MERGED Questions about Mormonism

[StephenKent]

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?

Actually, it’s not all that difficult and the reading would be enlightening. Here in the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum, whenever a question expressly addresses an issue about Mormonism (and this thread is one), the discussion often (most often) diverts to a wide range of issues different from the topic at hand (here, in this thread, the topic is *theosis *or deification).

If you go, say, to the Eastern Catholicism forum, where the question is not expressly about the theology of the Latter-day Saints, you’ll see simple, straightforward, honest discussion among Catholics of the topic, presented and analyzed in a non-judgmental, matter-of-fact way, acknowledging the simple truth that Catholics in both Eastern and Western traditions believe in theosis and deification. (See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=617499 (posts ## 9, 11 and 15) where a Catholic shows his understanding of the concept, using Peter as his guide).

You should read the links. It will be informative. I might suggest you start with a watered-down, simplified reading if that is more to your liking. For example, Wikipedia has an article on the subject here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinization_(Christian

 

[StephenKent]

The Catholic Answers Forum software lopped off the closing parenthesis of the link I included in my post immediately above. When you get taken to the Wikipedia site, click on the link in the following sentence: “Did you mean: Divinization (Christian)” That will take you to the page I was linking you to. Otherwise, you can cut and paste my entire link (including the closing parenthesis) into the address bar of your browser and that will take you to the right page, too.

 

[Porknpie]

Actually, it’s not all that difficult and the reading would be enlightening. Here in the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum, whenever a question expressly addresses an issue about Mormonism (and this thread is one), the discussion often (most often) diverts to a wide range of issues different from the topic at hand (here, in this thread, the topic is *theosis *or deification).

If you go, say, to the Eastern Catholicism forum, where the question is not expressly about the theology of the Latter-day Saints, you’ll see simple, straightforward, honest discussion among Catholics of the topic, presented and analyzed in a non-judgmental, matter-of-fact way, acknowledging the simple truth that Catholics in both Eastern and Western traditions believe in theosis and deification. (See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=617499 (posts ## 9, 11 and 15) where a Catholic shows his understanding of the concept, using Peter as his guide).

You should read the links. It will be informative. I might suggest you start with a watered-down, simplified reading if that is more to your liking. For example, Wikipedia has an article on the subject here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinization_(Christian

This is mental gymnastics. I too would simply like to see a chapter and verse or two from St. Paul. Surely, this was a very simple request.

Book:
Chapter:
Verse:

Simple. I can find multiple commentaries on any verse and would look forward to reading a view that I do not have. Simple. Easy.

 

[HonoraDominum]

This is mental gymnastics. I too would simply like to see a chapter and verse or two from St. Paul. Surely, this was a very simple request.

Book:
Chapter:
Verse:

Simple. I can find multiple commentaries on any verse and would look forward to reading a view that I do not have. Simple. Easy.

This.

I can’t respond to a post without one simple talking point. Would your links be enlightening? Absolutely. But to ask this is like a missionary asking me to read the Book of Mormon. For most Mormons, it takes an entire year to get through it, and many have only read it cover-to-cover a few times in their life if ever. To ask such a huge task of someone for a simple conversation about theology is simply an unreasonable request.

This is not a book club, this is an internet forum. Even if you said, “In this link, on page blah blah, it explains the point that I was trying to make that …”, that would narrow it down. Give me one page, one point that proves the argument that you are trying to make and we’ll start there. I don’t need to discuss “watered down” theology, I just need a topic. It would be like me saying, Here’s the Baltimore Catechism, let’s talk about the essence of being a practicing Catholic.

It’s not like I’m a light reader - I’m simultaneously reading “Abandonment to Divine Providence” and “Practicing the Presence of God”, and also attend daily Mass and work full time. I simply don’t have hours of time to read simply so I can respond to a simple internet post. I wouldn’t even know where to start.

Just one point. Just one argument. That’s all I’m asking.

 

[CyberAngel]

Isa 43:10 You are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that you may know, and believe me, and understand that I myself am. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there shall be none.

 

[Publisher]

Isa 43:10 You are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that you may know, and believe me, and understand that I myself am. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there shall be none.

