LDS: Why try to convert Catholics, what do we lack for salvation?

[dianaiad]

Yeah, it didn’t feel right and I could not imagine our Church refusing to allow some cute little couple in their 90’s to marry. Sometimes, especially with a hypothetical situation, we can take something with a sound theological basis as written in stone while ignoring the mitigating circumstances.

This same idea would apply to suicide. Theologically speaking we must say that it is a serious sin as God is the author of life and we have no business taking that life, even if it is our own. In reality, the Church recognizes mental illness, undue stress and other factors that may have contributed to someone taking their own life and prays for their salvation. We can’t know what was in the persons heart. Hope that makes sense.

Yeah, it does.

As to suicide, I think that Catholicism is a little stricter than we are. I’m not certain if you still do this…are suicides allowed to be buried in consecrated ground?

I honestly do not know the answer to that one, which is why I’m asking.

As to the LDS view of suicide, I think we tend to go with the “nobody in their right mind commits suicide” view of things…which of course mitigates the thing quite a bit.

Just musing here, but I’m having a little trouble imagining an instance of suicide that would NOT be full of mitigating factors, except those who commit suicide to get out of just punishment, perhaps (the guy who offs himself because he’d rather die than spend ten years in jail for something he actually did, for instance).

Sorry, went off the rails a bit there. The above is absolutely and strictly personal opinion.

 

[SteveVH]

Yeah, it does.

As to suicide, I think that Catholicism is a little stricter than we are. I’m not certain if you still do this…are suicides allowed to be buried in consecrated ground?

I honestly do not know the answer to that one, which is why I’m asking.

As to the LDS view of suicide, I think we tend to go with the “nobody in their right mind commits suicide” view of things…which of course mitigates the thing quite a bit.

Just musing here, but I’m having a little trouble imagining an instance of suicide that would NOT be full of mitigating factors, except those who commit suicide to get out of just punishment, perhaps (the guy who offs himself because he’d rather die than spend ten years in jail for something he actually did, for instance).

Sorry, went off the rails a bit there. The above is absolutely and strictly personal opinion.

Actually, I have to agree with you that anyone commiting suicide is probably not in their right mind to begin with. I’m just happy it’s God that ultimately judges us.

As to being buried in concecrated ground - I don’t know. I’ll have to go back to my priest on that one. Most Catholics I know aren’t buried in concecrated ground anyway. I think it used to be more of a big deal than it is today, but I’ll check.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually, I have to agree with you that anyone commiting suicide is probably not in their right mind to begin with. I’m just happy it’s God that ultimately judges us.

As to being buried in concecrated ground - I don’t know. I’ll have to go back to my priest on that one. Most Catholics I know aren’t buried in concecrated ground anyway. I think it used to be more of a big deal than it is today, but I’ll check.

A young woman from our parish committed suicide this past Nov. She had a funeral Mass and was buried at Mt. Calvary Catholic Cemetery.

http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spacebal...c.flickr.com/4013/4260542805_8f0681a7ca_m.jpg

 

[TheosisM]

Actually, I have to agree with you that anyone commiting suicide is probably not in their right mind to begin with. I’m just happy it’s God that ultimately judges us.

As to being buried in concecrated ground - I don’t know. I’ll have to go back to my priest on that one. Most Catholics I know aren’t buried in concecrated ground anyway. I think it used to be more of a big deal than it is today, but I’ll check.

As RebeccaJ noted in her example, they are allowed to be buried in consecrated ground. Here is something from “Catholics United for the Faith”:

May someone who commits suicide receive a Catholic funeral? In the past, people who committed suicide were often denied a Church funeral. This was not a judgment of the deceased’s eternal destiny (indeed, the Church has always offered Masses for those who have committed suicide). Rather, a Church funeral was denied to the deceased in order to avoid giving scandal to the faithful and to emphasize the grave nature of suicide.

