LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[flyonthewall]

On the contrary it means I have faith, in the Teaching Church Christ instituted.

I did not say or imply you did not have faith…I am sure you do.

The big difference is you make God in your image, whereas the opposite is commanded.

We simply we are made in God’s image.

It behoves all of us to remember being like is not an exactitude. This is what Satan thought when he told God he would not serve ! He the liar and the father of lies’ (John 8:44). Thought he was like unto God.

Being “as one of us” is not an exactitude but it is a foundation on which we build with the Lord’s help

Seeking God is wisdom !

All wisdom does come from God, and He exhorts us to seek it.

God’s direction was not to eat of the tree they simply did not obey{ PRIDE} is the #1 deadly sin, all sin, in fact is pride. To become like God the way you understand is a gross misinterpretation.

God’s direction was not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, that is true. Eve sought wisdom, which is good, but not when disobeying God.
We seek to become like God by obedience to His commandments and teachings. Is this what you believe is a gross misinterpretation? Obedience to His commandments and teachings? If this is a misinterpretation then what are we to do if not obey His commandments and teachings?

I would be interested in hearing your side.

 

[flyonthewall]

This post by flyonwall is as far as I have read; I can’t help but respond to this now. Sorry if others have already responded and said the same thing, since we do have the same spirit. (Catholics)

Don’t the scriptures exhort one to seek wisdom?
Yes…Gods Wisdom not ours

Flyonwall, this is why having a sense of the Most Holy Trinity is so important.
There is only one who has Wisdom and this is God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Together as One they are Wisdom.

Adam and Eve were alive in this Wisdom, they were perfect human beings. They were living as created beings, living in Gods Grace without sin. Yes they could have had children, but with no pain, no death etc…But God also gave them free will as he did not create them to be puppets, rather each one unique and very, very special.

But for whatever reason there was this fallen angel who desired to have what Jesus has always had with His Father, for whatever reason this angel became jealous of Jesus. This angel comes to Adam and Eve to take them away from Jesus promising them their own wisdom, that they can have what Jesus has always had apart from His Grace.

Flyonthewall the tree of life in the garden is Jesus Himself. The food from the tree was freely given to them, it was life itself. You can not take this food less you die. No my Friend we receive this food from God in order to have eternal life. For it is better to receive than to give. One requires humility. for what can we give God that He does not already have with Jesus? No we must receive without any kind of payback as there is none. When you realize this you will understand the Cross, the Passion of Christ for you.

An adopted child receives a gift from His Father, from His Fathers heart. Then he runs out and does everything he can to try and prove his worthiness in the receiving of this gift. The Father sits in silence shaking His head knowing that this child has nothing that he can prove, that he is loved as he is. He lets him go into the very world that called him away. Out of the greatest love that has ever existed God glances at His Son Jesus, Jesus glances back at His father. The Son leaves, enters this world to bring you back home.

Thus we have the Crucifix front and center in each on of our Homes

There is no great test for us other than finding Jesus in our lives and allowing Him to carry us home. This is where heaven can be found on earth. You surrender to Him, you do His work. Your strength and wisdom comes from Him to you. You can not take this or earn this, this would be sin……no, it is freely given. You receive

Interesting.
One thing you may not have been aware of though, it was partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil that got them in trouble, not the tree of life.
The tree of life was only forbidden them after they partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

 

[KathleenGee]

Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden Tree of Knowledge as they were deceived thinking they could be as gods…

So the curse of Adam was to work the soil at the tree of knowledge, and Eve’s pain of childbirth would be greatened, and the fruit of eating the forbidden fruit would be a tenuous relationship with each other.

The Old Testament prophets spoke of a redeemer who would die on a tree…Jesus said He is the Vine, we are His branches and that we are called to be perpetually united to Him for our life.

Subsequently Jesus is called the Tree of Life that replaces the Tree of Knowledge which is pride that leads man to think he does not need God.

 

[KathleenGee]

So now we are finding out in a more precise way that Smith did not mean what he said…that he was simply reflecting the Stone Campbell movement.

He began his position that all was apostate, an abomination…certainly abomination is a word drawn on by people in this movement…who cannot accept any form of Christianity.