After the Jews returned from Exile around 600BCE, they decidely moved toward a true monotheistic stance…as reflected in the later prophets, such as Isaiah which you quote…however, prior to the Captivity/Exile occurance, Israel was henotheistic…not monotheistic. The God of Israel was God above all gods…they were to have no other God before Him…YHVH was the greatest of the Gods…but not the only god.

That changed after the Return…probably some things they learned from Zorastrian influence…also “Satan” took on a more prominant role in Jewish thought and belief…also a Zorastrian influence on the religious development of Judaism.

 

[WuXiaoXia]

Isa 43:10 You are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that you may know, and believe me, and understand that I myself am. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there shall be none.

As much as any Latter Day Saint would love to say that their God is one and the same as the traditional Christian conception that is stating a blatant lie. My understanding is that the LDS folk do a lot of good for the world and for themselves and that is a wonderful thing. They need to admit though that their religion is an entirely new beast. That would obviously bring up various issues for religious dialogue and maintaining/acquiring converts but perhaps one day they’ll speak the truth on this issue.

 

[Porknpie]

After the Jews returned from Exile around 600BCE, they decidely moved toward a true monotheistic stance…as reflected in the later prophets, such as Isaiah which you quote…however, prior to the Captivity/Exile occurance, Israel was henotheistic…not monotheistic. The God of Israel was God above all gods…they were to have no other God before Him…YHVH was the greatest of the Gods…but not the only god.

That changed after the Return…probably some things they learned from Zorastrian influence…also “Satan” took on a more prominant role in Jewish thought and belief…also a Zorastrian influence on the religious development of Judaism.

Publisher -

Are you referring to the Jewish OT belief in God being above the “heavenly beings”? I understood these to be a belief in Angels and not Gods.

 

[SteveVH]

Here in the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum, whenever a question expressly addresses an issue about Mormonism (and this thread is one), the discussion often (most often) diverts to a wide range of issues different from the topic at hand (here, in this thread, the topic is *theosis *or deification).

If you go, say, to the Eastern Catholicism forum, where the question is not expressly about the theology of the Latter-day Saints, you’ll see simple, straightforward, honest discussion among Catholics of the topic, presented and analyzed in a non-judgmental, matter-of-fact way, acknowledging the simple truth that Catholics in both Eastern and Western traditions believe in theosis and deification.

However, the issue between Mormon and Catholic theology is not over theosis or deification. It is over the Mormon theory of “exaltation” vs. theosis or deification. They are fundamentally different.

The theory of “Exaltation” requires man to be a self-existent being, complete with divine nature in and of himself. It is not created or caused by God in any way. While God is needed to help man progress, man holds within his own being the power to reach, at last, godhood itself.

“Theosis”, on the other hand, teaches that our destiny is a supernatural one in which we share in the divinity and life of the Holy Trinity for eternity, but we must receive this gift from God because we lack dvinity by nature. Theosis means that we have received divine nature from God, not of ourselves. This also says something about God. If our divine nature is created in us by God then God could not have progressed from man. Theosis requires an Uncaused Cause who we call God.

 

[Publisher]

Publisher -

Are you referring to the Jewish OT belief in God being above the “heavenly beings”? I understood these to be a belief in Angels and not Gods.

No, in Israel’s early history…they wee not monotheists as we have come to understand monotheist…they were henotheists…while they accepted the existence of other gods, they alone were chosen by YHVH to be His chosen people, and they were to have no other Gods before Him…Israel came to believe that only YHVH existed AFTER the Captivity/Exile and their Return…the later prophets NOW began proclaiming that YHVH alone existed…it was only after the Return that the Jews came to believe YHVH was “alone” and no other god existed…Zorastrian belief helped shape the concept of a single God…a 'modified" Zorastrian concept also influenced the Jewish belief and later development of “Satan” as no longer the Servant of God…but God’s adversary.

 

[CyberAngel]

No, in Israel’s early history…they wee not monotheists as we have come to understand monotheist…they were henotheists…while they accepted the existence of other gods, they alone were chosen by YHVH to be His chosen people, and they were to have no other Gods before Him…Israel came to believe that only YHVH existed AFTER the Captivity/Exile and their Return…the later prophets NOW began proclaiming that YHVH alone existed…it was only after the Return that the Jews came to believe YHVH was “alone” and no other god existed…Zorastrian belief helped shape the concept of a single God…a 'modified" Zorastrian concept also influenced the Jewish belief and later development of “Satan” as no longer the Servant of God…but God’s adversary.

