Mormons: What does it mean that Michael holds the keys of Salvation?

[SteveVH]

Kathleen, I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut. If I might ask a question…
When Adam & Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, it states their eyes were open.
What were their eyes open to?

It seems that the Mormon view is that what Adam and Eve did here was actually a “good thing” and we should be understanding and sympathetic toward their predicament. It is as if they were walking around half stupid and here was a chance to gain wisdom and knowledge and who could blame them.

The truth is that they were created as perfect human beings, physically, intellectually and spiritually. They were also created with free will. The fact that they had no knowledge of evil was not a hindrance. God does not create junk, or things that are only partially whole. It is through the sin of Adam and Eve that death now entered in. They now would die, both physically and spiritually. Their intellect was darkened. The will was diminished and they would become slaves to the flesh. As their posterity, all of mankind would follow suit. As Kathleen mentioned, our current state of affairs bears witness to this truth.

 

[dianaiad]

Diana, sorry, I must have missed this post. Nice try, but the fact that God, being almighty, can bring good out of evil does not justify sinning. If that were the case we should all be sinning as much as possible so that even more good can come from it.

…and still, we have this quote from St. Augustine, which indicates the idea as an early Catholic one. (shrug)

It’s not that I am claiming that having good come from sin justifies the sin; I have never been a fan of 'ends justify the means," though that seems to be a grounding philosophy of anti (insert belief system here) folks. In fact, I think that the willingness to employ that tactic is one of the things that pushes someone over the line from ‘critic’ to 'anti-"

Not the same thing, though, as the predicament that Adam found himself in.

 

[dianaiad]

The sin of pride…who is like unto God as Michael said…and the temptation was to be like gods…

God ‘decides’ who lives and who dies…we have no right to take the life of an innocent human being.

Kathleen, nobody here would disagree with you on this…and you are changing the subject.

L

ater we see the beginning of fratricide between Abel who gave the Lord the choice of his first fruits and Cain who did not, and how this relationship ended up with Cain murdering his brother through pathological envy.

Which of course is true–but about Cain and Abel, not Adam and Eve. If we take this story as simple fact, and not a metaphor or allegory, if these two had not been kicked out, would there have been an Abel for Cain to murder, or a Cain to murder Abel?

We as humans can continue the life of the divine to those around us…love and the fruits of the Holy Spirit, forgiveness, living out the corporal and spiritual works of mercy…

I think this is a much more secure route in seeking deification than seeking deification by ruling and having control over others, continuing to incarnate one’s self in the next life.

Well, I do too. How nice that we agree on this!

 

[KathleenGee]

Don’t mean to change subject…but to point out the fall out from the fall of Adam and Eve passed on to their offspring.

The other is in regards to the angels…and again I am referring to the CC…this one 392…Scripture speaks of a sin of these angels…this ‘fall’ consists in the free choice of these created spirits, who radically and irrevocably rejected God and his reign. We find a reflection of that rebellion in the tempter’s words to our first parents:“You will be like God”. The devil ‘has sinned from the beginning’; he is ‘a liar and the father of lies.’

393…It is the irrevocable character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgiveable…just as there is no repentance for men after death.

I am pointing out to our roles and missions, our natures…and the reason the Son of God came to destroy the work of the devil…and in the Catholic tradition they are constant…people and angels on’t change from one person or angel to another…they are all different and unique creatures.

 

[SteveVH]

That is an interesting take on it…Later on in that chapter there is this:

It is only AFTER they partook of the fruit that their eyes were open, and they became as “one of us”, to know good and evil.
How could they not be like God before if they only knew good and not evil?
I agree that they were made in innocence, but that they did not know either good or evil. How can one exist without the other?

Are you saying that good cannot exist apart from evil? God is eternal, which means he had to exist before anything created. Because God is eternal, Love is eternal; the love between the Father and the Son, forming another divine person, the Holy Spirit. If Love is eternal, then goodness is eternal, but evil is not. Goodness does not depend upon evil for its existence. Created beings with free will brought sin into existence, beginning with the rebellion of Lucifer and his followers who then made war against God and man. Man collaborated with Lucifer and turned away from God, bringing sin and death into the world.

The point is, even in the creation of the world, God saw it and said it was good. Concerning his creation of man He said it was “very good”. Goodness, therefore, existed without evil from eternity. Only in this temporary, fallen world does evil exist. There can be no evil in God, in Who’s life we are invited to share for the rest of eternity. Christ has defeated evil and it will not exist into eternity. So yes, one can exist without the other. Light can exist without darkness.