As in the past, the Church teaches that suicide is and always will be objectively and gravely wrong. At the same time, today she better understands the psychological disturbances that may influence a suicide and thus mitigate personal culpability. This being the case, those who take their life are now typically provided funerals (cf. Catechism, no. 2282).

cuf.org/Faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=264

The catechism paragraph noted above agrees with you and dianaiad as far as noting being in the right mind:

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

This article may also be helpful:

he Church allows Christian burial in consecrated ground to those who have committed suicide. “Only God can stand in judgment of a person’s soul or know their final thoughts, regrets, desires or prayers. Funeral Masses are offered for the victims of suicide and ongoing Masses are said for the eternal rest of their soul,” a spokesman said. “God is merciful. He is always ready to forgive.”
timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6677561.ece

The Catholic Encyclopedia reflects perhaps the “older” view, which still gave exceptions:
“Further, Christian burial is to be refused to suicides (this prohibition is as old as the fourth century; cf. Cassian in P.L., XL, 573) except in case that the act was committed when they were of unsound mind or unless they showed signs of repentance before death occurred.”
newadvent.org/cathen/03071a.htm

 

[SteveVH]

A young woman from our parish committed suicide this past Nov. She had a funeral Mass and was buried at Mt. Calvary Catholic Cemetery.

http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spacebal...c.flickr.com/4013/4260542805_8f0681a7ca_m.jpg

I also have done music at three funeral Masses of people who have committed suicide. There was no difference other than the eulogies were tough. We all depend upon the mercy of God and we shouldn’t lose hope for anyone’s salvation.

 

[Monte1945]

AMDGtoo,
But “as for me and my house”, marriage is an eternal covenant and I am deeply and eternally grateful that it is. It is so much more than having children! So much deeper, richer, fuller, and more meaningful although having children (whether by birth or by adoption) enriches marriage by vast dimensions. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” is oh, so true.

It seems to me, that you are attempting to understand and evaluate the
“after life” after the resurrection from within your perception through your
human senses.

You are assuming that the future life there will be similar to our present
reality perceived through our current human perceptions.

What type of “forms” we will have and what kind of happiness through
fulfillment we will experience “there” might not be the same as it is
here.

If one enters into the life after the resurrection one is not suppose to have any of the
same kind of needs as we feel during our current life.

It certainly is indicated that there will not be any need for any of the attachments we have need of here.

Such as “marriage”.

If one has totally completion of happiness what would be the use of any fulfillments there?

I personally have not been married for over thirty five years, and I have not been nor am I unhappy because of it.

Is it of your church’s opinion that I will be forced to have a wife over there? (if I get there)

 

[Monte1945]

Monte1945,
If you want a list, then in the interest of time during the future rather than drag these things out, even though this will make this thread go on for weeks as people take issue with every case, here is a list (but remember that drifting is what happened and that many truths including the most important of acknowledging Christ’s atoning power and grace and His example of love and peace have remained):

1. Eternal marriage covenant. (Given to Adam and Eve.)
2. Covenant of baptism after belief by the particular individual, in a covenant with Jesus Christ.
3. Authority to administer those covenants, granted by God through the apostles on the earth, and only through such apostles being on earth among men.
4. Repentance does not include “doing penance”, but does include “restitution”.
5. Understanding the importance of seeking to be a “joint heir” with Jesus Christ, and not short-changing the doctrine which allows people to make excuses for not seeking continuous improvement during the course of their lives, continuous seeking for sanctification through the Holy Spirit, continuous seeking for the gifts of the Spirit and the gift of revelation through the Holy Spirit which will bring “hidden wisdom” and will guide to greater capacity to forgive and love others and forgive self and rely upon the grace of Jesus Christ Who is mighty to save and to glorify those who become His sons and His daughters through His atoning grace.
6. Understanding that God spoke to prophets in more places in the world than one particular area anciently, because His love encompassed all of His children and there were righteous people in more places than one. If He spoke to prophets, then they could write it down and could preserve a record of His dealings with them.
7. Understanding that all Biblical prophecies will be fulfilled.

Brother Parker,
Yes, I understand your point of these listed issues would make this a very long stretched
out forum… but they are very interesting and certainly a means to an interesting end if
one might engage oneself in them.

Maybe one issue at a time. would suffice for this area…

This thread is so broad I can’t say, that these issues would not be within the subject it was begun with. But I think they are very interesting and unless we do approach them we will not be able to actually measure them.

Actually some of the statements you have made are not that far off from Roman Catholic
views of the same subject.

Each can be discussed without sentiment or anger… and it would be very interesting too me.