This is not what really happened
but I know from experience that I can’t convince otherwise
Once this thinking is stuck no verse can reverse it
You see what you were taught to see.
The only hope is WARNING

 

[StephenKent]

This is mental gymnastics.

Paul the Apostle taught in numerous passages that men are sons of God (as in chapter 8 of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans). Paul conceives of the resurrection as immortalization (1 Cor 15:42-49). 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 says that “we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another.”

In John 10:34, Jesus defends himself against a charge of blasphemy by stating: “Have I not said that ye are gods?” It it widely believed that Jesus is referring to Psalms 82:6 in saying “Ye are gods and children of the most high.”

Christ’s defence against the charge of blasphemy includes the following passages from John Chapter 10:

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

The scope and level of belief in the doctrine of deification among the various Christian denomniations varies greatly. While all Christian faiths espouse the belief that human beings will never be independent of God, and will never cease to be subordinate to God, there are ample biblical passages to support the belief that men can become “Gods” by overcoming the world through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.(1 John 5:4—5;Revelation 2:7-11). There are also several biblical passages which state that, through Christ, men may become heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ and will inherit all things just as Christ inherits all things.(Romans 8:17;Galatians 4:7;1 Corinthians 3:21-23;Revelation 21:7).

Christian denominations that believe in a more literal meaning of deification (most notably Latter-day Saints) believe that they are received into the “church of the firstborn,” meaning they inherit as though they were the firstborn.(Hebrews 12:23)

Christian denominations that believe in a more literal meaning of deification note that there are no limitations on these scriptural declarations; those who become as God shall inherit all things. Most notably, Latter-day Saints (i.e, Mormon Christians) believe that man can be one with Christ and with the Father and receive glory – though Mormon Christians believe man will always be subject to God.(1 John 3:2;1 Corinthians 15:49;2 Corinthians 3:18;John 17:21-23;Philippians 3:21)

 

[HonoraDominum]

In John 10:34, Jesus defends himself against a charge of blasphemy by stating: “Have I not said that ye are gods?” It it widely believed that Jesus is referring to Psalms 82:6 in saying “Ye are gods and children of the most high.”

Okay, now we have a point, now we have something biblical we can discuss. I can work with this. First, again, the quote in context:

[BIBLEDRB]John 10:30-38[/BIBLEDRB]

Let’s look at the basic argument that you are making here by quoting this scripture and connecting it to Psalms. You’re saying, look, Jesus quotes Psalms which says right there that men are “gods”, and then use that as a starting point to mention many other scriptures which talk of men becoming gods and heirs of God.

This is the wrong interpretation of this scripture.

Christ’s use of this scripture to make his point can be explained much better than I from the Haydock Commentary (available in Public Domain) (emphasis added):

Christ here stops the mouths of the Jews, by an argument which they could not answer, that sometimes they were called Gods, who acted by God’s authority. I have said: you are Gods. Psal. lxxxi. 6.

To help further understand the concept of the bible’s frequent use of the word “gods” to refer to men, St. Alphonsus Liguori brings some light into this Psalms in his work “The Divine Office: Explanation of the Psalms and Canticles” (available in Public Domain). In describing Psalms 81, he summarizes it like this: “It is God whom the prophet makes speak in this psalm; he reproaches the princes and the judges of the earth for their evil administration of justice, and places before them the moment of death, when they themselves will have to be judged. The last verse shows us Jesus Christ coming to judge all men at the end of the world.” Here is Liguori’s interpretation of the final verses of this Psalm (emphasis added).

1. O Judges! I have set you up as gods of the earth,** by giving you a share of my own power; by virtue of this authority that you have received from the Most High, you are his sons**.
2. But take note that you are men, and as men you have all to die, and one day each of you will fall from his post, as the princes who went before you have fallen.
3. “Hereditabis in omnibus gentibus.” Thy reign shall extend over all the nations as They heritage, and ad the last day all these must submit to Thy justice and power.

In other words, he too understood the fact that in this Psalm, which is said in the voice of God, is generally interpreted to mean not “you are an equal to me” but “you have a power that I have because I have given this power to you, but you are still only a man.”

