This may be just a bit off topic, but I think I need some clarification.No offense intended, but those are the terms used in the literature. It seems to be a standard developing in academia.
This question was recently discussed in the tread “Poll: Romney…” The LDS do believe there are three in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and that these three are one. They are one in purpose, one in authority and they bear record as one. (1 John 5:7)How can you not believe in the Trinity when 1 John 5:7 is very clear that the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit are ALL God?
Galations 1 8:9 doesn’t say anything about the Book of Mormon. Paul was writing to the Churches of Galatia. (Gal 1:2) He was writing to them because the early church was straying from the gospel of Christ. He said: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pevert the gospel of Christ.” (Gal 1:6-7)Also, how can you believe in the Book of Mormon if the Bible says not to in Galatians 1:8-9?
To be fair, you should also inform everyone of what you don’t believe when making a comparison of LDS doctrine of the Godhead to the doctrine of the Trinty. When you say you believe that there are “three in heaven” it begs the question, three of what? Three Gods?This question was recently discussed in the tread “Poll: Romney…” The LDS do believe there are three in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and that these three are one. They are one in purpose, one in authority and they bear record as one. (1 John 5:7)
Do you really believe that we should view the import of the words of Paul as only applying to the Galatians? Can I read what was written and conclude that it just doesn’t apply to me? What he said applies to all Christians at all times. We are not to believe another Gospel than that which was given to us by the Apostles, period. Because one wishes to call himself an Apostle today does not change the reality of Paul’s words and the fact that the Book of Mormon is “another gospel”.Galations 1 8:9 doesn’t say anything about the Book of Mormon. Paul was writing to the Churches of Galatia. (Gal 1:2) He was writing to them because the early church was straying from the gospel of Christ. He said: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pevert the gospel of Christ.” (Gal 1:6-7)
This had nothing to do with changes in “doctrine” (they had no authority to change doctrine) it had to do with the fact that they were not living according to the “doctrine” they had received.This shows how susceptable the early church was changes in doctrine.
Yes, the Apostles were able to correct false doctrine which is why they gave the warning (to all of us, not just the Galatians) not to accept another gospel.The apostles were led by revelation and they were therefore able to correct false doctrine when it showed up. Paul said: “But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man, For I neither received it, of man, niether was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” (Gal 1:11-12)
And you have some sort of evidence for believing that Jesus would start a Church which would not live beyond the lives of the Apostles? He commands that they make disciples of all nations, but did not intend for the Church to carry on this work or to have the authority he clearly gave once the twelve had died? The truth is you don’t have any objective evidence to support this notion. It is, however, necessary in order to justify the existence of the LDS church which would otherwise have no purpose for existing.LDS believe that the apostles were there to lead the church by revelation and when the apostles were killed revelation ceased
And? Do you know the hour of God’s judgment? If not, how then do you know that we live “shortly prior” to that event?John saw in vision an angel that would bring the gospel to preach on earth shortly prior to the “hour of (God’s) judgement”:
It very clearly tells that that we should not accept another gospel, even if it comes from an angel. If the Book of Mormon was giving us the same gospel, and not “another” gospel then there would be no need for it to begin with. We already have it. By its very existence and the claims made concerning it, it is “another gospel”.The Bible doesn’t say we should doubt all angels, for they might be preaching the original true gospel of Jesus Christ.
It’s hard to explain to someone who was not raised Mormon, but being taught the Bible in the LDS church has an amazing bias against the truths that are taught in the Catholic church. Let me give you an example that leapt out at me. In perusing my old Quad (the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants and Pearl of Great Price scripture combo) recently, I came across this section of my bible:
Sign in - Google Accounts
When I looked at this, and the way it was marked up, it blew my mind. As a Catholic, the emphasis is always on “Thy will be done”. The Mormon emphasis is what they call the “Atonement”, which is basically the emphasis on the burdens of all of the sin of mankind being given to Christ to bear in the garden. The Catholic emphasis, however, is on the struggle of Christ to accept the burden of the sacrifice that He is about to make, with the final resolution being that he does accept the cup to drink and begins his Passion. It’s kind of hard to describe, really, but if you want to learn more about the atonement you can read another post where I talked about it at length.
Another scripture that completely hit me over the head the first time I heard it in Mass was Matthew 15:11.
[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 15:11[/BIBLEDRB]
In context, this makes so much more sense. The Pharisees are criticizing Christ for not going through the ritual washing of hands before eating. Christ calls them out for the hypocrites they are, citing their violation of the fourth commandment as one of their more grievous crimes against God. Then he says it’s not what a person puts into their mouth that is sinful, but the words that come out of it. When I heard this, I thought, how in the world can the Word of Wisdom be true if Christ says that what is put into the mouth is not sinful?
