be genuine does not make it “public” by our definition; neither does it make “private” revelation “public” the moment someone else finds out about it.

In the sense of necessary revelation, they did not. In the sense of revelation that is helpful for many to hear, that strengthens the faith of many or guides many as God wishes to guide them, then yes, that’s what it was. It was not necessary for all, though.
Click to expand...
Small difference with Mormonism, not much. Laptop battery low gotta go. Mormons don’t have to accept anything the church teaches. If you don’t agree, you can leave or stay depending on how serious your disagreement is. Small stuff no big deal. Big stuff – could be “apostasy” with the church and could mean excommunication. But why stay with a church you don’t agree with?

I know you define “public” differently than we do, but that is your system. There are differences but practically speaking not much
 
jean8 said:
bill,
No, Mormons are not christians!
They have some very strange beliefs that are not found in the Holy Bible. The Mormon chrurch has written their own bible.
For a detailed informational web site on this cult you may want to visit. www.letusreason.org

God bless,
jean8
Click to expand...
THANK YOU for the info i knew that jw and the mormons are, a ex mormon told me about her ex church being a cult the mormon church
 
1holycatholic said:
I don’t dispute that people make gods out of avarice etc…

Has it ever occurred to you that “strange gods” means “strange gods”???

Mormons believe in many gods. There is only one God, all others are strange gods.
Click to expand...
The problem is I think, you are saying that I am making of the same God we both know a strange god, for only in your view is He not strange.

Outside the Catholic church, the same God can be a strange god?

Peace>>>AJ
 
mfbukowski said:
I think you are right on the money. Right on the MONEY. We need to talk more about this. We participate in his creation through ideas. I totally agree. 100%.

(If you think I agree, you’d be right) 😉
Click to expand...
mfb, what Arandur has presented echoes a book I’ve just begun reading that you might enjoy: The Divine Family: The Trinity and Our Life in God, by Fr. William K. McDonough.

catalog.americancatholic.org/product.aspx?prodID=T16711
 
Interesting though, no convictions

My sources say he was arrested for being a disorderly person and an impostor in 1826 and was found guilty but didn’t serve any jail time.
 
Here’s the way to find out the answer to this question.

Mormons do you believe there is only One God?

Do you believe the Father was always God?

Do you believe the Son was always God?

Do you believe the Holy Ghost was always God?

Do you think they were equal to each other?

Do you believe they are three united persons?
 
BartBurk said:
Here’s the way to find out the answer to this question.

Mormons do you believe there is only One God?

Do you believe the Father was always God?

Do you believe the Son was always God?

Do you believe the Holy Ghost was always God?

Do you think they were equal to each other?

Do you believe they are three united persons?
Click to expand...
yes to all.
 
mfbukowski said:
Straight up? Sure, let’s do it. If not here then elsewhere.

I have no problem with any of this discussion. I think it is fascinating. I actually have no problem with the cosmological argument (I think at this moment depending on which one we are talking about) but I really believe that truth comes out of discussion. When someone throws a bunch of terms at me and doesn’t define them, I have no clue what they are talking about. I am VERY into defining terms or there is no communication. Lingusitic meaning is in the CONTEXT of a discussion. People think that language is a trivial issue, but the modern philosophers often come from the perspective that it is the ONLY problem. One of the reasons I left academic philosophy was that I didn’t want to spend the rest of my life deconstructing language – I wanted to practice philo sophia-- love of wisdom. But those language guys are perfectly right that you have to get your terms clear. Extremely clear especially in all this very abstract stuff. Look how long it took us to figure out what “revelation” meant to both of us. One word.

I just play with 1holycatholic because he posts 25 words and I am supposed to know exactly what context he is coming from, and I want to show him (or her) that there just might be other ways of looking at the universe that he/she had not considered

I object mostly to 1holycatholics manner not what he says.

I would really like to get into depth on some of the issues you raise here, but time is an issue.

I could probably write an essay about every line in this post. But I won’t. It’s good stuff and bears discussion.

But in my defense insofar as it is necessary, read that first quote you made carefully and you will see I am making the same point. I am objecting to his 800 year old CONTEXT which is not to be taken seriously, not the argument itself. His use of 800 year old jargon imo clouds the issues and makes them impossible to understand in a modern context today. If we use those terms, we will get hung up on them and fall into error just like a needle in a record. They are so much an unchallenged part of our thinking that everyone accepts those arguments without even thinking about what they mean. That is my real objection.
Click to expand...
You are descending into the maelstrom of epistemological confusion in order to avoid an unpleasant ontological truth. Mormon theology is rampant with logical contradictions.

Further, how you can take this:
"Arandur:
Since I had never heard of a major objection to the Cosmological Argument, I dropped by Wikipedia for a start. Seems the folks there (who love to correct and add to controversial issues and philosophical arguments) don’t seem to think that the argument has been “disproven” or even objected to by a majority.
Click to expand...
and get this:
mfbukowski said:
The mere existence of a wikipedia page that everyone seems to agree on proves my point!
Click to expand...
Is truly a mystery. :hypno:
 
mfbukowski said:
yes to all.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it is ‘yes’ to all.

though to be honest, one has to understand the part about 'God created the Universe" to understand the ‘why’ something that seems contrary to our beliefs really—isn’t.
 
BartBurk said:
Then I would suggest you are probably Christian. Unfortunately, many Mormons would have answered no to almost all of those questions.
Click to expand...
Actually…most Mormons would have answered “yes” AND “no” to almost all of those questions.😉

,and they wouldn’t be one bit disingenuous or dodgy in doing so, either!
 
truthsilence said:
Great! So then, from all Eternity, is,

God: Creature (created), or Creator?

Jesus Christ: Creature (created), or Creator?

Man: Creature (created), or Creator?
Click to expand...
Ah…

How to put this in the simplest terms; we do not believe in creation ex hihilo.

That’s what you would call a heresy in and of itself, but if you look at the rest of our doctrine in that light, it might make more internal sense.
 
dianaiad said:
Ah…

How to put this in the simplest terms; we do not believe in creation ex hihilo.

That’s what you would call a heresy in and of itself, but if you look at the rest of our doctrine in that light, it might make more internal sense.
Click to expand...
What created God?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top