Here’s something you didn’t explain in your interpretation of the scripture: “I and the Father are one.” Catholics interpret this as the Son being consubstantial with the Father. Your focus on the study of this scripture seems to be the use of the word “gods”. But as I have discovered when studying the scriptures as a Catholic, Mormons teach the study of the scriptures very myopically. You see the word “gods” and seem to completely miss the point of the story. The Jews are about to stone Christ because he said he and the Father are one, and Christ says, if you see my works, you will know that what I said was true. He only uses this scripture as an example of the difference between the use of the word “gods” in Psalms and why he claims to be more than merely a man with power given to him by God, but the true Son of God.

 

[CyberAngel]

in Mormonism humans have pre-existence
e.g. we all are “gods” only that our god, the Heavenly Father, is the most advanced one.
Father has a sacred wife with which he conceived us physically
Also:
Jesus and Satan are brothers
only that Satan’s plan was to force humans to love god
while Jesus’s plan was that it should be out of free will
We are here to evolve and learn and
the best of us will become gods (fathers with several wives) in our own planet
and the cycle goes on
That requires Temple marriages (sealing) among other things

What else lustful Smith made up you can learn yourself easily
Is it worth it? Only if you need to study these things.
LDS Church is quite different from anything else
Mormon understanding of Father, Jesus, Satan is very different from other religions
Also humans are different. You just don’t remember your pre-existence…
Finally:
You will find out how J.Smith translated word-for-word the Book of Abraham.
AND
that now they explain the translation being “inspired”
why?
because the BoA is a hoax.
They didn’t know hieroglyphs back then
When they solved that mystery myriads of Mormons left the Church
The Veil of the real Devil is strong on the eyes of poor Mormons
Let’s pray that they get saved!

 

[Porknpie]

in Mormonism humans have pre-existence
e.g. we all are “gods” only that our god, the Heavenly Father, is the most advanced one.
Father has a sacred wife with which he conceived us physically
Also:
Jesus and Satan are brothers
only that Satan’s plan was to force humans to love god
while Jesus’s plan was that it should be out of free will
We are here to evolve and learn and
the best of us will become gods (fathers with several wives) in our own planet
and the cycle goes on
That requires Temple marriages (sealing) among other things

What else lustful Smith made up you can learn yourself easily
Is it worth it? Only if you need to study these things.
LDS Church is quite different from anything else
Mormon understanding of Father, Jesus, Satan is very different from other religions
Also humans are different. You just don’t remember your pre-existence…
Finally:
You will find out how J.Smith translated word-for-word the Book of Abraham.
AND
that now they explain the translation being “inspired”
why?
because the BoA is a hoax.
They didn’t know hieroglyphs back then
When they solved that mystery myriads of Mormons left the Church
The Veil of the real Devil is strong on the eyes of poor Mormons
Let’s pray that they get saved!

I was just reading 2 Peter 2 from another post. In 2 Peter, Paul is warning not to follow those with private interpretation of scripture. Could he not be clearer? Does this not sound like Joseph Smith?

19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable. You will do well to be attentive to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
20 Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation,

And
1 There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2 Many will follow their licentious ways, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled.
3 In their greed they will exploit you with fabrications, but from of old their condemnation has not been idle and their destruction does not sleep.

And
14 Their eyes are full of adultery and insatiable for sin. They seduce unstable people, and their hearts are trained in greed. Accursed children!

 

[mtolympus]

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?

There are three members of the Godhead. They are one God deriving authority from the Father to do the will of the Father.

Jesus prayed to the Father: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3)

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”.

Of course Pauls words apply to everyone, but his words should be considered in their context. Paul “marveled” that members of the churches of Galatia were “so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (Gal 1:1-6)

The original post simply assumed that the angel that brought the Book of Mormon was preaching another gospel. However, if the Church strayed from the original gospel between the time the apostles were killed until the doctrines of the Church were defined in the creeds in 425 AD, and if there was a restoration of the original gospel, then the Book of Mormon teaches the true gospel.

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.

Yes, and when the Apostles were killed and revelation ceased there was no one to keep the Church from following another gospel.

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?".

No I don’t know the hour of God’s judgement. I only know that many scriptures that I have quoted and which I believe relate to the restoration of the original gospel of Jesus Christ will apparently have fulfillment shortly before “the hour of (God’s) judgment.”