Then I thought, no, gluttony is a sin, as is drunkenness, which is a subset of gluttony. However, in further pondering on the subject, I realized that Christ chiding the Pharisees about their nitpicking of the law was more of him calling them out on their own pride, and saying the phrase about what is put into the mouth was making the point that the law had changed. It also made me realize that for Mormons to say that I cannot go to the Temple because I drink coffee, and therefore am jeopardizing my eternal salvation because of Starbucks, just didn’t make sense according to the teachings of Christ. To judge a person unworthy of salvation because they have a glass of wine or two with dinner is completely against both the letter and spirit of the law as taught by Christ in this scripture.
But none of this ever caught my attention as a Mormon. I know I had read this scripture before, as I had “scripture chased” in Seminary for years. I truly believe as a Mormon, I was in the same state as the man in Mark 8, who when Christ put spit on his eyes and was asked if he could see, responded “I see men like trees, walking”. I could vaguely see something that resembled the true Gospel of Christ, but it was still obscured. With the gift of sanctifying grace received at my baptism and confirmation, Christ healed my spiritual blindness and I could truly give praise and glory to His holy name with a clear vision of who He really is.
Read item 22 at maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/studies/?vol=3&id=73How can you not believe in the Trinity when 1 John 5:7 is very clear that the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit are ALL God?
How recent was your conversion? From reading your past posts, it seems you were Catholic as recently as this past March.As a member of the LDS church (I am a convert),
Exactly. From reading the sticky thread called “Important Forum Information,” this forum is supposed to be about respectful dialogue between members of different faiths with a goal of reaching greater understanding of our various faiths. That can include disagreement and debate, of course, with the proviso that all discourse be “civil and charitable.” I enjoyed reading your post, but I would, respectfully, suggest an occasional paragraph break; it can help a person better follow your thoughts as well as provide some eye relief.Whether you are Catholic, Baptist, Luthern, Methodist, LDS, etc., we each can defend our beliefs with the Bible. And to those who may not share those same beliefs we may express “how can you believe such a thing”. We LDS respect other faiths but we, obviously, do not agree with some of their doctrine.
Sorry, but you lost me. Maybe you could keep your posts a litte shorter and use a paragraph now and then. Also I’m a little confused. Are you Catholic or Mormon, and if you are Mormon why do you identify yourself as Catholic?As a member of the LDS church (I am a convert), one of the fundemental truths I have learned about people and their beliefs - and the religion and others - is that our understanding is based primarily on our prejudices (prejudice as in pre-judging). We are all guilty of this ignorance. I have had many come to me with the question “What do Mormon’s believe”. Sometimes it is an honest question but usually it is an attempt to “bait” me to listen to some of the most unbelieveable doctrinal and practice errors that about my religion. I have tried to respond with “We do not believe anything like that”; upon which the “questioneer” responds with “Oh, yes you do”. I am more than willing to have a civil discussion with anyone that is interested in learning the truth of what the LDS church teaches, practices, and believes but I have grown weary of the futility of reasoning with prejudice and ignorance. That said! I can comfortably say that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (I speak of the teachings, practices, and believes of the church) respects all religions and people who live and teach principles taught by Jesus Christ - namely to live the two great commandment. Is that respect limited to Christians only? No! Whether you are Catholic, Baptist, Luthern, Methodist, LDS, etc., we each can defend our beliefs with the Bible. And to those who may not share those same beliefs we may express “how can you believe such a thing”. We LDS respect other faiths but we, obviously, do not agree with some of their doctrine. One of the responses in this forum was that Joseph Smith was told by the Lord that all churches - at that time - were in error But that is what every church teaches about every other church otherwise there would be no “other” churches. If all Christian denominations that believed all Christian churche true - as long as they believed the same fundemental principles, why not combine churches. The majority of Christian churches struggle financially to pay the rent, utilities, and the salaries of the church employees and to fill their houses of worship with worshipers. Why not combine their resources by combining their congregations. There would be more believers in fewer buildings and the economy of resource would probably permit those larger - but fewer - congregations to do much more in the way of service to the poor and needy. What I observe is that most Christian churches have fund raising projects to pay the rent and utilities and the minister’s (Pastor, Priest, etc.) salary but do very little in the way of true Christian charity. I know that the beliefs of the LDS church are strange to those outside of the faith. I have observed that this “strangeness” is a barrier to most people to look objectivly at our beliefs. In response to this “strangeness”, I think of what was revealed to Isaiah and Paul: For the Lord shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act." Isaiah 28:21 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are aperfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But as it is written, "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath "revealed them unto us by his Spirit : for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man "knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God bknoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God ; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth ; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man breceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God : for they are foolishness unto him : neither can he "know them, because they are 'spiritually "discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him ? But we have the mind of Christ. 