I don’t think there is any reason to even consider number one… there just isn’t
enough “revealed truths” to make any kind of educated guess at whether one
will have eternal marriage in the here after… that is merely human speculation.
Attempting to grasp intellectually a abstract truth which there isn’t much revealed
by God.

We know that God is, because He revealed Himself to us… We have “parts” of knowledge of God’s eternal truths from the view of what He has revealed… but we do not have
complete knowledge of all of it. The issue of Marriage in the after life has not been
revealed. One might speculate and come up with some reasonable views but since
there isn’t anything to measure those “views” against. We can’t measure it.

There has to be a true “truth” to measure the Truths of God. I am using the word
“true” as from a tool’s point of being true.

 

[Monte1945]

Monte1945,

1. Covenant of baptism after belief by the particular individual, in a covenant with Jesus Christ.

I take it you are referring to “Baby Baptism” as something which you do not feel as
something which is a reasonable doctrine.

And that the Catholic church, being one which does practices this is teaching false doctrine.

That is “reasonable” from one point of view but not necessarily the only view.

The matter of being water baptized is similar to Jewish practices of the circumcision. A baby boy was brought to the temple, eight days old and was put under the eye of God in the Temple for his foreskin to be removed to be a sign or mark that this person was
in the family of Abraham and that God had a covenant with him and his people.
He then became a member of the family of God.

Mary and Joseph took Jesus for this ritual on the fifth day of his birth.
Thus we have the old testament procedure of a parent/adult taking a child
to God without the child being involved in the decision.

Thus a child could/can be taken and accepted by God.

The real difference in seeing this ritual from your eyes and that of the Catholic church
is the manner of the distribution of God’s Graces to the people.

From what is generally believed some people seem to feel that the only channel one has to God’s Salvation is through one’s intellect or reason and only “after” using their senses they can intellectually realize God’s plan of salvation for them. And from that platform “only” they can begin to receive God’s Graces and have a relationship with God.

It isn’t that simple from the Catholic point of view… that just might be a bit more of man’s
limited intellect working in regards to this issue…

Jesus said, “do not stop the children from coming unto me” “who ever does that,
it would be better if that man was never born… better for him to be taken to the deepest
sea with a stone hung around his neck and sunk”…

Jesus was asked how can I find salvation and Jesus said, you must be baptized in water and in the spirit. This was not said, “after you have intellectually realized my plan for salvation”…

There isn’t any detailed instructions or listed means to how exactly the Holy Spirit
works when it is written he shall come and live in all of us. And he will come without
any anyone telling us about him… (Hebrews 8) The writer quotes that God will send
his spirit (laws) in our hearts and minds and no man need tell his neighbor know the
lord for all shall know him…

At what age is that done? Can the holy spirit come to a child and live within him?

When a catholic couple take a baby to be baptized in the church. The first reason
is that if the holy spirit comes to infants, the family and church is praying for Him to
come to this child… the second purpose is that the parents will promise God that
they will witness the love and name of Jesus to this child during his growth.

The parents will ask two people to come as God Parents and witnesses to the
vow of the parents. The God Parents take a vow to present this child with the witness
of Jesus and to live a Christian life in front of this child… and if the parents were to die these God Parents will take over the parents Christian duties.

The priest who is officiating at this service takes a vow to God that the church
will witness to this baby, until this child is of the age, to make a vow of faith for him/her
self. which is part of the program of that child.

There is a program for this child to follow… usually in a catholic School but if no school
is available then the church will take that duty. and teach that child his bible lessons.
At a certain age… usually early teen age… the child will make a vow to accept his/her
own responsibilities of their own Christan walk. this is called confirmation.

The main reason for the child being baptized is that we believe the Holy Spirit
comes to us. and infuses our human natures with an added entity which is what
we call the Grace of God… I guess one might see this more in the description of

“Enlightened Reason” (reason infused with divinity)

From this perspective one might not be able to comprehend some of God’s Truths
from reason “alone”.