 

[ParkerD]

DOUAY-REIMS
“And he saith to me: See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren, who have the testimony of Jesus.”

KING JAMES VERSION
“And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus:”

NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION
“But he said to me ‘Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus.’”

NEW AMERICAN BIBLE
“But he said to me ‘Don’t! I am a fellow servant of you and with your brothers who bear witness to Jesus.’”

Parker, just a couple of things to consider here when looking for a body of evidence supporting your assertion that the motivation of the Catholic Church in giving us the NAB translation was that “we’re going to make the words say what will match our doctrine.”

If anyone has the authority to properly translate something, it is the one who canonized it to begin with. I am trying to imagine the scenario where the Church leaders are sitting around twisting their moustaches saying, “Hey, you know that book that we canonized way back when? Well, it turns out that it conflicts with our doctrines so we need to tweak it a little. Yeah, I know that our earlier versions are spread around the world for everyone to see, but maybe they won’t notice.”

Looking at the NIV translation of the same verse, it appears that the Protestants cooperated with us in this deceitful endeavor.

As you very well know, we are squabbling over differences in King James English and modern English. Not only is sentence structure different, even the meaning of words are different. Take the phrase “The exception proves the rule.” In modern English this sentence doesn’t make sense. The actual meaning of the phrase is "The exception tests the rule.

In looking for a body of evidence supporting your position, I can find no one other than you and other LDS members who interpret this passage the way you do. Not a single one. Now, looking at it from a purely linguistic viewpoint, doctrine aside, you would think that there would be someone that would agree with your assessment of the sentence structure and wording, especially if it is so clear, as you contend.

SteveVH,
Just so you know, I truly believe that most of what the Protestants have done with the doctrines as they broke off from Catholicism still have a large body of content that is rooted in Catholic beliefs carried over. So your finding is not surprising to me. I have found time and again that the Douay Rheims translation is closer to the KJV and thus I trust it more as coming from translators who were bringing over from the Hebrew and the Greek and the Aramaic a knowledge about the idioms and the punctuation that would create meaning in English that was close to the original meaning.

As to the “authority,” even if it were Jews doing the translating (who would tie more to the original writers than any Catholic in terms of understanding the idioms and the punctuation), the compilers hold no more authority than anyone else in the world. Compiling the texts and transcribing the texts and then sharing them with the world (good things to have done) do not constitute having been granted authority to do that by God or by the world at large. I realize you’re going to feel strongly differently about that point.

I do think the language is clear, most particularly in the King James but also in the Douay Rheims. “Of thy brethren” in any gospel context would be talking about male adults who were considered “thy brethren” by virtue of association or calling or general membership or beliefs. Any place else those words are used, that same understanding would come across and not be disputed. That is how the apostles and members talked about each other and their relationship to each other.

Thanks for adding more in sharing your point of view.

 

[SteveVH]

…and still, we have this quote from St. Augustine, which indicates the idea as an early Catholic one. (shrug)

It’s not that I am claiming that having good come from sin justifies the sin; I have never been a fan of 'ends justify the means," though that seems to be a grounding philosophy of anti (insert belief system here) folks. In fact, I think that the willingness to employ that tactic is one of the things that pushes someone over the line from ‘critic’ to 'anti-"

Not the same thing, though, as the predicament that Adam found himself in.

Yes, St. Augustine’s quote is an early Catholic one. We certainly don’t hide it either. It is repeated, actually sung, at every Easter Vigil. It expresses the greatness and glory of a God who can overcome and bring into existence the greatest good ever known to man, the risen Christ, out of the greatest evil known to man, the murder of the Son of God. No doubt it is a mind bender, something I have contemplated for some time. Without sin, Christ would not have become incarnate and be required to suffer and die in order to save us from our sins. If He would not have died, He would not have risen. Nevertheless, we do not celebrate evil, but rather the triumph of God over evil. Adam and Eve do not deserve a pat on the back for turning away from God and bringing sin and death into the world.

As to the predicament “Adam found himself in”, it is the predicament any creature with free will finds themselves in. We have to make choices. Adam chose to disobey God’s command and it had eternal consequences. Parker and I have been down this road, and the road has become very long and tedious for both of us. I believe I understand the the predicament of Adam from the Mormon viewpoint. Correct me if I’m wrong. Adam was forced to break one of God’s commandments in order to keep the others. I gave a scenario to which I didn’t get a response. This is akin to being commanded to drive to a destination 90 miles away in a half-hour without speeding. If you speed I will punish you and if you don’t reach your 90 mile destination in a half-hour I will punish you. Good luck. I’d be interested in your response and if I understand this concept correctly.