The Bible says you judge a man by the company he keeps. Smith was known to be some sort of charlatan or divinizer to earn a living. The penal records of his time do provide adequate documentation that he had committed fraud.

There were mutual threats to expose each others’ secrets in this company that created the Book of Mormon.

As it was a group that created the Book of Mormon, you can’t separate Smith from it.

How I wish Mormons would detach themselves and begin to study authentic Catholic Church history. You see two different and contrary formations.

 

[Jerusha]

There were mutual threats to expose each others’ secrets in this company that created the Book of Mormon.

Yeah, they all had “the goods” on each other, accompanied with vows of “blood atonement” on anyone who would betray the rest. Definitely a “secret combination,” so roundly condemned in the BoM.

 

[KathleenGee]

May Mary and those who pray with her bring guidance to the Mormon people…and crush the head of the serpent.

The Mormon people are surrounded by so many, many rationalizations and cover ups…

being denied the Tree of Life and its fruits – Jesus Christ – True God and True Man – Who provided us the Kingdom of Heaven through His Word, His Sacraments, especially and foremost in the Eucharist…the Bread of Heaven…His Holy Spirit and the Church.

I just heard a song about Advent…never got the exact title…but it is about Apples – the true fruit of Jesus Christ that grows on His tree…

 

[ParkerD]

So the curse of Adam was to work the soil at the tree of knowledge, and Eve’s pain of childbirth would be greatened, and the fruit of eating the forbidden fruit would be a tenuous relationship with each other.

…
Subsequently Jesus is called the Tree of Life that replaces the Tree of Knowledge which is pride that leads man to think he does not need God.

Hi, Kathleen,

I suppose that I might as well try and understand your thinking.

1. Do you think Adam’s having to “work the soil” is a “curse”?
2. Do you think women’s greater “pain of childbirth” is a “curse”?
3. Do you think Adam and Eve had a “tenuous relationship with each other”?
4. Do you think the “Tree of Knowledge” is “pride”?
   If so, is knowledge not to be sought?

Are you taught these kinds of things, or do they flow from other teachings and become the logical product of those teachings?

(Note: I would say the answer for me to each of those questions 1 through 4 is a definite “no”, and knowledge is something good to be sought after in this life, so long as it is used for the benefit of mankind.)

Peace.

 

[KathleenGee]

Hi Parker…

I am with my son downstairs…he’s cleaning up things…and I am trying to get in the mood to get my Christmas cards out.

In the meantime, I came across this most fascinating book that appeals to me because it has a spirituality about it as well…you may have heard others speak of it on CAF…

“Worthy is the Lamb”, by Thomas Nash. I am ordering it. I also remember you referring to Melchizedek and the Aaronites…I remember studying Exodus through the Scott Hahn ministry, that Moses came down from Mt Sinai with the tablets of the 10 commandments. When he returned and saw the people worshipping the Golden Calf, he then threw down the tablets!!!

From then on, the Aaronite priesthood was no more. And one had to prove one’s lineage from the tribe of Levites to be allowed to become a priest, and that one could only serve for a period of time, 30 to 50 years old.

When Abrahm, the one who began the Jewish people, encountered Melchizedek, the priest came forward with the gifts of bread and wine. The offering was to be both sacrificial and saving as Abrahm had just one several battles with various kings. Melchizedek was not of time. And some think he was of the Canaanites…but in the Jewish Catholic tradition, one cannot go to a religious leader outside one’s faith tradition. Thus, Abrahm would not have gone to a Canaanite after battle for blessing.

Instead, the best theory is that Melchizedek was a descendent of Shem of Noah, who was anointed. In this way, the tradition of faith within a peoples is maintained.

When Christ died on the Cross, the veil on the tabernacle was torn open…and now the full revelation of God revealed in the death of Jesus Christ. His resurrection on Sunday gave us the hope of the defeat of death and eternal life.

Jesus was of the order of Melchizedek…and He fulfilled Melchizedek’s prophecy of the perpetual sacrifice. And Jesus is the Tree of Life. We draw on His divineship in the Eucharist.