I can’t sit here and say, because I can’t grasp this from my ability reason alone, that there isn’t some truth too it…

 

[AtticusFinch]

to understand the LDS belief on baptism, one must understand the LDS do not consider infants part of their families

 

[ParkerD]

to understand the LDS belief on baptism, one must understand the LDS do not consider infants part of their families

AtticusFinch,
I am surprised that you would somehow have drawn this conclusion. The LDS belief is very clearly stated if one looks for it, that little children are already completely saved through the atonement of Christ and will be exalted in their resurrection, no question about it. They will be with those righteous families who are also exalted, so if the parents weren’t righteous then the child would be with an ancestor who was righteous and desired the full gospel covenants and made them.

My wife’s mother, for example, had a child who died at birth and that child is now with the dad who died when he was forty-five. They are in the spirit world together. They will also be together in their resurrection, along with my wife’s mother, and will rejoice together then just as they rejoice together in the spirit world with other members of the ancestral family.

You might want to do some primary source reading before writing a remark showing this kind of lack of knowledge. (At least, I would hope so.)

 

[RebeccaJ]

All LDS have an immaculate conception, only theirs rubs off by the time they’re eight years old.

 

[paul_c]

Brother Parker,
Yes, I understand your point of these listed issues would make this a very long stretched
out forum… but they are very interesting and certainly a means to an interesting end if
one might engage oneself in them.

Maybe one issue at a time. would suffice for this area…

This thread is so broad I can’t say, that these issues would not be within the subject it was begun with. But I think they are very interesting and unless we do approach them we will not be able to actually measure them.

Actually some of the statements you have made are not that far off from Roman Catholic
views of the same subject.

Each can be discussed without sentiment or anger… and it would be very interesting too me.

I don’t think there is any reason to even consider number one… there just isn’t
enough “revealed truths” to make any kind of educated guess at whether one
will have eternal marriage in the here after… that is merely human speculation.
Attempting to grasp intellectually a abstract truth which there isn’t much revealed
by God.

We know that God is, because He revealed Himself to us… We have “parts” of knowledge of God’s eternal truths from the view of what He has revealed… but we do not have
complete knowledge of all of it. The issue of Marriage in the after life has not been
revealed. One might speculate and come up with some reasonable views but since
there isn’t anything to measure those “views” against. We can’t measure it.

There has to be a true “truth” to measure the Truths of God. I am using the word
“true” as from a tool’s point of being true.

You obviously haven’t been following this thread. There is abundant scriptural proof that disproves the Mormon concept of celestial marriage. In Luke 20: 34-36, Jesus flat out tells the Sadduccees who were testing them that their is no marriage in heaven. And Both Jesus (Matthew 19:12) and St. Paul (1corinthians 7) state that it while marriage is sacred, it is better to be celibate to focus on God if you are able to maintain it.

 

[SteveVH]

As RebeccaJ noted in her example, they are allowed to be buried in consecrated ground. Here is something from “Catholics United for the Faith”:

May someone who commits suicide receive a Catholic funeral? In the past, people who committed suicide were often denied a Church funeral. This was not a judgment of the deceased’s eternal destiny (indeed, the Church has always offered Masses for those who have committed suicide). Rather, a Church funeral was denied to the deceased in order to avoid giving scandal to the faithful and to emphasize the grave nature of suicide.

As in the past, the Church teaches that suicide is and always will be objectively and gravely wrong. At the same time, today she better understands the psychological disturbances that may influence a suicide and thus mitigate personal culpability. This being the case, those who take their life are now typically provided funerals (cf. Catechism, no. 2282).

cuf.org/Faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=264

The catechism paragraph noted above agrees with you and dianaiad as far as noting being in the right mind:

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

This article may also be helpful:

he Church allows Christian burial in consecrated ground to those who have committed suicide. “Only God can stand in judgment of a person’s soul or know their final thoughts, regrets, desires or prayers. Funeral Masses are offered for the victims of suicide and ongoing Masses are said for the eternal rest of their soul,” a spokesman said. “God is merciful. He is always ready to forgive.”
timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6677561.ece

The Catholic Encyclopedia reflects perhaps the “older” view, which still gave exceptions:
“Further, Christian burial is to be refused to suicides (this prohibition is as old as the fourth century; cf. Cassian in P.L., XL, 573) except in case that the act was committed when they were of unsound mind or unless they showed signs of repentance before death occurred.”
newadvent.org/cathen/03071a.htm

Thanks for the references and the (name removed by moderator)ut Theosis. Good stuff.