1st Corinthians 2:6-16 The Lord’s work and acts have always been strange to those who do not understand or seek for understanding. As Paul said “we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of the world, that come to nought…” Perhaps some of you that may read my comments may help me in my understanding - or misunderstanding - how does one receive “understanding” of those sacred principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ by the wisdom of the world? You may respond that all one has to do is read the Bible. But among those who restrict their Christian beliefs to the Bible, there is so much confusion, decension, and disagreement that the Bible alone cannot be the answer. Many observe that they cannot understand how anyone can believe the doctrine of the LDS church generally and the Book of Mormon specificially - your observation can be expressed as that the beliefs of the LDS church are foolishness. I refer to what Paul said, "But the natural man (I would understand the natural man as being anyone that would rely on the “the wisdom of the world, that come to nought) receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him…”. Yes! the things of God have always been strange and foolish to the world and they have been rejected because man has always had a problem seeing beyond their prejudice and did not seek for the inspiration of God for the “wisdom of God”. Many years ago I was listening to a Christian radio broadcast where two pastors from different Christian sects were discussing with the shows host - who was also a Christian of a still another Christian belief - the question of the godhead: was the Father and Son and Holy Ghost three-in-one (I don’t know how to express this otherwise without writing a long liturgy). The two pastors were of the belief that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were the same being; the host believed they were three separate (no, the host was not LDS). They went back and forth with Biblical verses to support their individual beliefs. The conversation was becoming a little warm and, it was obvious the host was becoming frustrated with the lack of agreement for which all “Christians” should be in agreement. During the discussion, one of the “pastors” profiled those who would believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost could possibly be three separate individuals. The profile included the following: They would believe in modern day prophets They would believe in other scripture other than the Bible They believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are separate individuals And the list went on and on. It was obvious to whom they were profiling - the LDS church. But what I found very interesting is that at that moment the host announced that he believed the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were separate individuals and asked the pastors does that make me a cult member (oh yea, the profile was to identify cults). That is when the discussion began to be warm. The pastors never accused the host of being a cult but included him into the Christian community. I said, to the radio, “hey, how can you call the LDS church a cult because we believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are distinct individuals but give the host a pass? Where is your consistancy?”. Oh well, so much for objectivity. In an attempt to throw an olive branch to the host, at the conclusion of the discussion, one of the said (and I thought this was beautiful), “Well, I guess the only way we shall really know is that if God reveals it”. Again I addressed the radio, “Yea, Yes, You are beginning to understand - but God has revealed it. The age of confusion of who God is, who the Son of God is, and who the Holy Ghost is is now resolved”. His strange ways!
Mormonism is not polytheistic. Some would misinterpret the *Athanasian Creed *as if it were a proclamation of polytheism (“the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God” – Marquess of Bute’s English translation of the text of the Creed). Similarly, the Latter-day Saints’ belief in the Godhead can be and has been misinterpreted (“We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in his Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost” – First Article of Faith, which uses the word “God” once).Isn’t Mormonism kind of polytheistic? 3 separate beings are all gods? Men can become gods? It’s on the extreme side to me.
Here’s the difference between the Mormon’s concept of God and the LDS concept of God. According to the Plan of Salvation, as man is, God once was, and as God is, man may become. According to LDS theology, there is an Eternal Progression - just as God progressed, Man may progress. Also, Christ is of the same substance, the same “stuff” as Man, only perfect. His spirit was created at the same time as yours and as mine, and while he was the firstborne, he and you and I are identical substances, only he had a unique grace that the rest of us did not.Where Latter-day Saints and Roman Catholics differ is in the assertion that the Three Persons of the Godhead are of one substance (“homoousion”). Readers will note – if they read every word of the *Catholic Encyclopedia’s *entry for the *Blessed Trinity *-- that in all of its many paragraphs of scriptural quotations and citations, it studiously *avoids *ever mentioning 1 John 5:7-8, the scriptural passage that the originator of this thread otherwise asserts affirms Catholic belief in the Trinity. That passage does not affirm that belief; it was modified centuries after it was written to state what it never originally said. (*See *my post above). The authors and editors of the *Catholic Encyclopedia *well knew this (for the reasons stated in the first source linked to in my post above).