Quickly I would answer yes to what I said…but I also think that God always knew our will…aka St. Thomas Aquinas…and that without the fall we would not have Jesus or in need of a Savior…so every cloud of 'no’s has its silver lining…Through Jesus, the negative is transformed through the Cross, our sufferings of toil of this earth now sanctified through Jesus Christ, and each day we are growing in Him to become a new creation…Jesus sanctifies marriage between one man and one woman, our homes a domestic church. Our work is sanctified in Christ, no longer the burden.

The whole construct of Catholicism is Jesus Christ, Parker. Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega!

God bless!

 

[catholic-rcia]

Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden Tree of Knowledge as they were deceived thinking they could be as gods…

So the curse of Adam was to work the soil at the tree of knowledge, and Eve’s pain of childbirth would be greatened, and the fruit of eating the forbidden fruit would be a tenuous relationship with each other.

The Old Testament prophets spoke of a redeemer who would die on a tree…Jesus said He is the Vine, we are His branches and that we are called to be perpetually united to Him for our life.

Subsequently Jesus is called the Tree of Life that replaces the Tree of Knowledge which is pride that leads man to think he does not need God.

Thanks Kathleen
This is one sin I seem to take to confession. For me its when I forget how much I need God for everything. the key in this not forgetting is constant prayer.

 

[KathleenGee]

Pride is the worst sin.

So when Christians start saying they are better than other Christians then I know they are not in the truth.

Nobody is better than anybody. “Who is like unto God?” exclaimed St. Michael in Genesis…note the serpent as well was cursed to crawl in the dirt that fed the Tree of Knowledge.

I am ordering that book today by Tom Nash. Wish the Mormons would as well.

Prayed for everyone this morning and will try to do so earnestly through Christmas.

I know of some Catholics who were very much into the letter of the law, and very condemning of other people they considered irregular, not knowing where they were coming from or the great suffering they are going through. They labelled another as a gossip, when the person was in an experience far outside theirs…and the person thought of committing suicide…it had been going on for some time. A friend told me about it, and said that people who are like that are gossiping…very religious and self-righteous Christians can be the very worst because they are perverting the spirit of Jesus…phariseeism.

Yes, if people are suffering enough from being ostracized by the parish sect, and then are condemned by it, it can drive somebody over the edge or never want to have anything to do with God or religion.

 

[SteveVH]

Here you go telling me what I believe again…sigh.
Jesus was God before His mortal birth and eternally so. There was never a point at which God the Father was not God. Why is it so difficult for you to accept my belief is as I state?

Oh I don’t know, maybe little things such as “He was once as we are now”. Do you not see a conflict here? God was never as we are now and if you believe that God is eternal (as the rest of the world defines “eternal”) there is no way that you could believe that statement, yet you continue to make it. Do you see why this might be confusing?

Please do expound on what existed before God. You claim God has always existed. Fine. Then you should be able to understand that matter has always existed in one form or another.

Well first of all, I will expound upon whatever I choose to expound upon. Nothing existed before God because God has always existed. There is no such thing as “before God”.
That is precisely what is meant by eternity. No beginning and no end. God exists outside of time and space. You cannot, at the same time, say that God is eternal and that God had a beginning.

As to your second statement, I do not for a moment accept your premise that matter has always existed. There is nothing that exists that does not have a cause for its existence. This is something that we know from our own observance of the physical world around us. This necessarily requires the uncaused cause, who we call God. What you are saying is that God is not all powerful; that He is subject to His own laws of physics. To take it a bit further, you are actually saying that the laws of physics are not even God’s laws, but exist independently of Him. Sorry, I do not buy it for a moment.

This particular topic is a go nowhere topic as eternity is a concept that just does not translate very well in our finite existance. You take infinite concepts and argue about them in a finite context. Can you expand on how something can have no beginning? Can you describe how something is made from nothing?

We have no disagreement, apparently, that eternity is something the human mind cannot fully grasp. The existence of eternity and an eternal God, however, is not dependant upon our ability to grasp it. It is actually you that argues in a finite context. In my opinion this is why the LDS describes the Father as having a body of flesh and bone. You cannot imagine otherwise. It is why you believe that matter is eternal. You cannot imagine otherwise, therefore you reject anything beyond your understanding.

