LDS Doctrine of Eternal Progression/Catholic View

[Tony888]

This is an excellent example of the lack of understanding of divinity. It is a confusion of both theology and anthropology, not differentiating between the Creator and the creature. And we are only God’s children through adaption, not through procreation. There is only one Son of God who was begotten by the Father. The rest of us are invited into God’s family, but we will never be God. We will share in His divine life through a gift of grace, but we will always remain human and He will always remain divine.

I tried to keep it simple and I was not maligning your view, just articulating the difference.
I am not unique in using the ‘species’ metaphore as a method of clearly articulating the differences in theology without writing a book on the point.

 

[rmcmullan]

As I understand it, the Catholic parallel to Eternal Progression is Theosis.

Eternal Progression is the simplest concept: After trying to be like Jesus long enough, you finally do.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

As I understand it, the Catholic parallel to Eternal Progression is Theosis.

Eternal Progression is the simplest concept: After trying to be like Jesus long enough, you finally do.

Your understanding is incorrect.

There are no parallels whatsoever in Catholicism and Mormonism. Mormonism is not even Christian.

Jim Dandy

 

[KathleenGee]

Mormonism is polytheistic…contradiction to Judeo Christianity.

 

[PJM]

=Maverick;7983451]I have been reading about the Mormon doctrine of “Eternal Progression”. As I understand it, a person in this world works to be come a better person throughout his or her entire life. This process continues after death and a person continues to grow and become more God-like after death, until eventually one can become like a God.

I know the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that a person can become like a God through progressing after death, but is there a Church doctrine about striving to become a better person throughout one’s entire life, or perhaps even after death?

First a smallpoint. It actually is like a “god” not GOD [our God], as they speak of MANY gods.

Sure that is the premise for the Commandments, the Sermon on the Mound [Matt Chapter 5], and the Seven Sacraments.

**Matt.5: 48 **“You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

1Pet.1: 15-16 "but as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct;since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy”

Matt.19:17 "And he said to him, "Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments."

This speaks directly to why God CREATED Purgatory: EVERYONE must be made perfect in immatation of God, before they are granted access to His Divine Presence. [NOT JUST CATHOLICS].

Rev. 21: 27 “But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.”

**Mt. 5: 26 **truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.

**Heb. 2: 10 **For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Tony888]

First a smallpoint. It actually is like a “god” not GOD [our God], as they speak of MANY gods.
Pat

You got that wrong Pat, it is taught by the RCC with a captial G (as well as a small g)

WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?
“For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”
“The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods”

 

[Tony888]

Your understanding is incorrect.

There are no parallels whatsoever in Catholicism and Mormonism. Mormonism is not even Christian.

Jim Dandy

LOL, no parallels beyond a shared doctrine that Christ “became man so that we might become God.”

 

[SteveVH]

I tried to keep it simple and I was not maligning your view, just articulating the difference.
I am not unique in using the ‘species’ metaphore as a method of clearly articulating the differences in theology without writing a book on the point.

While I was responding to your post, Tony, I was really speaking of Mormon theology in general so I didn’t mean anything personal and I certainly didn’t feel you were trying to malign me in any way. It is not as if I haven’t heard this before. I have always found the Mormon idea that we are made of the same “stuff” as God perplexing at best. There just seems to be no distinction between Creator and creature other than a level of progression. In my mind it brings God down to our level and diminishes His true glory and majesty. Christ humbled himself to take on flesh and become as one of us. Divinity is eternally above and beyond humanity.

 

[zaffiroborant]

PJM:

First a smallpoint. It actually is like a “god” not GOD [our God], as they speak of MANY gods.
Pat

You got that wrong Pat, it is taught by the RCC with a captial G (as well as a small g)

WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?
“For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”
“The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods”
Reply With Quote

Well first of all you skipped five paragraphs of the CCC in between the question and answer you supposedly “quoted”.
Secondly the small g is where one finds the Catholic understanding and it is rather presumptuous of you to tell us what the understanding is of our own catechism.

“Out of context” and “telling us what we believe” 2 things LDS complain about and yet here you are doing the same things.

 

[rmcmullan]

Other words used for theosis are dieficiation and divinization. And you say this is different than the Mormon doctrine of eternal progression? I have to assume you are being purposefully obtuse. They are both the end result of “trying to be like Jesus.”

