Mormon doctrine in a nutshell!

[RC_Matt]

continued from #91

snip

Substituting sprinkling and pouring for immersion came about over a period of centuries. It was not until A.D. 1311 that the Roman Catholic Church proclaimed officially that baptism could be performed only by pouring. The Protestant churches cannot cite Biblical authority for their practice of sprinkling or pouring—they must admit that they adopted the practice from the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does not pretend to find the practice in the Bible. They believe the Catholic Church has the right to define and change doctrine regardless of what the Bible says. Therefore sprinkling and pouring for baptism have only human authority, not divine authority.

I know you addressed this to Ruthie, so I won’t comment on the bulk of it; however, the practice of pouring did not develop over a period of centuries. It has been an accepted practice since the very beginning, which is evident in much early Christian art; and it is specifically referenced in the Didache, which is kind of an early Catechism written around 50-70 AD:

“Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water (i.e., a river). If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” (Chapter 7)

By the way, the Catholic Church does not teach that baptism can only be performed by pouring; immersion is perfectly acceptable:

“Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.” (Catechism of The Catholic Church, paragraph 1239)

 

[why_me]

Amen, Paul.

To know the truth, you must separate Joseph Smith from Christ. They cannot both be telling the truth. Joseph Smith apparently never read these passages:

Matthew 22:30 “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

Mark 12:25 “When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

Luke 20:35 “But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage,”

The Word of the Lord. Amen!

These verses may be for temporal marriages. In the lds faith, those lds marriages that have been conducted in the lds church, will not be binding in the next life. But those marriages that occurred in the temple will be binding in the next life.

JS was very much aware of those passages above.

 

[why_me]

For the lds understanding of marriage:

BIBLE DICTIONARY
Marriage
Among the Israelites, marriage was usually preceded by a formal act of betrothal, such a contract, when once entered on, being regarded as absolutely binding. On the marriage day, the bride was escorted to her husband’s home by a procession consisting of her own companions and the “friends of the bridegroom,” or “children of the bride-chamber,” some carrying torches, and others myrtle branches and chaplets of flowers. When she reached the house, words such as “Take her according to the law of Moses and of Israel” were spoken, the pair were crowned with garlands, and a marriage deed was signed. After the prescribed washing of hands and benediction, the marriage supper was held. For a year after marriage a man was released from all military service. The gospel law of marriage is partially given in Matt. 19: 4-9; Mark 10: 2-12; Rom. 7: 2; 1 Cor. 7. Its meaning, as symbolizing the union between Christ and the Church, is explained in Eph. 5: 22-32.
Latter-day revelation tells us that marriage under the law of the gospel and the holy priesthood is for eternity, and that men and women thus sealed in marriage continue to have children throughout eternity. Although this concept of marriage is not fully presented in our present Bible, traces of it are found in Matt. 16: 16-19; Matt. 19: 3-8; Matt. 22: 23-30; and Moses 4: 18. However, the fullest explanation is found in D&C 132

scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/m/18

 

[ronald_g_w]

Amen, Paul.

To know the truth, you must separate Joseph Smith from Christ. They cannot both be telling the truth. Joseph Smith apparently never read these passages:

Matthew 22:30 “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

Mark 12:25 “When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.”

Luke 20:35 “But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage,”

The Word of the Lord. Amen!

These Verses are correct in what they state, for they will neither marry nor be given in marriage once out of this life as marriage like baptism can only be performed here in this temporal state, hence the KEYS ( power & authority ) given to Peter to bind on earth so that it will be bound in Heaven.
Matt. 19: 5-6
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Matt. 16: 19
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Mark 10: 9
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
1 Cor. 11: 11
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

 

[ronald_g_w]

I know you addressed this to Ruthie, so I won’t comment on the bulk of it; however, the practice of pouring did not develop over a period of centuries. It has been an accepted practice since the very beginning, which is evident in much early Christian art; and it is specifically referenced in the Didache, which is kind of an early Catechism written around 50-70 AD:

“Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water (i.e., a river). If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” (Chapter 7)

By the way, the Catholic Church does not teach that baptism can only be performed by pouring; immersion is perfectly acceptable:

“Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.” (Catechism of The Catholic Church, paragraph 1239)

Part of the point I was trying to make is that both faiths alter teachings / shift gears as the need arises, plural marriage is not new just as sprinkling / immersion

What I would like to ask is howcome that scripture Ez 36:25 you read as it is and stand by it when there are no other scriptures to back it. (but you dont read the scriptures the way they read that Jesus has Bro’s& Sis’s. I mentioned this not to go down that road but to make a point.) all other scriptures point to immersion. Is sprinkle the correct interpretation or is it refering to something other than baptism. If we look at Isa 52:15 sprinkle can not mean what is says but if we change it to gather it then has meaning.
What are your thoughts ?

 

[ronald_g_w]

Everything written in the Bible says that.

In post #87 I raised two points and I would like to raise them again
Rom 8:17
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

Jesus is God what is he then to inherit

John 17: 11-23
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

How do you see these Scriptures when your claim to God and Jesus being one God are we to become a part of that Godhead ???

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

For the lds understanding of marriage:

BIBLE DICTIONARY
Marriage
Among the Israelites, marriage was usually preceded by a formal act of betrothal, such a contract, when once entered on, being regarded as absolutely binding. On the marriage day, the bride was escorted to her husband’s home by a procession consisting of her own companions and the “friends of the bridegroom,” or “children of the bride-chamber,” some carrying torches, and others myrtle branches and chaplets of flowers. When she reached the house, words such as “Take her according to the law of Moses and of Israel” were spoken, the pair were crowned with garlands, and a marriage deed was signed. After the prescribed washing of hands and benediction, the marriage supper was held. For a year after marriage a man was released from all military service. The gospel law of marriage is partially given in Matt. 19: 4-9; Mark 10: 2-12; Rom. 7: 2; 1 Cor. 7. Its meaning, as symbolizing the union between Christ and the Church, is explained in Eph. 5: 22-32.
Latter-day revelation tells us that marriage under the law of the gospel and the holy priesthood is for eternity, and that men and women thus sealed in marriage continue to have children throughout eternity. Although this concept of marriage is not fully presented in our present Bible, traces of it are found in Matt. 16: 16-19; Matt. 19: 3-8; Matt. 22: 23-30; and Moses 4: 18. However, the fullest explanation is found in D&C 132

scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/m/18

from the New American Bible
Matthew 22:24-30

24 saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies 16 without children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up descendants for his brother.’
25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died and, having no descendants, left his wife to his brother.
26 The same happened with the second and the third, through all seven.
27 Finally the woman died.
28 Now at the resurrection, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had been married to her.”
29 17 Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

from Christ own words we are not married in heaven but are as the Angeles .

there is no marriage in heaven

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

[ronald g w;4230396]In post #87 I raised two points and I would like to raise them again
Rom 8:17
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

we are heirs in that we now can come to live in the glorious presents of God in heaven

Jesus is God what is he then to inherit

us

John 17: 11-23
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

How do you see these Scriptures when your claim to God and Jesus being one God are we to become a part of that Godhead ???

they are a proclamation that we are to be able to live for eternity in the presents of God ( the Trinity) having most perfect ability to love God

 

[FCEGM]

. . . How do you see these Scriptures when your claim to God and Jesus being one God are we to become a part of that Godhead ???

We can become god-like by our participating in the life of Christ in the bosom of the Father, but we can never by nature be what each Person of the Trinity is and has by virtue of their Divine Nature.

We, by the grace of the Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of the Son, may rise to share in that glory and already participate in it, though often unawares, through our participation in Christ - initially through Baptism, and subsequently through faithfulness to the sacramental life of the Church.

So, humans may share in God’s perfection by the grace won for us in Christ. What we can never be is what God is in Himself. By His grace He allows us to participate in the perfection of His Divinity, but it is never ours on our own since we are creatures.

Divinization, or theosis (the word used in the Eastern Churches, both Catholic and Orthodox), is the process of growing into our identity in Christ bestowed upon us in Baptism. We do not remain mere creatures; we are elevated by grace to the status of sons and daughters. Through baptism into Christ there is an ontological change in our identity. It doesn’t prepare us (contra Mormonism) to become gods in our own right, but to participate by grace in the life of the Most Holy Trinity, to prepare us to enter into the Beatific Vision.