 

[paul_c]

Originally Posted by ParkerD
Monte1945,
If you want a list, then in the interest of time during the future rather than drag these things out, even though this will make this thread go on for weeks as people take issue with every case, here is a list (but remember that drifting is what happened and that many truths including the most important of acknowledging Christ’s atoning power and grace and His example of love and peace have remained):

1. Eternal marriage covenant. (Given to Adam and Eve.)
2. Covenant of baptism after belief by the particular individual, in a covenant with Jesus Christ.
3. Authority to administer those covenants, granted by God through the apostles on the earth, and only through such apostles being on earth among men.
4. Repentance does not include “doing penance”, but does include “restitution”.
5. Understanding the importance of seeking to be a “joint heir” with Jesus Christ, and not short-changing the doctrine which allows people to make excuses for not seeking continuous improvement during the course of their lives, continuous seeking for sanctification through the Holy Spirit, continuous seeking for the gifts of the Spirit and the gift of revelation through the Holy Spirit which will bring “hidden wisdom” and will guide to greater capacity to forgive and love others and forgive self and rely upon the grace of Jesus Christ Who is mighty to save and to glorify those who become His sons and His daughters through His atoning grace.
6. Understanding that God spoke to prophets in more places in the world than one particular area anciently, because His love encompassed all of His children and there were righteous people in more places than one. If He spoke to prophets, then they could write it down and could preserve a record of His dealings with them.
7. Understanding that all Biblical prophecies will be fulfilled.

Parker,
this is a different Apostasy list than you provided a few hundred post ago. if you remember, we established at that time that Catholics practiced everything that you claimed Mormon’s needed to do for exaltation except Celestial marriage and as you know, I have gone to great lengths to show you how Scripture contradicts that Mormon doctrine.

So lets go through your new list.
1 . We have discussed enough. There is no marriage in heaven (Luke 20: 34-36)
2. Baptism is a sacrament for the forgiveness of sins, the gaining of saving grace and entrance into the church. We believe a parent can be the proxy for their child to give them these benefits and that the Child themselves, when they reach their teens, can confirm their belief and gain the gifts of the holy spirit during the sacrament of confirmation.
3. The sacraments must be administered by the Apostles and their successors, we agree on this., The catholic view of successors is that they were apointed by the original apostles. As opposed to the Mormon view, where they were appointed by Joseph Smith and his successors
4. Catholics believe repentence requires both penance and restitution.
5. We believe that we should strive for holiness by following the words and example of Jesus. this is done by loving God and our neighbor. I don’t think there is a lot of differnce between our actions on this point.
6. All truth regarding salvation was given to the original Apostles to teach the nations. There are no new truths.
7. Yes, all biblical prophesies will be fulfilled.

So where is the apostasy fo the original church. We’ve already discussed in detail that it actually the Mormon’s who have diverged on point 1. On Point two, it can be effectively argued that Peter said to baptize the children in Acts 2: 38-39:38
38 Peter (said) to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.
39 For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call.” . On point 3, we agree that the sacraments need to be administered by the Apostles and their successors. In the Case of the Catholics, they successors actually were appointed by the Apostles, unlike the Mormon’s apostles, who were appointed by Joseph Smith. On pont 4, the Catholics do more than you think that is required. why would that be bad. In point 5 we are in agreement. On point 6 you are actually advocating that the original church NEVER had all the information, which would say Jesus failed in his mission. We are in agreement in point 7.

 

[sablouwho]

All LDS have an immaculate conception, only theirs rubs off by the time they’re eight years old.

Now, that’s just … funny!

 

[ParkerD]

Monte1945,
Thanks for the kind expression in presenting your point of view in your posts. I haven’t time to answer, other than to let you know that certainly marriage will always be a voluntary, free will and choice opportunity that is not only never forced, but if either spouse felt undermined in any way by their marriage then it simply would not be a binding covenant, and would be over at death.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,
this is a different Apostasy list than you provided a few hundred post ago. if you remember, we established at that time that Catholics practiced everything that you claimed Mormon’s needed to do for exaltation except Celestial marriage and as you know, I have gone to great lengths to show you how Scripture contradicts that Mormon doctrine.

