W
why_me
Guest
It is all a matter of interpretation. But there are more scriptures that speak of milk before meat. People can not handle all the meat at first…but with time and understanding the meat can be understood.
- Status
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
“wonderful” is not a word that Bloom used to describe anything religious.
S
scipio337
Guest
W
why_me
Guest
These verses that you mentioned are up for interpretation. If one is a catholic, one sees the succession. But a protestant would see it just a little differently depending the the greek word for rock.
And the mormons see it differently from the protestant and the catholic. For mormons, these verses represent revelation. The rock is revelation. Verse 19 can be construed to mean revelation since Christ is telling Peter that the keys that he is now given are the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which would signify an act of revelation since the heavens will be opened by the keys, and the binding on earth will be bound in heaven through revelation. Peter would need to have a direct link (receiving revelation) to heaven to bind anything on earth.
W
why_me
Guest
He wrote a great book on the university system in America: The Closing of the American Mind. Also, he wrote a great literary book which name now escapes me. But I do know that he is respected in the literary and academic community.
W
why_me
Guest
No problem with the acts of succession but for the mormon, each act of succession would bring the world closer to apostacy since the church began to do the works of man and not God. To my knowledge, the catholic church does not believe in modern day revelation. If true, this would make it difficult not to become corrupted by the sophistry of man. But I could be wrong about the catholic church’s stance on modern revelation.
S
scipio337
Guest
He has been a groundbreaker in literary criticism for quite a while.
His book The American Religion: The Emergence of the Post-Christian Nation is HIGHLY critical of Smith and LDS theology.
He considered Smith a genius for the doctrines he made up, or possesed. He also (as a gnostic) pointed to LDS “gnostic” beliefs.
S
scipio337
Guest
We do believe in modern revelation. It does not supercede Christ’s Revelation, in which all things were given.
If anything, not believing in “modern revelation” as a process of forming new doctrine (often flip flopping and contradictory) makes a faith much LESS likely to “become corrupted by the sophistry of man”.
See polygyny.
W
why_me
Guest
That is probably true. But he still found the sermon to be a work of genius. And that was my point. It is a great sermon because it took christianity into a new direction. We need to remember that smith was just 24 when the mormon faith began. And within 14 years he was murdered. He accomplished much in his short life.
W
why_me
Guest
So the pope receives revelation to guide the catholic church and the world?
S
scipio337
Guest
So did Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, L. Ron Hubbard, Arthur Rimbaud, Jack Kerouac, and Thomas Wolfe.
S
scipio337
Guest
No, silly goose.
I thought you claimed to be Catholic. “Revelation” has historically been a means of inserting “the sophistry of man” into belief. See David Koresh, Muhammed, Hassan bin Sabah, Smith.
“G*d told me its OK” is the final argument, especially when trying to convince people against what they perceive as the “norm”.
Personal revelation, however, is a different story. Gd “reveals” himself to us personally and on a regular basis. In Catholicism, revelation is not just possible, it is a neccessity for a loving Gd. Dogma, however, is immutable.
Hence the Vatican Council teaches: “In order that the obedience of our faith might be agreeable to reason, God has willed that to the internal aids of the Holy Spirit, there should be joined external proofs of His Revelation, viz: Divine works (facta divina), especially miracles and prophecy, which inasmuch as they manifestly display the omnipotence and the omniscience of God are most certain signs of a Divine revelation and are suited to the understanding of all” (De Fide Cath., cap. iii).
While the Church recognizes that G*d has spoken to His servants in every age, and still continues thus to favour chosen souls, she is careful to distinguish these revelations from the Revelation which has been committed to her charge, and which she proposes to all her members for their acceptance. That Revelation was given in its entirety to Our Lord and His Apostles. After the death of the last of the twelve it could receive no increment. It was, as the Church calls it, a deposit – “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude, 2)
The distinction is clear.
N
Nordar
Guest
N
Nordar
Guest
Let’s not forget James Dean
A
AMDGtoo
Guest
Evidence? Or is this just another charge hurled at the Catholic Church while conveniently forgetting that you guys have leaders who have actually admitted that they “speak as a man”?
S
scipio337
Guest
There are certainly a lot of people in the “27 club”Let’s not forget James Dean
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27_Club
I also should have mentioned a certain carpenter from Nazareth who died pretty young.
R
rmcmullan
Guest
I dunno, can you say Anti-Pope? How about Apostle?Can you say Apostolic Succession?
You have not proven that Pope=Apostle. You’ve just given a name to the substitution.
N
Nordar
Guest
I really can’t help but start laughing when I read some of these posts. I’m quite sure you think you are making sense
R
RC_Matt
Guest
Comments from a self-proclaimed Jewish-Gnostic literary critic have no relevance whatsoever. If he did indeed find the sermon to be “wonderful” and “a work of genius,” that would be the absolute antithesis of endorsement for Christians.
No, Joseph Smith didn’t take Christianity in a new direction; what he did was take some Christians in a new direction - away from Christianity.
W
why_me
Guest
And to this day, many people on this earth give the above a great deal of credit for reshaping music, poetry and literature. So can I claim the same for JS? He reshaped christianity?
- Status