LDS Doctrine: the Sources and Scope

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pahoran
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lax16 said:
Diana - Okay I didn’t see it that way…It seems to me a way for Todd to avoid answering some of the tougher questions by making a whole lotta somethin’ outta nothin’.
Click to expand...
LOL, i made a comment several pages ago, where I clearly qualified it as my interpretation on what he wrote.

Lax, now what are these tougher questions that I’m avoiding?
 
Todd520 said:
LOL, i made a comment several pages ago, where I clearly qualified it as my interpretation on what he wrote.

Lax, now what are these tougher questions that I’m avoiding?
Click to expand...
Todd - They are scattered throughout a couple of different threads, but here are three (more to follow):

I quoted from the Didache - they are not my words. **What do you think the apostles meant by:**Not everyone, however, who speaks in a spirit is a prophet, unless he have the behavior of the Lord. By his behavior, then, the false prophet and the true prophet shall be known.

**What is ‘mainlining the spirit’? **

**You can tell me how JS was like the prophets of the Old Testament any time you’d like. **
 
lax16 said:
Todd - They are scattered throughout a couple of different threads, but here are three (more to follow):

I quoted from the Didache - they are not my words. **What do you think the apostles meant by:**Not everyone, however, who speaks in a spirit is a prophet, unless he have the behavior of the Lord. By his behavior, then, the false prophet and the true prophet shall be known.

**What is ‘mainlining the spirit’? **

**You can tell me how JS was like the prophets of the Old Testament any time you’d like. **
Click to expand...
Point one - I don’t know, so I was asking you for references. I have yet to read the full OT once so am far from a biblical scolar on finding and interpreting the nuances.

**Point two **- sorry for the silly analogy of someone who was in the midst of revelation, as opposed to just speaking their mind on a topic. This difference has come up repeatedly in these threads so I was highlighting the unique state of revelation

Point three - see point one, I know I don’t have the depth to debate this topic, one way or another.
 
Todd520 said:
Point one - I don’t know, so I was asking you for references. I have yet to read the full OT once so am far from a biblical scolar on finding and interpreting the nuances.

**Point two **- sorry for the silly analogy of someone who was in the midst of revelation, as opposed to just speaking their mind on a topic. This difference has come up repeatedly in these threads so I was highlighting the unique state of revelation

Point three - see point one, I know I don’t have the depth to debate this topic, one way or another.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight…
  1. You stated on a different thread that you did not fully understand Catholic Doctrine when you left.
  2. You then stated on a different thread, that you did not know about certain aspects of LDS History
  3. Now you state you have never read the entire Bible.
Yet, you are now LDS.

wow. Just wow.
 
SirThomasMore said:
Let me get this straight…
  1. You stated on a different thread that you did not fully understand Catholic Doctrine when you left.
  2. You then stated on a different thread, that you did not know about certain aspects of LDS History
  3. Now you state you have never read the entire Bible.
Yet, you are now LDS.

wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...
If Todd520 was a Catholic he will remain a Catholic ad aeternum. :yup:
 
Todd520 said:
Point one - I don’t know, so I was asking you for references. I have yet to read the full OT once so am far from a biblical scolar on finding and interpreting the nuances.

**Point two **- sorry for the silly analogy of someone who was in the midst of revelation, as opposed to just speaking their mind on a topic. This difference has come up repeatedly in these threads so I was highlighting the unique state of revelation

Point three - see point one, I know I don’t have the depth to debate this topic, one way or another.
Click to expand...
Todd - You seem like a good-natured fellow so I will hang in there with you.
However, I am going to give it to you straight.
  1. You do not need to read the entire Bible before responding.
  2. Reading the Bible does not make one a biblical scholar.
  3. There is TONS of info available from LDS sources on these topics so read them first (just google!) then respond with your thoughts from an LDS perspective.
  4. If you have the depth of knowledge to leave one religion for another, you must have opinions about the most important aspects of that religion - otherwise you would not have signed on, right?
  5. Claiming not to know is not acceptable nor believable and does not let you off the hook. Do your homework!
  6. The best way to learn about a topic is to have a person challenge you by asking a question. (Just about everything I have learned comes about by studying after being asked a question by a non-Catholic!)
  7. Don’t let others do your thinking for you.
 
