Hey, how does the Mormon theology about Jesus Christ being the Creator in Genesis fit into that? (They tried to teach me this in LDS Sunday school, and I just couldn’t grasp it.) We can start a new thread if you like, all this is waaaaay off topic anyway.
Not so, or at least not the way Mormons see it. He was not “once” a man, because that implies time. He created time. It is a paradox like your paradoxes I guess. How could he be anything “before” there was time?
Thanks.
When you get back, let’s talk.
God made us so we could be with Him. He delights in us. I don’t have any childhood thing memorized so I don’t know how to complete the thing you’re trying to remember. As to what He was doing before that, you’ll have to ask Him the next time you see Him.
Well Ok with me either way But it’s also catholic theology - short on time, but read John 1- in the beginning was the word and all was created through the word. Not complicated at all. Eloheim is a plural because there were more than one “creators” in the sense that it was the Father’s plan executed by the son – in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word WAS God. Very consistent to mormons. gotta go
Someone correct me but I think this is part of what explains the oneness of the Catholic Trinity. But yeah, another thread.
Yes, the Gospel of John was written the way it was to definitively set forth the nature of God. If I remember correctly, the opening lines of John also serve to dispel the Gnostic heresy, but that study was a very long time ago for me. It does define the Catholic Trinity (and everyone else’s trinity, except the Mormon trinity).
No, Rather, that human beings who are faithful members of the Church collectively have a spiritual “sixth sense” that aligns them with the teachings of the Church, and that by looking at faithful Catholics world wide and down through the ages, one can perceive a pattern emerging that shows what the Church means to be teaching.
What I’m getting at, and you may agree with this, is that the CC is extremely cautious, and oftentimes slow, at defining dogma. She believes, as all Catholics should, that she’s been given the responsibility of handing on Gods revelation correctly and that she must do so with great care and humility. So, the fact that Limbo never became dogma while the Church held a tentative acceptance of it as a quasi-satisfactory means of addressing a concern that people had is an exercise of this caution. Sensus fidelium can come into play when, as we’ve come to understand the nature and will of God better over the centuries, the faithful, lay and clergy, begin to question whether this idea really is “Catholic”. I believe there’s a reason why the HS has never allowed this belief to become dogma-and that He never will-maybe I’m wrong.
Not at all, the sensus fidelium is simply the gift of faith itself-the sheep recognizing the Shepard’s voice by the God given “radar” which attunes itself to the truth when heard. God doesn’t leave us without the help of His grace to believe the teachings the Church proposes or understand her way of thinking.
While I see your point about using sarcasm, (and I have to admit to doing it myself) I think it’s unreasonable to come out swinging with sarcasm and then call those who respond to it negatively as “supposed Christians” and say they lack charity.
I agree. I love it!! Fantastic to devote upon, pray, and ponder.
I doubt if Mormons have turned over any new stones. You should read Augustine for one-He actually *may *have succeeded in asking a few too many questions.
But I happen to love him.I second the motion.I hate to usurp the moderator’s role here but the last few posts have veered away from OP and gone fishing into Mormon territory.
Due to chumming?I hate to usurp the moderator’s role here but the last few posts have veered away from OP and gone fishing into Mormon territory.
Don’t get me wrong- I don’t mean to imply that Mormons don’t believe that God is an exalted man who is like us and has a body like ours the same way that Jesus has a body like ours. And that raises the question of how he got that body. But it is all conjecture that does not for a moment take away from his greatness. Perhaps there are multiple eternities and multiple universes – I don’t know – no one does. But having a body takes away nothing from the greatness of Christ, nor does it from his father.God made us so we could be with Him. He delights in us. I don’t have any childhood thing memorized so I don’t know how to complete the thing you’re trying to remember. As to what He was doing before that, you’ll have to ask Him the next time you see Him.
Your description of the Mormon God is at variance with how it has been explained to me. I have always been told that the Mormon God is an exalted man and that Mormons, following Him, can be exalted. I have even heard missionaries discuss, in all seriousness, their concern that to become a God they will need to go through crucifixion on their own planet.
Even if I got it wrong, or someone else explained it to me incorrectly, about God/Heavenly Father, I still find the idea of eternal progression to be an appeal to human vanity. I also believe that this notion figures into the idea that Heavenly Father has a body of flesh and bone ~ it doesn’t make sense that we can become gods if we are different from God in that way, so PRESTO ~ give God a body and that “mystery” is SOLVED. My assessment is that Joseph Smith was just a tad too full of himself in coming up with this one.
Well the reality is that we sort of believe the same thing. God will “always” be my God, and I will never ever in any universe be his equal. This is the nature of eternal progression. He will always be the father of my spirit, and I will always be his child and he will always be infinitely greater. He will always be progressing and if we live to be worthy of such an incredible blessing, so will we always be progressing.
My apologies for being off topic.
Fascinating stuff and not unlike certain Mormon ideas as well. We believe that any member can ask God about any doctrine and get his own revelation about the truth of any re-interpretation or change in leadership for example. The notion of a sixth sense is also something that parallels our beliefs – it is what we call a “testimony”. Really we just call this all “ongoing revelation”. There is a repository of truth we all can tap into and receive answers from.No, Rather, that human beings who are faithful members of the Church collectively have a spiritual “sixth sense” that aligns them with the teachings of the Church, and that by looking at faithful Catholics world wide and down through the ages, one can perceive a pattern emerging that shows what the Church means to be teaching.
When the Pope comes out with “new” teachings, like the canon of the Scriptures, or the various different teachings about Mary, the faithful Catholic who is in touch with the sensus fidelium doesn’t think, “Oh, something else to memorize,” but rather, “What took the Pope so long to figure that easy one out? My grandma knew that stuff when she was a child.”
Obviously, doctrine is not based on the sensus fidelium alone - but it is one of the tests by which a doctrine is tested. If it fails to be recognizable to the majority - and I mean the majority - not only the vocal minority, or only those who are literate - but when the Peruvian cattle herder, the Italian housewife, the English school child, and the French shepherd together say, “Well, yeah, that’s a statement of the obvious, isn’t it?” when the Pope proposes something for belief, then you know it’s not an idea that is unknown to the Church at large. But if they all go “Huh?!” then you know it’s a dud, and it doesn’t make it as a required belief for Catholics.