Thanks.

 

[KathleenGee]

These concepts that are taken down the road, obviously I don’t or are unable to go there…

But it is belief that in the end all works for the glory of God…Goodness eventually triumphs over evil…

The evil the unjust do to the unjust all fulfills the will of God in that they are purifying those who are carrying the cross and approaching eternal life. And the just in turn bless those who persecute them for the persecutors’ conversion.

When I sometimes reflect on Adam and Eve…it was like they were made to fail…how could they resist temptation to disobey…?? and their weak character, intact, was the means God used to bring Christ into the world as justification for sin.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,
Just so you know, I truly believe that most of what the Protestants have done with the doctrines as they broke off from Catholicism still have a large body of content that is rooted in Catholic beliefs carried over.

Point taken. However if they could find anything to prove Catholic doctrine or interpretation wrong, most would jump at the chance, as history bears out.

So your finding is not surprising to me. I have found time and again that the Douay Rheims translation is closer to the KJV and thus I trust it more as coming from translators who were bringing over from the Hebrew and the Greek and the Aramaic a knowledge about the idioms and the punctuation that would create meaning in English that was close to the original meaning.

Remember though, our disagreement does not center upon translating from Greek or Hebrew into English. I just disagree that either the KJV or the Douay Rheims versions mean what you think they mean. I don’t think doctrine even plays a part here. It is simply a disagreement about the meaning of English words and sentence structure within the context of the time and style in which they were written.

As to the “authority,” even if it were Jews doing the translating (who would tie more to the original writers than any Catholic in terms of understanding the idioms and the punctuation), the compilers hold no more authority than anyone else in the world. Compiling the texts and transcribing the texts and then sharing them with the world (good things to have done) do not constitute having been granted authority to do that by God or by the world at large. I realize you’re going to feel strongly differently about that point.

Seeing as our Church started in 33 A.D., in Jerusalem, I think we had a pretty good idea of the meaning of what was written. The first Catholics were Jews, and the first Catholics wrote the New Testament. That includes John the Apostle.

I do think the language is clear, most particularly in the King James but also in the Douay Rheims. “Of thy brethren” in any gospel context would be talking about male adults who were considered “thy brethren” by virtue of association or calling or general membership or beliefs. Any place else those words are used, that same understanding would come across and not be disputed. That is how the apostles and members talked about each other and their relationship to each other.

Parker, I have no problem with your definition of “brethren”. It is one of those words that we have to explain when defending the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity. The use of brethren was used to include almost any group of like minded people, as well as cousins and siblings. The brethren of Jesus does not necessarily mean his literal brothers. In the case of Rev. 19:10, I just disagree that it is a reference to an Angel (I don’t believe the angel is even referred to as Michael) being considered John’s brethren, other than in their common purpose of serving God. Even then, I believe the actual meaning of the English words, as written, are referring to the brethren of John, not the angel. He is the fellow servant of John and John’s brethren. That meaning is as clear to me as yours, apparently, is to you.

 

[ParkerD]

These concepts that are taken down the road, obviously I don’t or are unable to go there…

But it is belief that in the end all works for the glory of God…Goodness eventually triumphs over evil…

The evil the unjust do to the unjust all fulfills the will of God in that they are purifying those who are carrying the cross and approaching eternal life. And the just in turn bless those who persecute them for the persecutors’ conversion.

When I sometimes reflect on Adam and Eve…it was like they were made to fail…how could they resist temptation to disobey…?? and their weak character, intact, was the means God used to bring Christ into the world as justification for sin.

Kathleen,
Neither you nor SteveVH seem to have an understanding that encompasses how wisdom is gained in this life. A child may love God, but that doesn’t mean they have wisdom. They could go through their whole life loving God but if they don’t pay attention to the world around them and learn from others including others’ mistakes, and learn also from their own mistakes, then their level of wisdom will remain that of a child.

Neither Adam nor Eve had a “weak character”–my goodness. Nor did they suffer from the sin of pride. That is a teaching that has been trumped up with no Biblical foundation for it in their case. Many people do suffer from pride, but there is not one verse that indicates that was their situation.