“* * * LDS teaching (from deception) . . . You can be Gods!!”
The above two comments do not take into account the teaching of the Apostle Paul. You can read some of the interpretations of *theosis *here:“In Catholic theology, God cannot change, and Man cannot progress in what his ‘stuff’ is. * * * * [W]e will never, ever have God stuff as part of our stuff.”
Timeless Man,Where does one begin? Hummmmm! I guess I’ll begin with Galatians 1.
It seems that Paul is addressing a specific group (the saints in Galatia - a saint is and was a member of the Christ’s church) that was having a problem with mixing their old religion with that which Paul preached. (Old habits and beliefs are difficult to change and the Galatians were having a problem with the transition from the old to the new.) Keep in mind that there was no compilation of the books that comprise the Bible at that time. Perhaps the only contact these people had with “the Church” was the brief visit(s) of the apostles and perhaps some inspired teachers.
“I marvel that ye (the Galatians) are so soon removed from him that called you inot the grace of Christ unto another gospel. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.” I wonder if Paul was speaking specifically of one of the hereitical philosophies that was a constant irritation to the Church leaders, that of Gnosticism. If not the Gnostics, then some other doctrine that was not what the apostles taught.
“But though we (the apostles?), or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Many of you are takeing a letter of Paul’s that was focused on a specific problem and using that as a universal application to anything that does not support your prejudice (see my earlier post).
The Church leaders were challenged by those Jews who would not leave their belief in salvation through obedience of “the law”. Ref. Galatians 2:21: “for it righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain”. What law? The law of carnal commandments given by God to Moses? And why did the national of Israel receive the law of carnal commandments? Because they would not let go of the religion they lived with in Egypt - paganism. When Moses did not return from the mount - where he conversed with God - Israel became impatient and constructed a golden calf to worship.
Joseph Smith - nor his successors - preached “any other gospel” than was taught by the Savior or his servants - the apostles and prophets. The difference is the selective verses - out of context - that so many use to “prove” their pre-conceived belief. Taken in context, Paul was addessing a specific problem with an identifiable group. Does that mean that the principle should not be applied universally? Absolutly, NO? But one needs to be very careful what they call “any other gospel”.
I’m a little surprised no one has used Revelations 22:18-19. This is the usual passage used to “prove” that God will never reveal any other scriptures. “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecyof this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are writtehn in this book.” What book? Lets look at some possibilities:
As I read Revelations, I see that from chapter 5 on John is speaking of this book - the book of the seven seals. It is very unique and no man is to add to the “prophecy of this book”. How can anyone add to a book sealed in the manner that this book is sealed?
- The Bible: Bible is from the Greek meaning a compilation or library of books. The Holy Bible is a compilation of books but the compilation did not occure for over one hundred years after the apostolic age. So John could not have been talking about something that did not exist. Could John of been speaking by revelation of that which was to come? That would be quite a stretch but would saitisy anyone looking for something that would justify their prejudice that God would not reveal anyting other than that which was to be compiled into this “library” of books.
- The Book of Revelation itself: Here is a great possibility. The problem is that, if John was speaking of the Book of Revelation, we cannot apply those verses as a warning that God will not reveal anything additionally. The Bookof Revelation is unique. It does not teach the members of the Church in that era but is more of a revelation of that which is to come.
- The Book of the Seven Seals (Revelation 5:1…): “And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with the seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Whop is worthy to open the book; and to loose the seals thereof? And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon…” Wow! Now we have a possibility that really makes sense.
Yet! Taken out of context this reference has been used to “prove” there will be not other scriptures. Again, a principle, teaching, and warning that is specific is taken out of context - as is Galatians chapter 1 - to “prove” that God will not reveal additionally than that which he has already revealed. The only thing that is proven is that scriptue is used to rationalize prejudice.
The strength of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the testimony of its members. A testimony revealed by the spirit of prophecy and revelation. John taught that “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”. (Revelation 19:10) A testimony transcends belief - it is knowledge revealed by the Holy Ghost that Jesus is the Christ. That is what Joseph Smith taught and what is taught today by the LDS church.
Taken out of context the Bible can “prove” anything. Taken - and understood - in its entireity will point to the truth of what is taught in the LDS church. But time, nor space permits a complete discussion.
I would love to address John 10:30 - “I and my Father are one.” But time nor space permits.