Can you describe how God’s words create? Was it instantaneous? Was the light He created on the first day different than the lights He created on the fourth day? Isn’t light, light? Why did it take Him 7 days to create the earth if He could just speak it into existance?

I don’t have to know how God did it, I only have to know that He did. I know this from what God Himself has revealed. We don’t believe in a literal seven days. Genesis is written in a poetic genre which is meant to convey the truth that God wished to reveal. It is not speaking in literal terms. We do not believe, for instance, that God needed to rest on the seventh day. Seven is a very meaningful number which also means “swearing an oath” (sheba) or entering into a covenant. This is much to deep to get into in this thread. What we take away from Genesis is that God created all that exists and entered into a family bond (covenant) with mankind. Mankind disobeyed God which then required a Savior. This is the subject matter of the rest of salvation history.

Continued…

 

[SteveVH]

Continued…

Can you give me your interpretation of the following:
Colosians 1:15"[Speaking of Jesus]Who is the image of the invisible God, the **firstborn **of every creature". Jesus was not born before Adam & Eve were created, nor was He the firstborn of Adam and Eve. How can He be the firstborn of every creature if there were creatures born before Him?

There is a difference between Jesus’ existence and His incarnation. Scripture also tells us that Jesus created everything that is. From what you have quoted here there are one of two possibilities. Either scripture is completely contradictory or you have the wrong interpretation of the term “firstborn”. You ascribe this to His physical birth wherein scripture is referring to His eternal existence; the “image of the invisible God”. It expresses Christ’s preeminence and supremacy in the creation of all things.

Well, you might have a point if Revelation actually stopped with Jesus. It did not. It continued decades after His resurrection and ascension. If all revelaton stopped with Jesus because He was the full revelation of God, then the entire book of Revelation should be thown out because it was written after revelation was supposed to have stopped.

In our saying that Christ is the fulfillment of all revelation, we are not saying that this revelation did not come from the prophets and the Apostles. What we are saying is that everything revealed finds its fulfillment in Jesus Christ, from the Old Testament prophecies to the book of Revelation. He is the purpose of all revelation. It all points to him, regardless of who spoke it. We are not waiting for further public revelation because it has already been revealed in Him. Anything that does not ultimately point to Jesus is false revelation.

As I mentioned before, this does not mean that God has stopped all communication with mankind. He communicates with us constantly through His Church, His saints and His Sacraments. All of His communication is an effort to draw us nearer to Him and our Heavenly Father, who are One, through the working of the Holy Spirit.

By the way, I wish you also a blessed Christmas as we celebrate the Light which came into the darkness of world.

God bless you.

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by flyonthewall
Can you give me your interpretation of the following:
Colosians 1:15"[Speaking of Jesus]Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature". Jesus was not born before Adam & Eve were created, nor was He the firstborn of Adam and Eve. How can He be the firstborn of every creature if there were creatures born before Him?

Nope! Poor biblical exegesis and a poor understanding of linguistics. Jesus and the Jews in Palestine did not speak English. You are interpretating the term: firstborn in the modern English sense,which is not applicable to the ancient Jews or Jesus.

If Jesus is only a creature,then explain how he could redeem and save? I thought scripture makes it clear only God alone can save? Likewise,in the NT numerous it is stated Jesus was WORSHIPED? It is forbidden for creatures to WORSHIP other creatures.Your interpretation is incorrect.

 

[SteveVH]

Hi Parker. I hope you don’t mind if I jump in here. I’m just curious as to what you believe the quotes below mean. It seems pretty straight forward. Maybe I’m missing something.

1. Do you think Adam’s having to “work the soil” is a “curse”?

"Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return." (Gen 2:17)

That doesn’t sound like a curse to you?

1. Do you think women’s greater “pain of childbirth” is a “curse”?

Do you think it is a blessing? I wonder how the women feel about that.

1. Do you think Adam and Eve had a “tenuous relationship with each other”?

I really have no idea. It is not difficult to speculate, however, that since they now had a fallen nature that their relationship would probably suffer from the very things in which all relationships suffer. They had lost original innocence and were ashamed. They now would give in to pride, selfishness and other human flaws inherent in a fallen nature. But, as I said, I would only be speculating.