SirThomasMore said:
Let me get this straight…
  1. You stated on a different thread that you did not fully understand Catholic Doctrine when you left.
  2. You then stated on a different thread, that you did not know about certain aspects of LDS History
  3. Now you state you have never read the entire Bible.
Yet, you are now LDS.

wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...
Obviously he’s been hooked on a feeling and is high on believing.
 
RebeccaJ said:
Obviously he’s been hooked on a feeling and is high on believing.
Click to expand...
…that you’re in love with meeeee.

Thanks Rebecca, that song is now stuck in my brain

Thats’ almost as bad as …It’s a small world after all…It’s a small world after all.

hehehe…just a little revenge.
 
Comming to this fourm has taught me how little so many people of faith know about their doctrine; and i’m not just singling out Catholics.

I admit I have along road ahead in my study.
 
lips as sweet as candy…the taste is on my mind…girl you got me thirsty for another cup of whineeeeee

geez…now the song is in MY head, too…

someone is gonna pay
 
remember how we heard about how friendly the LDS board was and how calm that board was?

Take a look at this thread over there… mormonapologetics.org/topic/50930-anyone-else-notice-a-recent-change-at-madb/

it is hysterical. Me being calm, them getting more and more agitated, calling me names, personal attacks, whyme posting links to my posts oever here for them all to come see…it is absolutely hysterical. And puts to rest the myth about how nice they are. I felt like a puppeteer.

The problem is, they KNOW how fragile their grip on facts are…so when you challenge them, it is like kicking an ant bed…they all scurry around trying to bite something.

But it all brings home the fact that we, as Catholics, know we have the truth. The Catholic Church position on the Mormon Church is that they follow false prophets and are a false Church. We need to never forget that. We need to pray, pray, PRAY!!!

They are still our brothers and sisters. They still are loved by God…but unless we pray them out, they face grim futures.
 
dianaiad said:
Uhm…it’s in your wedding vows. Specifically. As well, it’s one of the standard ploys against our practice of proxy work for the dead…the mockery goes “and everybody is going to live together under one roof, and the children will live with their parents forever? What about THEIR children?”

You can’t HAVE this both ways, Paul.

However, I will be very glad to acknowledge my fault, and to apologize profusely and humbly if you can show me where, in scripture or Holy Tradition or the catechism or anywhere at all, some official scripture or the equivalent that shows how Catholicism teaches that the family will be together after death, or that husbands and wives will be together.
Click to expand...
From the catechism and the encyclopedia:
To live in heaven is “to be with Christ.” The elect live "in Christ,"598 but they retain, or rather find, their true identity, their own name
Click to expand...
Heaven is the blessed community of all who are perfectly incorporated into Christ.
Click to expand...
Moreover, the blessed see each other and rejoice in the company of those whom death separated from them.
Click to expand...
They delight greatly in the company of Christ, the angels, and the saints, and in the reunion with so many who were dear to them on earth.
Click to expand...
We remember who we were, live in community, joyfully reunited with those we were separated from in death. Nothing here gives any credence to you assertion that we believe families will be utterly dissolved at death. I will remember your unfounded assertions about our faith (you haven’t provided any citations for the “utterly dissolved”) when I read your future posts.
 
zaffiroborant said:
From the catechism and the encyclopedia:

We remember who we were, live in community, joyfully reunited with those we were separated from in death. Nothing here gives any credence to you assertion that we believe families will be utterly dissolved at death. I will remember your unfounded assertions about our faith (you haven’t provided any citations for the “utterly dissolved”) when I read your future posts.
Click to expand...
There is NOTHING in what you have posted that states that family and spouses will be together in any manner that is different from ‘being with’ your neighbor four doors down who also will see you in heaven.

In other words, if everybody has the same relationship to one another, then what would be special about seeing your spouse, as opposed to seeing someone you never knew in mortality?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top