I am grateful for the testimony born by the Spirit that Jesus is the Christ and that Joseph Smth was a mortal prophet. I know that the doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are strange to the world and seem foolish to those who attempt to understand by the tools of “the natural man”. The docrine of Christ has always been strange to those on the outside looking in and those on the outside have always attempted to “prove” that “it” could not be true and they have used the scriptures and reasoning as the foundation of their attacks. But! It is true.
I hope all who read my contribution will forgive me for any typos - I usually don’t edit. And I hope you all understand that, to the best of my ability, I am trying to give context to your misunderstanding and I recognize my weakness in my efforts.
It is my prayer that we will all go to the source of truth and light - Jesus Christ - for greater understanding and not rely on the sophistry and wisdom of man.
Slam dunk refutation of Joseph Smith as a FRAUD. Makes me want to cry for Mormons who are some of the most decent people I have known. Joseph Smith had a high reputation for financial fraud and used to be a diviner for hire too. He married his own follower’s wives as his own and esteemed Muhammad too (which current scholarship also refutes as legend and a myth). God makes very special places for the likes of Joseph Smith who not only dupe the innocent but destroy their faith in the real God and fellow man.Mormonism loses all credibility when you watch this documentary where Joseph Smith supposedly claim to translate Egyptian hieroglyphs when no one knew what they meant. They go back and translate them and he was dead wrong.
youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE
I would like a Mormon to tell me precisely when the Church became corrupt. Was it in the first century? The third? The 16th? Before or after the Protestant Reformation? Before or after the split of the Orthodox Church? Was it before the Council of Hippo, among others, which declared the 73 books of the Bible? If the Church has been so corrupt, why do they accept the King James version as the authoritative Bible? It has 7 books missing, since the council declared there were 73. Dates and specifics, please.I’ve always thought of the Mormon doctrine of the Godhead as fairly equivalent to the idea of the Trinity. We accept that God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are all God and united in a fundamental way. However, we also believe they are separate individuals. One understanding of the Trinity also has the three united yet separate. I think where Mormons depart a bit from the orthodox understanding is that we claim that the Father and the Son have immortal bodies of flesh. I don’t see that this ought to be a huge doctrinal issue for other Christians, since most of them admit that God made himself flesh at one point anyway. That God should have the ability to present Himself as man with a body shouldn’t be too surprising in that case.
Mormons don’t think the Book of Mormon is preaching “another gospel.” Mormons believe it preaches the same gospel that Paul received by revelation, and that it was written for the purpose of restoring this truth to the earth after it had been gradually lost over years of apostasy (e.g. corruption introduced into the scriptures, loss of authority, loss of revelation, etc). That is the Mormon viewpoint, anyway. Needless to say, Mormons also pray for others to be “led to true Christianity” and many of them are very certain that their church is True.
The belief in more the one God=polytheism.Where Latter-day Saints and Roman Catholics differ is in the assertion that the Three Persons of the Godhead are of one substance (“homoousion”).
I’m going to have a very hard time responding to you when your evidence is links to huge documents with pages and pages of highly detailed theological arguments. Maybe we can narrow it down to a scripture or two from Paul that proves your argument and we can go from there?Allow me to respond to the following two points:
The above two comments do not take into account the teaching of the Apostle Paul. You can read some of the interpretations of *theosis *here:
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&ved=0CGsQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Forthodoxinfo.com%2Fgeneral%2Ftheosis-english.pdf&ei=_fosUNfxNubRyAHw9oC4Bg&usg=AFQjCNEYbAu7pySCDPI0O5xUXqmv_JVP6A (Eastern Orthodox)
And here:
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&ved=0CGUQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.etsjets.org%2Ffiles%2FJETS-PDFs%2F37%2F37-3%2FJETS_37-3_365-379_Clendenin.pdf&ei=_fosUNfxNubRyAHw9oC4Bg&usg=AFQjCNH3_GfjM7Zv0wvGdQ4HF5DKJZMgqQ (Eastern Orthodox)
And here:
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=49&ved=0CGYQFjAIOCg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbyustudies.byu.edu%2FarticleDownload.aspx%3Ftitle%3D8377%26linkURL%3D48.3GillumAgainst31fdae96-c1b4-442f-b587-0121b0ee0fa0.pdf&ei=c_0sULOHAsaayQGj4oGoDw&usg=AFQjCNFs9krXvIpdkj0cSeRcrbo6lJQ5Zw (Latter-day Saint and Roman Catholic)
And I might as well refer also to the views of our brothers, the Evangelicals:
maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publ…7&chapterID=63
The Apostle Paul taught us well.