 

[Stephen168]

St. Athanasius:

As, then, he who desires to see God Who by nature is invisible and not to be beheld, may yet perceive and know Him through His works, so too let him who does not see Christ with his understanding at least consider Him in His bodily works and test whether they be of man or God. If they be of man, then let him scoff; but if they be of God, let him not mock at things which are no fit subject for scorn, but rather let him recognize the fact and marvel that things divine have been revealed to us by such humble means, that through death deathlessness has been made known to us, and through the Incarnation of the Word the Mind whence all things proceed has been declared, and its Agent and Ordainer, the Word of God Himself. He, indeed, assumed humanity that we might become God. He manifested Himself by means of a body in order that we might perceive the Mind of the unseen Father. He endured shame from men that we might inherit immortality. He Himself was unhurt by this, for He is impassable and incorruptible; but by His own impassability He kept and healed the suffering men on whose account He thus endured. In short, such and so many are the Savior’s achievements that follow from His Incarnation, that to try to number them is like gazing at the open sea and trying to count the waves.

 

[Stephen168]

Other words used for theosis are dieficiation and divinization. And you say this is different than the Mormon doctrine of eternal progression? I have to assume you are being purposefully obtuse. They are both the end result of “trying to be like Jesus.”

As I understand it, the Catholic parallel to Eternal Progression is Theosis. Eternal Progression is the simplest concept: After trying to be like Jesus long enough, you finally do.

Which is the difference between Christians and Mormons.

 

[rmcmullan]

Isn’t this like the arguement about if God could make a stone big enough even He couldn’t move it? Why couldn’t God make us like Him? You know, through GRACE!

 

[Stephen168]

Isn’t this like the arguement about if God could make a stone big enough even He couldn’t move it?

Yes

Why couldn’t God make us like Him? You know, through GRACE!

For the same reason he doesn’t make a square with three sides. Are you suggesting Mormons believe his does?

 

[PJM]

=Tony888;8023064]You got that wrong Pat, it is taught by the RCC with a captial G (as well as a small g)

TRUE, BUT why?

Because “God” signifies our One Triune God-head of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. While “god” refers to man-made idols both real and imagined.

May God Continue to Bless you my friend,

Pat

 

[Jim_Dandy]

LOL, no parallels beyond a shared doctrine that Christ “became man so that we might become God.”

The Mormon Jesus is a spirit-child of “Heavenly Father,” who is an ‘exalted’ man having gone through ‘eternal progression’ – flesh and bones like us in every way, according to J Smith. Jesus is the literal brother of Lucifer (Satan). According to Mormonism, we are also spirit-children of this same man-turned-god and his goddess wives and therefore are literal brothers and sisters of Jesus and Lucifer, who both came to earth from their pre-existent state, as did we. Oy veh!

The Catholic doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation are unlike Mormon belief in any way. Your idea of Christ is very unCatholic.

Humans never become God (or, as in Mormonism, Gods plural).

To say that we become more and more Christ-like is not to say that we ever become Christ.

You read, but you don’t understand the teaching of the Church. You’re “proof-texting” the Catechism.

Theosis is what St. Paul meant when he wrote, ". . . It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" Galatians 2:20.

"If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him" John 14:23. NOT – ‘and he will become (a) God’!

Jim Dandy

 

[PJM]

=Tony888;8023075]LOL, no parallels beyond a shared doctrine that Christ “became man so that we might become God.”

Friend, that is your position and not held by ANY True Christian church and certainly NOT by the CC.

The Bibles are filled with exhortations to emulate as best we can; God. But being “like God” is your position of BEING a god.

Freind, what is your biblical foundation for this position?

God bless you,
Pat

 

[Peter_John]

LOL, no parallels beyond a shared doctrine that Christ “became man so that we might become God.”

There is a big difference between sharing in the nature of God’s existence and becoming an autonomous god in our own realm. The comparison is one of semantics and expression, but not one of meaning or function. Two different sides of a tapestry: same threads, reversed images.

 

[rmcmullan]

Yes

For the same reason he doesn’t make a square with three sides. Are you suggesting Mormons believe his does?

So what other limits to God’s powers do Catholics believe?

 

[Robert_in_SD]

So what other limits to God’s powers do Catholics believe?

God’s inability to make a three-sided “square” is not a limitation on God’s omnipotence. It is a statement that reveals the Christian (not just Catholic) notion that God is neither arbitrary, nor self-contradictory. Our God is not a God of chaos, but a God of reason who can, therefore, be understood (as best as we mortals can, at least) through the application of logic and reason.

I thought Mormons and Catholics agreed with that general principle. We all agree that God is omnipotent, but we also can agree (at least I thought we could) that God cannot contradict Himself.

Peace,
Robert