LDS - "Begotten in the flesh"

[zaffiroborant]

kimg, can you explain the notion of “ex Cathedra” to me? I’ve been told it basically means your Pope gets to opine about things he wants to opine about, without it being binding doctrine on the Catholic church.

As I said before in this thread, mormons don’t use the phrase “ex Cathedra”, but we most certainly have the notion that fallen, sinful, error prone human beings don’t stop being human just because God calls them to an office. They can still be right or wrong about things, even though God occasionally calls on them to prophecy. Think of all the failings of Old Testament prophets - everything from selling prophecies for money, to denying God, to lying - it’s a fascinating to read scriptures about what some of those guys said and did when not

The Journal of Discourses is neither doctrine nor scripture. And odd as it sounds, McConkie’s book “mormon doctrine” isn’t doctrine either. It’s sort of an embarrassing chapter in our history. McConkie basically published his book without telling anyone, and the brethren went through and found errors on almost every page.

So again,

• Just because a church leader says it, doesn’t mean I believe it.
• If you wish to claim there’s something wrong with a Mormon who doesn’t believe and support everything his leaders say, then you and I can go off and read what Old Testament prophets said and did, and I’ll ask you to believe and support them.
• Many Mormons have believed and taught ‘God had sex with Mary’ over the decades. I don’t find evidence in the scriptures to support the notion.
• RebeccaJ pointed out a short part in the Catholic’s CCC claiming “without seed”. I don’t find evidence in the scriptures to support the notion either.
• I don’t really care how Christ was conceived. He was born of a virgin, and is my Savior and Redeemer. I’m content with that.

In your view God the Father has a physical body and Jesus His literal son, logically that means Jesus is the product of Mary’s egg and the Father’s sperm. That’s what a literal offspring is or begotten in the flesh, the product of the combination of egg and sperm.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Thank you Rebecca. Except, I’m still confused. Sometimes I think I believe the Trinity on faith and then I doubt. Not sure I’ll make it into the church for Easter Vigil…again. I suppose one has to believe in revelation since reasoning doesn’t seem to work for me in this case.

What confuses me is that throughout the Bible they speak of this person begat so and so…etc. Begotten is also used in other instances in which it is meant as procreation.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending my past beliefs.The Catholic Church has been the most healing of places for me. That is saying something! I was once hard core Utah Mormon.

One more thing to add. I was told that Mary was still a virgin. She wasn’t with a man, they say. Thus, they redefine what virgin means. It is a extremely blasphemous belief.

This entry at Bible.org is a good read. bible.org/seriespage/son-god-begotten-not-made

Also, the idea/belief that Jesus is a demigod is not found in the apostolic faith. It is a heresy of Arianism. A pagan belief that is never described in the Bible, in any writings of the Church fathers, or in the faith that has been handed on.

Today, this heresy is found among modern gnostics, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses.

The apostolic faith has always held firmly to the understanding that Jesus is fully God and fully human.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Forgive me - I didn’t mean to poo-poo the CCC. I know little about it, where it came from, but I do know it’s important to Catholics.

I’m hardly an expert on why that small quote is there, but it seems at first glance that whatever reasoning got it there, didn’t come from the actual scriptural account. “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee” = scripture. And from where I’m standing, if your reasoning brings you to the conclusion that seed either was or was not involved, your reasoning has added something that isn’t contained in scripture.

One quote? We view the Bible it it’s entirety. And as LW7 said, we are not sola scriptura.

But then again, I haven’t read the reasoning behind that part of the CCC. Perhaps it cites additional scriptural justification of which I’m unaware. Wouldn’t be the first time - I’m hardly a scriptorian.

Well, then, read up.

One thing I find admirable about Catholicism, is Catholics tend to be pretty darn unapologetic when their doctrines offend someone. How offensive a particular thing is or isn’t to this or that culture, shouldn’t impact what’s true or what’s false. Right?

Truth is not subjective. The object of our truth is a Person, Jesus Christ, who is our God. That is the Christian faith. The offense is one of a defaming the God who we worship, and the dignity with which we believe all humans are made. In the image of our God. If your societal ideal is the destruction of these things, you can hardly expect Christians to call that truth.

But in the ‘mormons believe God had sex with Mary’ deal, I’m hard-pressed to find the notion enshrined in doctrine. It sure isn’t enshrined in scripture.

Yet you continually defend this notion, rather than rejecting it entirely as the lie that it is.

 

[kimg901]

kimg, can you explain the notion of “ex Cathedra” to me? I’ve been told it basically means your Pope gets to opine about things he wants to opine about, without it being binding doctrine on the Catholic church.

As I said before in this thread, mormons don’t use the phrase “ex Cathedra”, but we most certainly have the notion that fallen, sinful, error prone human beings don’t stop being human just because God calls them to an office. They can still be right or wrong about things, even though God occasionally calls on them to prophecy. Think of all the failings of Old Testament prophets - everything from selling prophecies for money, to denying God, to lying - it’s a fascinating to read scriptures about what some of those guys said and did when not

The Journal of Discourses is neither doctrine nor scripture.So what is the J.o.D? And odd as it sounds, McConkie’s book “mormon doctrine” isn’t doctrine either. It’s sort of an embarrassing chapter in our history. McConkie basically published his book without telling anyone, and the brethren went through and found errors on almost every page.

So again,

• Just because a church leader says it, doesn’t mean I believe it.
  So you don’t believe in what Smith said?
• If you wish to claim there’s something wrong with a Mormon who doesn’t believe and support everything his leaders say, then you and I can go off and read what Old Testament prophets said and did, and I’ll ask you to believe and support them.
  Example(s) please.
• Many Mormons have believed and taught ‘God had sex with Mary’ over the decades. I don’t find evidence in the scriptures to support the notion.
  As you said, it was taught. Where did it come from?
• RebeccaJ pointed out a short part in the Catholic’s CCC claiming “without seed”. I don’t find evidence in the scriptures to support the notion either.
  ***True. No evidence in Scripture. But that’s why we believe in God and His Infinite power to make things happen beyond our understanding. ***
• I don’t really care how Christ was conceived. He was born of a virgin, and is my Savior and Redeemer. I’m content with that.What Christ? Christ that was born of a father that had a father and so on? Im sorry but my Christ and your Christ are 2 different people. My Christ wouldn’t send His Apostles to die if He knew He was going to change His mind later and lead the 1 billion Catholics to follow astray.

Sorry, I forgot that Mormon Doctrine was not doctrine but 1 man speaking.