So lets go through your new list.
1 . We have discussed enough. There is no marriage in heaven (Luke 20: 34-36)
2. Baptism is a sacrament for the forgiveness of sins, the gaining of saving grace and entrance into the church. We believe a parent can be the proxy for their child to give them these benefits and that the Child themselves, when they reach their teens, can confirm their belief and gain the gifts of the holy spirit during the sacrament of confirmation.
3. The sacraments must be administered by the Apostles and their successors, we agree on this., The catholic view of successors is that they were apointed by the original apostles. As opposed to the Mormon view, where they were appointed by Joseph Smith and his successors
4. Catholics believe repentence requires both penance and restitution.
5. We believe that we should strive for holiness by following the words and example of Jesus. this is done by loving God and our neighbor. I don’t think there is a lot of differnce between our actions on this point.
6. All truth regarding salvation was given to the original Apostles to teach the nations. There are no new truths.
7. Yes, all biblical prophesies will be fulfilled.

So where is the apostasy fo the original church. We’ve already discussed in detail that it actually the Mormon’s who have diverged on point 1. On Point two, it can be effectively argued that Peter said to baptize the children in Acts 2: 38-39:38
38 Peter (said) to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.
39 For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call.” . On point 3, we agree that the sacraments need to be administered by the Apostles and their successors. In the Case of the Catholics, they successors actually were appointed by the Apostles, unlike the Mormon’s apostles, who were appointed by Joseph Smith. On pont 4, the Catholics do more than you think that is required. why would that be bad. In point 5 we are in agreement. On point 6 you are actually advocating that the original church NEVER had all the information, which would say Jesus failed in his mission. We are in agreement in point 7.

Paul C,
What I am in agreement with you is that your beliefs and your chosen religious affiliation go hand in glove such that you have exactly what you want within those beliefs including “no new truths” which basically means that the Holy Spirit stops revealing knowledge, and you get everything you want in the way of knowledge of God from the Bible or from tradition.

I would not be content with that, ever, since first-hand knowledge and inspiration beyond the Bible are both available and promised. It is a different set of choices with a different set of results. The 1 Corinthians 2 kind of knowledge is absolutely promised by God, and Paul showed and taught it as did John the Beloved and Peter. I have what I want, and you have what you want, and God and Christ have kept Their promises in giving us according to our faith and “asking” that it “shall be given.”

It seems to serve no good end to belabor our differences further, Paul C. All the best to you, especially in your long and devoted marriage–congratulations.

 

[AtticusFinch]

AtticusFinch,
I am surprised that you would somehow have drawn this conclusion. The LDS belief is very clearly stated if one looks for it, that little children are already completely saved through the atonement of Christ and will be exalted in their resurrection, no question about it. They will be with those righteous families who are also exalted, so if the parents weren’t righteous then the child would be with an ancestor who was righteous and desired the full gospel covenants and made them.

My wife’s mother, for example, had a child who died at birth and that child is now with the dad who died when he was forty-five. They are in the spirit world together. They will also be together in their resurrection, along with my wife’s mother, and will rejoice together then just as they rejoice together in the spirit world with other members of the ancestral family.

You might want to do some primary source reading before writing a remark showing this kind of lack of knowledge. (At least, I would hope so.)

Nope…YOU should do some research. The Bible, on more than one occasion, says a WHOLE HOUSEHOLD or family was baptized. Now, you either have to believe that included children, or that miraculously, the only households where everyone was baptized no children existed. Or, that LDS do not consider children to be part of the household.

 

[paul_c]

Paul C,
What I am in agreement with you is that your beliefs and your chosen religious affiliation go hand in glove such that you have exactly what you want within those beliefs including “no new truths” which basically means that the Holy Spirit stops revealing knowledge, and you get everything you want in the way of knowledge of God from the Bible or from tradition.

Parker, just because you aren’t content with the Truths relayed by the Christ and the original apostles, doesn’t mean that there are more truths to be had. Truth is eternal and never changes by definition. Through study, we understand more of the truth of course, but there are no new truths.