The temptation of Adam and Eve’s was to “become gods” without conformity to God; that has been turned on its head in Christ Who now offers us, through our obedience, not to become “gods” on our own, but to participate in His own Divine Nature that IS His has by Nature. He invites us to participate in that Nature by grace; He wants us to be even more closely united to Him than as Creator and creature. He wants to relate to us as Father to child. The possibility for this deeper relationship is founded first in the creation of the first Man and Woman who walked in friendship with God, but they lost all that would have been theirs through that sin of disobedience; the second, New and ultimate foundation now is the re-creation of Man in the Life, Death and Resurrection of His Incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.

“Divinization” expresses the absolute transformation of oneself through the soul’s participation in God’s Divine Nature. This is not something we of ourselves have, but can only receive by grace initiated in Baptism and nurtured through fidelity to the sacramental life of the Church. We have become, as St. Peter writes, “partakers of the divine nature;” we become truly united by grace to the Divine Life which the Divine Persons alone have by their Nature.

From the Catechism:

1726 The Beatitudes teach us the final end to which God calls us: the Kingdom, the vision of God, participation in the divine nature, eternal life, filiation, rest in God.

1812 The human virtues are rooted in the theological virtues, which adapt man’s faculties for participation in the divine nature: for the theological virtues relate directly to God. They dispose Christians to live in a relationship with the Holy Trinity. They have the One and Triune God for their origin, motive, and object.

1988 Through the power of the Holy Spirit we take part in Christ’s Passion by dying to sin, and in his Resurrection by being born to a new life; we are members of his Body which is the Church, branches grafted onto the vine which is himself: [God] gave himself to us through his Spirit. By the participation of the Spirit, we become communicants in the divine nature. . . . For this reason, those in whom the Spirit dwells are divinized.

I suggest reading such as The Spiritual Canticle, by St. John of the Cross (a Doctor of the Church) for a profound reflection of the Church’s teaching; for example:

“. . .the Bridegroom [Christ] communicates Himself to the soul by means of the adornment of these virtues; He feeds on the soul, transforming her into Himself, now that she is prepared and seasoned with the flowers of virtues, gifts, and perfections, the seasonings with which, and among which, He feeds on her. By means of the Holy Spirit, who prepares the dwelling, these virtues delight the Son of God so that through them He may feed more on the love of the soul. This is the characteristic of the Bridegroom: to unite Himself with the soul amid the fragrance of these flowers.” Stanza 17, #10.

"Turn Your face toward the mountains. . .The face of God is the divinity, and the mountains are the soul’s faculties (memory, intellect, and will). This verse is like saying: Let Your divinity shine on my intellect by giving it divine knowledge, and on my will by imparting to it divine love, and on my memory with the divine possession of glory.

“The soul asks in this line for everything she possibly can ask of Him. She is no longer satisfied with the knowledge and communication of the “back” of God - which was His communication to Moses [Ex. 33:23] - and which is knowledge of Him in His effects and works; she can only be satisfied with God’s face, which is an essential communication of the divinity of the soul. This communication is not brought about through any means, but through a certain contact of the soul with the divinity. This contact is something foreign to everything sensory and accidental, since it is a touch of naked substances - of the soul and the divinity.” Stanza 19, #4

“. . .Beloved, first turn to the interior of my soul, and be enamored of the company - the riches - You have placed there, so that loving the soul through them You may dwell and hide in her. For, indeed, even though they are Yours, since You gave them to her, they also belong to her.” Stanza 19, #6

 

[RC_Matt]

Part of the point I was trying to make is that both faiths alter teachings / shift gears as the need arises, plural marriage is not new just as sprinkling / immersion

What I would like to ask is howcome that scripture Ez 36:25 you read as it is and stand by it when there are no other scriptures to back it. (but you dont read the scriptures the way they read that Jesus has Bro’s& Sis’s. I mentioned this not to go down that road but to make a point.) all other scriptures point to immersion. Is sprinkle the correct interpretation or is it refering to something other than baptism. If we look at Isa 52:15 sprinkle can not mean what is says but if we change it to gather it then has meaning.
What are your thoughts ?