1. Do you think the “Tree of Knowledge” is “pride”?
   If so, is knowledge not to be sought?

Adam and Eve bought into the lie that they would be like God. The serpent had convinced them that God was holding out on them. Why couldn’t they eat of this tree? They could eat of every other tree. What was God hiding from them? It was not a desire for knowledge that was wrong. It was a desire to be like God, but independent of God; apart from God. That was why they were hiding. Yes it was pride and it was selfish pride that the serpent had instilled in their hearts.

So, you cannot equate what Adam and Eve did with the pursuit of knowledge in the common sense of the word. They wanted to be equals with God because the serpent had convinced them that this is precisely what God was hiding from them. There are a lot of different types of knowledge, Parker. Whether or not a certain type of knowledge is good or desirable would depend upon one’s intentions, I suppose.

 

[onenow1]

I would be interested in hearing your side.

RCIA and Kathleen and others have answered many of your questions and listned to your self analisis of scripture and have refuted them maybe not to your satisfaction but refuted.

This is my side: How can man fully comprehend GOD’s infinite make-up when he cannot fully comprehend his own finite make-up, we need authority from Jesus Church from day one of it’s institution={Matt 16:18} no gaps or Jesus becomes a liar.So ! {the LDS proposal> Jesus lied or was wrong about His Church continueing in perpetuity} would make Jesus nothing more then a false prophet ! And we know this is not true!

One more Time. A Word, (the Son) does not exist without a Speaker (the Father), and one cannot be a Speaker without a Breath (the Holy Spirit); just as the Word cannot exist without a Breath. Thus GOD acts as one. He does not send the Son independently from the fullness of the divine nature. It is the Father and the Son and the Spirit doing the speaking. It cannot be otherwise, since They are con substantial in Their divinity{one substance}.

Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;

1 Corinthians 12: 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit;
5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord;
6 and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one.

THE CREED OF NICAEA (325)… This was the original Nicene Creed. It was revised and finalized at the Council of Constantinople in 381…

We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker of all things. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made, things in heaven and things on the earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into the heavens, and is coming to judge living and dead. And in the Holy Spirit. And those that say ‘There was when he was not,’ and, ‘Before he was begotten he was not,’ and that, ‘He came into being from what-is-not,’ or those that allege, that the son of God is ‘Of another substance or essence’ or ‘created,’ or ‘changeable’ or ‘alterable,’ these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.

=flyonthewall] “God’s direction was not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, that is true. Eve sought wisdom, which is good, but not when disobeying God.
We seek to become like God by obedience to His commandments and teachings. Is this what you believe is a gross misinterpretation? Obedience to His commandments and teachings? If this is a misinterpretation then what are we to do if not obey His commandments and teachings”?

We are to believe all of God’s commands not LDS version.

Peace

 

[flyonthewall]

Oh I don’t know, maybe little things such as “He was once as we are now”. Do you not see a conflict here? God was never as we are now and if you believe that God is eternal (as the rest of the world defines “eternal”) there is no way that you could believe that statement, yet you continue to make it. Do you see why this might be confusing?

I can see why it would be confusing, but it isn’t really. We believe Jesus was God before He was born. He was mortal like us, and He continues to be God. Jesus even hints at it in John 5:19, 20
19Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

20For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel

What did Jesus see the Father do?

Well first of all, I will expound upon whatever I choose to expound upon. Nothing existed before God because God has always existed. There is no such thing as “before God”.
That is precisely what is meant by eternity. No beginning and no end. God exists outside of time and space. You cannot, at the same time, say that God is eternal and that God had a beginning.

As to your second statement, I do not for a moment accept your premise that matter has always existed. There is nothing that exists that does not have a cause for its existence. This is something that we know from our own observance of the physical world around us. This necessarily requires the uncaused cause, who we call God. What you are saying is that God is not all powerful; that He is subject to His own laws of physics. To take it a bit further, you are actually saying that the laws of physics are not even God’s laws, but exist independently of Him. Sorry, I do not buy it for a moment.