I would not be content with that, ever, since first-hand knowledge and inspiration beyond the Bible are both available and promised. It is a different set of choices with a different set of results. The 1 Corinthians 2 kind of knowledge is absolutely promised by God, and Paul showed and taught it as did John the Beloved and Peter. I have what I want, and you have what you want, and God and Christ have kept Their promises in giving us according to our faith and “asking” that it “shall be given.”

There have always been heretical sects that claimed they " knew more", starting with the Gnostics What Paul and the other Apostles point out is that the truth of salvation is available to the unschooled but hidden from the learned. That is because it can be summed up in one word: Love. But if you don’t have love, no matter how learned you are, you will never get it. And the world tends to to value other things like money, fame, and power over love. Love is the greatest of the virtues as Paul makes explicit in 1corinthians 13. And Jesus sums it up the same way in his Great Commandment: Love God with all your heart, all your strength and all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems to serve no good end to belabor our differences further, Paul C. All the best to you, especially in your long and devoted marriage–congratulations.

I wouldn’t be so sure. I think there is still good to come out of these discussions. While I don’t agree with your view of God or Joseph Smith, I have learned a lot from these discussions. You have pushed me to research my own faith and yours as well. That is all to the good and others also benefit from that research.

You know, I do want to point out one more thing relative to the differences between the Catholic and Mormon view of God. Catholics view God as an eternal, infinite being that made all things and knows all things. A being of pure love. All we want to do is be in his presence and serve him. That is enough for us because it means we will have love and give love form the source of all love. There is nothing more to be had. Power, money, fame. What do we need that for?

Mormon’s on the other hand, aspire to be Gods in their own right. But why? Do you crave the power and responsibility that comes with being God? Wasn’t this the same sin of pride that drove Satan away from God? He wanted to be God, too.

I know that you have repeated several times in this thread and others that good Catholics will get what they want: to be servants in the presence of the most high God but that Mormon’s, based on celestial marriage and other superior ordinances will be exalted beyond that and become Gods in their own right. But what is it about being a God that you need and desire?

 

[ParkerD]

Parker, just because you aren’t content with the Truths relayed by the Christ and the original apostles, doesn’t mean that there are more truths to be had. Truth is eternal and never changes by definition. Through study, we understand more of the truth of course, but there are no new truths.

There have always been heretical sects that claimed they " knew more", starting with the Gnostics What Paul and the other Apostles point out is that the truth of salvation is available to the unschooled but hidden from the learned. That is because it can be summed up in one word: Love. But if you don’t have love, no matter how learned you are, you will never get it. And the world tends to to value other things like money, fame, and power over love. Love is the greatest of the virtues as Paul makes explicit in 1corinthians 13. And Jesus sums it up the same way in his Great Commandment: Love God with all your heart, all your strength and all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself.

I wouldn’t be so sure. I think there is still good to come out of these discussions. While I don’t agree with your view of God or Joseph Smith, I have learned a lot from these discussions. You have pushed me to research my own faith and yours as well. That is all to the good and others also benefit from that research.

You know, I do want to point out one more thing relative to the differences between the Catholic and Mormon view of God. Catholics view God as an eternal, infinite being that made all things and knows all things. A being of pure love. All we want to do is be in his presence and serve him. That is enough for us because it means we will have love and give love form the source of all love. There is nothing more to be had. Power, money, fame. What do we need that for?

Mormon’s on the other hand, aspire to be Gods in their own right. But why? Do you crave the power and responsibility that comes with being God? Wasn’t this the same sin of pride that drove Satan away from God? He wanted to be God, too.

I know that you have repeated several times in this thread and others that good Catholics will get what they want: to be servants in the presence of the most high God but that Mormon’s, based on celestial marriage and other superior ordinances will be exalted beyond that and become Gods in their own right. But what is it about being a God that you need and desire?

Paul C,
I totally agree with the truths taught by Christ and the apostles, as well as the truths taught by all the prophets. I understand those truths, abide by them as best I can, and live for the promises and live to keep the covenants. I love the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Your last question is a very good one. I would not say that I “aspire” to do that or be a “god”, but I have enjoyed being a father and learning about free agency while also seeking to lead and inspire them along the way, so I can grasp the connection with other intelligences and spirits in the eternities, and the joy that could come from seeing their growth and from loving unconditionally.

Have a good day.