Dude, the Catholic Church didn’t change anything. The Baptismal instructions given by the first and second generation Christians in the first century, as recorded in the Didache, are exactly the same as those given in the Catechism 2000 years later. Other than the Trinitarian Formula, the Bible doesn’t give any explicit “instructions” for Baptism. It outlines the Baptisms of a few central individuals, but it says nothing about the thousands of other Baptisms that contemporaneously occurred and we know nothing of those; but the first century Christians, who wrote the Didache, were eyewitnesses to those events and performed those Baptisms themselves. Further, early Christian art explicitly depicts Baptisms by infusion.

There is a very long-winded explanation for all this, but it goes way off topic and I’d really rather not go there unless you insist. The short answer is that either method has been acceptable from the very beginning; and it just doesn’t matter anyway. It’s religious minutia and has absolutely zero impact on how well you follow Jesus’ teachings in life – and that’s the only thing that does matter.

 

[AMDGtoo]

(but you dont read the scriptures the way they read that Jesus has Bro’s& Sis’s. I mentioned this not to go down that road but to make a point.)

Not to take this off topic, but just to answer your question–actually the Scriptures do not

 

[po18guy]

These verses may be for temporal marriages. In the lds faith, those lds marriages that have been conducted in the lds church, will not be binding in the next life. But those marriages that occurred in the temple will be binding in the next life.

JS was very much aware of those passages above.

JS still contradicts Christ. No such thing as Mormon celestial marriage has ever existed, or been mentioned in human history. Until JS sold his ideas. You must separate JS from Christ to see the truth.

 

[Ruthie]

Hi, Ronald,

I’m away from home right now, using my hubby’s laptop, which is very hard for me to type on, and doesn’t have the resources of my desktop. So I’m going to hold off on answering you until I get home & settled - probably Thurs. or Fri.

God bless you,

Ruthie

 

[why_me]

JS still contradicts Christ. No such thing as Mormon celestial marriage has ever existed, or been mentioned in human history. Until JS sold his ideas.

Celestial marriage is an interesting concept and it can make sense. I know that there are many catholics who believe that both husband and wife will be together in heaven. And why not? If this couple had a wonderful marriage on earth, why wouldn’t it continue in the afterlife?

According to Mormon understanding, even those who are unmarried in this life (through no fault of their own) will have a chance to marry in the eternities. I think that the mormons have a wonderful thought: When you marry, you will be with your wife or husband and children in the eternities.

Now I do have some problems with the mormon concept of celestial marriage but in general, it is a nice thought, to be with your loved one in the celestial kingdom.

As for me, I am definitely terrestial material and so, no hope for a celestial life.

Here are some pertinent verses:

Gen. 2: 24 they shall be one flesh.
Gen. 25: 8 Abraham . . . died . . . and was gathered to his people.
Gen. 35: 29 Isaac . . . died, and was gathered unto his people.
Gen. 49: 33 Jacob . . . yielded up the ghost, and was gathered unto his people.
Isa. 51: 2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah.
Isa. 65: 23 blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.
Mal. 4: 6 (3 Ne. 25: 6) turn the heart of the fathers to the children.
Matt. 19: 8 put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Mark 10: 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
1 Cor. 11: 11 neither is the man without the woman . . . in the Lord

 

[why_me]

Here are a couple of scriptures that speak of the celestial:
*
TOPICAL GUIDE *
Celestial Glory

1 Cor. 15: 40 glory of the celestial is one.
2 Cor. 12: 2 such an one caught up to the third heaven.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Celestial marriage is an interesting concept and it can make sense. I know that there are many catholics who believe that both husband and wife will be together in heaven. And why not? If this couple had a wonderful marriage on earth, why wouldn’t it continue in the afterlife?

According to Mormon understanding, even those who are unmarried in this life (through no fault of their own) will have a chance to marry in the eternities. I think that the mormons have a wonderful thought: When you marry, you will be with your wife or husband and children in the eternities.