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come; and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. (Rev. 14:6-7)

 

[Timeless_Man]

Timeless Man,
Why do you identify yourself as Catholic when you are clearly LDS?

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

I don’t know how “Catholic” populated to my church membership. Upon reading your post, I tried to make a change but the site would not permit. I do apologize. There was no intent to deceive - just a mistake was made.

 

[SteveVH]

There are three members of the Godhead. They are one God deriving authority from the Father to do the will of the Father.

I am always amazed at the hesitancy most Mormon posters have in just saying what they actually believe. What you really believe is that they are three completley distinct and separate beings (as opposed to three persons in one being). Their “unity” exists only in purpose. So, in reality you do not believe in “one God”. You believe in at least three gods (divine beings) who are united, or are “one” in purpose only.

Of course Pauls words apply to everyone, but his words should be considered in their context. Paul “marveled” that members of the churches of Galatia were “so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (Gal 1:1-6)

Doesn’t seem like a lot has changed. These words very well describe our world today. I have seen it in my Church and I’m sure you’ve seen it in yours, but even more so in the secular world.

The original post simply assumed that the angel that brought the Book of Mormon was preaching another gospel. However, if the Church strayed from the original gospel between the time the apostles were killed until the doctrines of the Church were defined in the creeds in 425 AD, and if there was a restoration of the original gospel, then the Book of Mormon teaches the true gospel.

“If” is the operative word here. “If the Church strayed from the original gospel…” This is the version of history put forth by the Mormon church in order to justify its existence, however, it is a history completley lacking in evidence. There are several assumptions upon which this version of history is based. First of all there is the assumption that continuing “public” revelation is necessary in addition to the fullness of all revelation revealed in the person of Jesus Christ. The second assumption is that “priesthood authority” was lost after the death of the last Apostle; again an assumption for which there is no evidence.

Yes, and when the Apostles were killed and revelation ceased there was no one to keep the Church from following another gospel.

Well the obvious answer is that yes, there were many people to keep the Church from following another gospel. They were called bishops who were given the authority of the Apostles as their successors. Yes, we can trace every one of our bishops today (and actually, every priest as well) back to the original Apostles who laid their hands on the first bishops. No other church can make this claim, and certainly not the Mormon church. But even more to the point, the Church is not dependent upon any man in order to survive and hold true to the truth handed down to it by the Apostles themselves. The head of the Church is not man, but Jesus Christ. It is his Church. That is why it can never fail. The Church is guided into all truth by the constant presence of the Holy Spirit and the abiding presence of Jesus Christ who promised that he would not leave us orphans and would remain with the Church until the end of time. This means that there would never be a time when the Church was without the truth of the Gospel or without authority. The notion of the “Great Apostasy” assumes that Jesus did not keep his promises. We believe that he did and will continue to keep them.

 

[CyberAngel]

The head of the Church is not man, but Jesus Christ.
It is his Church. That is why it can never fail. The Church is guided into all truth by the constant presence of the Holy Spirit and the abiding presence of Jesus Christ who promised that he would not leave us orphans and would remain with the Church until the end of time. This means that there would never be a time when the Church was without the truth of the Gospel or without authority. The notion of the “Great Apostasy” assumes that Jesus did not keep his promises. We believe that he did and will continue to keep them.

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
AND
*Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. *

 

[mtolympus]

I am always amazed at the hesitancy most Mormon posters have in just saying what they actually believe. What you really believe is that they are three completley distinct and separate beings (as opposed to three persons in one being). Their “unity” exists only in purpose. So, in reality you do not believe in “one God”. You believe in at least three gods (divine beings) who are united, or are “one” in purpose only.

“Be believe in God the Eternal Father, and in His Son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost”
-Joseph Smith

I have said many times that we believe they are one in authority and purpose, not in substance. We pray to the Father, “the only true God” the same God to whom Jesus prayed. We believe in the one God that Paul believes in: “to us there is but one God
the Father,…and one Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Cor.8:6)

I have never been taught in Church that we believe in three Gods. The following is what I believe explained as simply as I can:

There are three members of the Godhead. They are one God deriving authority from the Father to do the will of the Father.

“If” is the operative word here. “If the Church strayed from the original gospel…”

I use the word “if” to be polite as a guest on your website. I am only trying to explain what I believe.