M
majick275
Guest
I did…the catechism. (although technically your wiki link doesn’t require refutation as it doesn’t claim infallibility nor even take a firm stance on this issue)
- Status
Z
zerinus
Guest
The Catechism did not teach the doctrine “baptism of desire” for infants. I teaches a different doctrine for infants, which represents a change from what was originally taught in the Catholic Church. I am not interested in what the Catechism teaches now. My discussion related to what the Catholic Church used to teach.
zerinus
M
majick275
Guest
and you have NEVER given us an infallible teaching on that.
as far as change you are ignoring the meat of my post. the CONSISTENT teaching is that we don’t know what happens to unbaptized infants but that we hope for God’s mercy. that is the only infallible teaching on this.
as far as change you are ignoring the meat of my post. the CONSISTENT teaching is that we don’t know what happens to unbaptized infants but that we hope for God’s mercy. that is the only infallible teaching on this.
M
majick275
Guest
BTW… while this threadjack is a good subject to discuss (it’s better served with it’s own thread) re we going to get back the OP and mormon apologetics?
I don’t mind this at all but I really would like to get back to multiple reverses in mormon doctrine and how that is reconciled with direct revelation in light of Joseph fielding Smith’s treatment of the subject.
I don’t mind this at all but I really would like to get back to multiple reverses in mormon doctrine and how that is reconciled with direct revelation in light of Joseph fielding Smith’s treatment of the subject.
Z
zerinus
Guest
I think I did. The Council of Carthage, and every other orthodox teaching that came out of the Catholic Church at that time that was not denounced as being heretical.
False! The CONSISTENT teaching at that time was they are damned, and go to hell. The “we don’t know” doctrine is a recent one.
zerinud
Z
zerinus
Guest
I didn’t start the diversion. A question was asked to which I responded. You are the ones who are dragging it out into a labyrinthine maze.
Well, that is not relevant to the subject of the thread either.
Feel free to start a new thread on that one too if you wish. No guarantee I will join it though. It all depends on who asks what and on the attitude of the posters. 
zerinus
M
majick275
Guest
the council of carthage which was neither infallible nor ecumenical, NEVER said we know for a fact that unbaptized babies go to hell. it stated that the pelagian heresy was false specifically denouncing the interpretation of Jesus scripture on many mansions somehow providing a place in heaven for those who were still under original sin. you have produced nothing other than that. later infallible teachings let us know that the current catechism is absolutely correct. that is to say WE DON’T KNOW.
BTW what do you mean by orthodox here? infallible teaching would be the only type that matters.
M
majick275
Guest
no need for a new thread when that was the purpose of this one.I didn’t start the diversion. A question was asked to which I responded. You are the ones who are dragging it out into a labyrinthine maze.
Well, that is not relevant to the subject of the thread either.
zerinus
Z
zerinus
Guest
Z
zerinus
Guest
X
xmormon
Guest
Still waiting for a Mormon defender to take on this myriad of obvious frauds and changes…Once again i suggest we change the subject to a more provable point. let’s change the subject to Mormonism and it’s many changes. In Mormonism we’re not dealing with differing opinions of councils, we’re dealing with the claim of direct revelation from Jesus Christ himself to one man, Joseph Smith.
Let’s start with the thousands of changes made in the Doctrine and Covenants. For those who are unfamiliar with the Doctrine and Covenants (hereafter D&C) it is a Mormon book Joseph Smith taught contained the exact words of revelations from Christ. Many times Mormon leaders have boasted of the exactness of the revelations contained in the D&C for example: Joseph Fielding Smith tenth President of the Mormon church made this comment concerning Joseph Smith’s revelations:
Inspiration is discovered in the fact that each part, as it was revealed, dovetailed perfectly with what had come before. There was no need for eliminating, changing, or adjusting any part to make it fit; but each new revelation on doctrine and priesthood fitted in its place perfectly to complete the whole structure, as it had been prepared by the Master Builder. (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol, 1, page 170)
However any historical study reveals thousands of changes in Joseph Smith’s revelations, many of them changing the meaning of the revelations completely.
A Study of the number of changes made in the revelations reveals
1835 Edition—2643 Changes
1844 Edition—18 Changes
1845 Edition—36 Changes
1846 Edition—No Changes
1852 Edition—11 Changes
1854 Edition—10 Changes
1876 Edition—2 Changes
1882 Edition—1 Change
1921 Edition—91 Changes
While there have been a few Mormons who have been willing to admit that Joseph Smith’s revelations have been changed, many have not been that honest.
Clearly Joseph Smiths numerous changes disqualify his words as being real scripture. In Deuteronomy 4:2 we read:
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
We ask, If the revelations were from God, why would they have to be changed many times completely changing even reversing their original meaning? Was not the Mormon God capable of giving the revelations right the first time? If there is more interest in this subject we will discuss at length the changes and their significance.
Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
M
majick275
Guest
where? your post didn’t state that. it merely eliminated the pelgian belief in “limbo” as a part of heaven
Z
zerinus
Guest
Apostates and anti-Mormons are the biggest fraudsters of them all. They are evil and corrupt beyond words to describe.
zerinus
M
majick275
Guest
i remember just fine. the deceptive propaganda is directly tied to LDS history as that is where we see the more “controversial” mormon doctrines taught openly as well as the multiple changes in doctrines.
Z
zerinus
Guest
You must be hard of hearing (or seeing):
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3464318&postcount=71
zerinus
Z
zerinus
Guest
M
majick275
Guest
actually i think the changes in the D&C are much more doctrinally significant. first because the BoM to this day is at odds with mormon teaching. Many of the BoM changes were spelling and grammar. (although the move from Jesus is being God himself to the son of God is big) the D&C (including the BoC and LoF) has gone from Oliver using a divining Rod, god the father being spirit and the holy spirit not being a separate person, denouncement of polygamy as evil and claiming it is not practiced by LDS to polygamy makes Gods and no mention of divining rods, the father has a body to you may to practice polygamy and the BoA prohibition on black people having the priesthood is lifted.
M
majick275
Guest
no doing just fine. you don’t like the truth so I think you are suffering here.
M
majick275
Guest
nope like I said that post never proclaims that infants not baptized here on earth definitely burn in hell. it is exactly as i described.
Z
zerinus
Guest
Like I said, you are being delirious. You must be running a high temperature. A visit to the doctor would be advisable.
zerinus
- Status