Now I do have some problems with the mormon concept of celestial marriage but in general, it is a nice thought, to be with your loved one in the celestial kingdom.

As for me, I am definitely terrestial material and so, no hope for a celestial life.

Here are some pertinent verses:

Gen. 2: 24 they shall be one flesh.
Gen. 25: 8 Abraham . . . died . . . and was gathered to his people.
Gen. 35: 29 Isaac . . . died, and was gathered unto his people.
Gen. 49: 33 Jacob . . . yielded up the ghost, and was gathered unto his people.
Isa. 51: 2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah.
Isa. 65: 23 blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.
Mal. 4: 6 (3 Ne. 25: 6) turn the heart of the fathers to the children.
Matt. 19: 8 put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Mark 10: 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
1 Cor. 11: 11 neither is the man without the woman . . . in the Lord

from the New American Bible
Matthew 22:24-30

24 saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies 16 without children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up descendants for his brother.’
25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died and, having no descendants, left his wife to his brother.
26 The same happened with the second and the third, through all seven.
27 Finally the woman died.
28 Now at the resurrection, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had been married to her.”
29 17 Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

from Christ own words we are not married in heaven but are as the Angeles .

there is no marriage in heaven

 

[why_me]

from the New American Bible
Matthew 22:24-30

24 saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies 16 without children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up descendants for his brother.’
25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died and, having no descendants, left his wife to his brother.
26 The same happened with the second and the third, through all seven.
27 Finally the woman died.
28 Now at the resurrection, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had been married to her.”
29 17 Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

from Christ own words we are not married in heaven but are as the Angeles .

there is no marriage in heaven

Mormons would interpret this to mean that worldly marriages are not sealed in heaven. In the lds faith, if one marries in the lds church, the person is not married in heaven. But in a lds temple marriage, the marriage would continue in eternity.

At the time of christ and before that time, maybe all marriages were performed for this life.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Here are a couple of scriptures that speak of the celestial:
*
TOPICAL GUIDE *
Celestial Glory

1 Cor. 15: 40 glory of the celestial is one.
2 Cor. 12: 2 such an one caught up to the third heaven.

There is context that the LDS continue to ignore. 1 Cor. 15:40 is not saying that there is something known as celestial. It’s talking about heavenly things verses earthly things. And 2 Cor. 12:2 is:

Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs and wonders, and mighty deeds.

" I think you mean another of Paul’s quotes–the one where he was speaking of a dream he had.

Looks like the LDS should take to heart II Peter 3:16:

As also in all his epistles, seeking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

(bolding mine)

Mormon doctrine in a nutshell?–Jesus lied. Joseph Smith is the man that should be followed instead.

 

[aquabatix]

: Mormons view such moderation as sinful as the person who drinks a fifth of vodka a day. And even deny the Sacrament because it includes a small amount of wine! And twist the meaning of the Bible to come up with this idea that Jesus didn’t drink wine, but grape juice. It’s ludicrous. There is no truth in these things.

I’m sorry, I’ve been reading this entire post, and when I got to this, I had to say something. If you know anything about agriculture in general, you will know that there was NO SUCH THING as grape juice in the time before Mr Welch and Smuckers in the Near East. After 1 hour in the heat of Judea, that pressed grape juice (since there is no refrigeration or preservatives) would have started fermenting and turning into wine. Wine was the most common drink in that time, beer was rarely being made and water was the only other thing available. So unless John is squeezing grapes under the table at the last supper next to Jesus, it was wine.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

=why me;4236753]Mormons would interpret this to mean that worldly marriages are not sealed in heaven.

By all Scripture ( not including those written by LDS members) there is only “worldly” marriage.

In the lds faith, if one marries in the lds church, the person is not married in heaven. But in a lds temple marriage, the marriage would continue in eternity.

But this is not founded in the Scripture or any Hewbrew or early Church writings.

At the time of christ and before that time, maybe all marriages were performed for this life.

And Christ did not see fit to change it. As a matter of fact he restated it. that in heaven / at the resurrection non are married. This is an example of LDS changing thing in direct conflict with what Jesus has said.