So in other words, you don’t understand and just made something up…? The uncaused cause? That contradicts your previous sentence that nothing exists that does not have a cause for its existence.
Do you believe God is a God of order? or do you believe He lives in chaos? If you believe He is a God of order, then there are rules, whether He made them or they exist independently.

We have no disagreement, apparently, that eternity is something the human mind cannot fully grasp. The existence of eternity and an eternal God, however, is not dependant upon our ability to grasp it. It is actually you that argues in a finite context. In my opinion this is why the LDS describes the Father as having a body of flesh and bone. You cannot imagine otherwise. It is why you believe that matter is eternal. You cannot imagine otherwise, therefore you reject anything beyond your understanding.

We believe that God exists with an eternal perspective…He can see the past as if it is happening now, He can see the future as if it has already happened. Past, present and future is one eternal round for Him.
How this is, I haven’t a clue but I do not reject it.
LDS teach that the Father and Son both have a body of flesh and bone because that has been shown to be true.

I don’t have to know how God did it, I only have to know that He did. I know this from what God Himself has revealed. We don’t believe in a literal seven days. Genesis is written in a poetic genre which is meant to convey the truth that God wished to reveal. It is not speaking in literal terms. We do not believe, for instance, that God needed to rest on the seventh day. Seven is a very meaningful number which also means “swearing an oath” (sheba) or entering into a covenant. This is much to deep to get into in this thread. What we take away from Genesis is that God created all that exists and entered into a family bond (covenant) with mankind. Mankind disobeyed God which then required a Savior. This is the subject matter of the rest of salvation history.

The same as with us, we don’t know how He does things, other than by His power. We don’t believe a physical body has to place limitations on God, that is something others place upon Him.
These are concepts that go beyond our understanding, but we believe it to be true…just as you do with your beliefs.

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker. I hope you don’t mind if I jump in here. I’m just curious as to what you believe the quotes below mean. It seems pretty straight forward. Maybe I’m missing something.

"Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return." (Gen 2:17)

That doesn’t sound like a curse to you?

Hi, SteveVH,
'Hoping you and your family are all well.

The verse as shown above is what I consider a mistranslation of the word that was translated to the word “because”. It throws a whole different meaning into the passage than the Hebrew transliteration. However, even with that translation, one can get an understanding if they allow themselves to believe that God really does do all things for the benefit and blessing of humankind, that “cursed is the ground because of you” could just as well say “cursed is the ground for your sake” or in other words, “for your growth.”

So, no, that does not sound like a curse to me. It sounds like God knew exactly what humankind needed for our growth, and used that situation to provide the blessing to Adam and Eve of the challenge of overcoming the adversity of a more difficult situation than an easily harvested garden Paradise.

Do you think it is a blessing? I wonder how the women feel about that.

Yes, I do. I think women increase in their love for their child because of the difficulty of their having carried the baby and had childbirth in the midst of pain. I don’t regret having had a few “kidney stones” in my life, either, (although I drink more water now), since I could gain greater compassion through that kind of pain that I had never experienced previously, and can now empathize better with the pains others experience.

If I remember correctly, we had a long discussion some time ago about Adam and Eve and wisdom and so forth. We have such completely different views about their situation that it is like night and day, and the word “pride” does enter into that difference (not in the Biblical account) but also the word “wise” (which is in the Biblical account). No need to go through that discussion again.

Merry Christmas to you and your family.

 

[flyonthewall]

There is a difference between Jesus’ existence and His incarnation. Scripture also tells us that Jesus created everything that is. From what you have quoted here there are one of two possibilities. Either scripture is completely contradictory or you have the wrong interpretation of the term “firstborn”. You ascribe this to His physical birth wherein scripture is referring to His eternal existence; the “image of the invisible God”. It expresses Christ’s preeminence and supremacy in the creation of all things.

I don’t ascribe this to His physical birth. I too refer to His eternal existance. Nothing you have stated above contradicts my belief on this.
We know the firstborn holds a special place, in leadership, authority, inheritance etc. It is the position of the firstborn that brought about the meaning of preeminance and supremacy, not the other way around.

In our saying that Christ is the fulfillment of all revelation, we are not saying that this revelation did not come from the prophets and the Apostles. What we are saying is that everything revealed finds its fulfillment in Jesus Christ, from the Old Testament prophecies to the book of Revelation. He is the purpose of all revelation. It all points to him, regardless of who spoke it. We are not waiting for further public revelation because it has already been revealed in Him. Anything that does not ultimately point to Jesus is false revelation.

As I mentioned before, this does not mean that God has stopped all communication with mankind. He communicates with us constantly through His Church, His saints and His Sacraments. All of His communication is an effort to draw us nearer to Him and our Heavenly Father, who are One, through the working of the Holy Spirit.

So are you saying your church is receiving revelation, and is lead by revelation? Would that be public or private revelation? I have been told that all public revelation has stopped.
What is it you mean by communicating through His church, saints and sacraments? What is this communication? Who receives this communication for the church?

By the way, I wish you also a blessed Christmas as we celebrate the Light which came into the darkness of world.

God bless you.

Amen.

 

[flyonthewall]

Nope! Poor biblical exegesis and a poor understanding of linguistics. Jesus and the Jews in Palestine did not speak English. You are interpretating the term: firstborn in the modern English sense,which is not applicable to the ancient Jews or Jesus.

Do tell, what is the interpretation of the term “firstborn”? What was the word used that was translated as such. What would have been a better English term to use than “firstborn”?

If Jesus is only a creature,then explain how he could redeem and save? I thought scripture makes it clear only God alone can save? Likewise,in the NT numerous it is stated Jesus was WORSHIPED? It is forbidden for creatures to WORSHIP other creatures.Your interpretation is incorrect.

Are we creatures? or are we children? If Jesus became one of us, then indeed He became a creature.
I don’t buy into the bit about being a creature. I am a child of God, as all mankind is. We are not creatures, but children. Now I ask you, can a Son of God redeem? Furthermore, not just any Son of God, but the Only Begotten Son of God, can He save? I say: “yes He can”. What do you say?

 

[flyonthewall]

RCIA and Kathleen and others have answered many of your questions and listned to your self analisis of scripture and have refuted them maybe not to your satisfaction but refuted.

Agreed. Many of my questions have ben answered, and my analysis has been responded to.

This is my side: How can man fully comprehend GOD’s infinite make-up when he cannot fully comprehend his own finite make-up, we need authority from Jesus Church from day one of it’s institution={Matt 16:18} no gaps or Jesus becomes a liar.So ! {the LDS proposal> Jesus lied or was wrong about His Church continueing in perpetuity} would make Jesus nothing more then a false prophet ! And we know this is not true!

Which day one are you referring to? Was it with Adam? Noah? Abraham? Moses? Elijah? All have had Jesus/Jehova and His religion revealed to them, and there were gaps in between.
Jesus was not a liar, and not a false prophet. Jesus stated there would be a restitution of all things to come in the future…how can there be a restitution of all things if all things did not need to be restored?

One more Time. A Word, (the Son) does not exist without a Speaker (the Father), and one cannot be a Speaker without a Breath (the Holy Spirit); just as the Word cannot exist without a Breath. Thus GOD acts as one. He does not send the Son independently from the fullness of the divine nature. It is the Father and the Son and the Spirit doing the speaking. It cannot be otherwise, since They are con substantial in Their divinity{one substance}.

If Substance and Nature were replaced by purpose and authority, I would agree whole heartedly.

Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;

1 Corinthians 12: 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit;
5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord;
6 and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one.

Agreed.

THE CREED OF NICAEA (325)… This was the original Nicene Creed. It was revised and finalized at the Council of Constantinople in 381…

We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker of all things. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made, things in heaven and things on the earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into the heavens, and is coming to judge living and dead. And in the Holy Spirit. And those that say ‘There was when he was not,’ and, ‘Before he was begotten he was not,’ and that, ‘He came into being from what-is-not,’ or those that allege, that the son of God is ‘Of another substance or essence’ or ‘created,’ or ‘changeable’ or ‘alterable,’ these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.

Very philosophical.