Eve desired to be wise. She could figure out that there was something to be gained from experiencing the choices involved in choosing good from evil. Until she partook of the forbidden fruit, the Bible is clear that she had no such opportunity to make such a choice. Therefore, she was somewhat like a child waiting to “go to school”–the school of hard knocks in some cases.

I suspect Augustine had the path to the gaining of wisdom in mind when he wrote what he wrote so many years ago about the fall of Adam and Eve.

 

[KathleenGee]

Well, going back to my first grade Catholic education, Parker, that was what I was taught, that Adam and Eve committed disobedience and pride.

To be as gods…is picking and choosing what is good in life and what is not…and it is the kind of thinking that leads to genocide, abortion, euthanasia, birth control and its use leading to adultery and sex outside of marriage.

To choose who to believe, it is the spirit of the universal church. Present form is Vatican II…our attitudes and approach to modern life. The second degree of truth is the universal catechism which draws on St. Augustine alot, but not in this context. St. Augustine also said other things reflective of his past life before conversion that continued for a time in his writings…they are usually pulled out to laugh at by pro choice people and other atheistic seculars in deriding Christianity.

God Himself is all wisdom. Adam and Eve already had wisdom in their innocence and being.

So for a Catholic, the truth of Adam and Eve and their intentions to go against God are found in our universal catechism, and it truly is my conviction when reading Sacred Scripture…faithful to its intent that is also shared by faithful Jews.

Last night I prayed for the Mormon people to come to this belief so that we could be more one.
The power of sin darkens our intellect, our personhood, to the point it brings infirmity and then death to our body. The fact that they chose to be as gods led them to their own fall and degeneration.

 

[campeador]

Kathleen,
Neither you nor SteveVH seem to have an understanding that encompasses how wisdom is gained in this life. A child may love God, but that doesn’t mean they have wisdom. They could go through their whole life loving God but if they don’t pay attention to the world around them and learn from others including others’ mistakes, and learn also from their own mistakes, then their level of wisdom will remain that of a child.

Proverbs 1:7 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”

Proverbs 8:13 “The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.”

Proverbs 9:10 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

 

[KathleenGee]

At Mass today, the second reading was from 1 Timothy, 6: 11-16…and it references that only Christ, true God and True man is called to immorality…the next is about the rich man who had everything in this life, plus a poor beggar, Lazarus at his door step…with dogs who came to lick his wounds…

He died and was comforted in the next, the rich man died and spent time in torment…and he did not listen…did not listen to Moses and the prophets, and to the need for wisdom…

Wisdom is choosing God and not of things of this world be they pride, power, or things.

My pastor saw the whole gospel more about compassion.

When Satan came to tempt Christ, it was the same-o, same-o…the temptation to be saved by Satan, to be given the earth…but nothing about being compassionate.

Satan did not offer Adam and Eve the gift of wisdom when eating the forbidden fruit. He did not offer them greater compassion and gratitude for all the blessings given them. They were tempted to have control, and to have greater freedom to be in control of their own lives, they in charge and nobody telling them what to do, kind of above it all.

What St. Augustine saw in the fall, and I think that Adam and Eve were too weak to deal with Satan…so it is like a set up to me, was that God would bring greater good out of it, and it was Jesus Christ…the answer to being as god…the only Immortal Man/God.

 

[CatholicGuyNY]

What is the Biblical basis, if any, of believing that Adam was Michael in his pre-mortal existence?

If this has already been answered, please point me to the post.

 

[ParkerD]

Proverbs 1:7 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”

Proverbs 8:13 “The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.”

Proverbs 9:10 “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

Campeador,
I’m glad you enjoy Proverbs. So do I. Solomon had prayed for wisdom as a gift from God, and Proverbs shows that he gave much wise instruction, particularly to children.

Solomon highlights the need for reproof and correction. He wrote, “My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction: For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding.” (3:11-13)

Thus Solomon accepted that this life is a place where in order to gain wisdom, a child will have choices needing to be made and should not be surprised when he receives correction from the Lord who loves him. He writes about the Lord directing the paths of those who give Him their whole heart with their trust. He writes about the need to confess and forsake his sins: “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” (28:13)

Thus the relationship between a child and the Lord is intended to be a one-to-one relationship, with the child or youth and the adult as they mature being ready and willing to identify their sins, confess them to God, forsake them and change behavior, and thus show that they have indeed learned wisdom and learned to accept the corrections that the Lord will provide by inspiration to the individual heart.

The above situation would not have come about if the opportunity to choose between good and evil had not been introduced into the world through Eve’s choice. She chose to accept a dire consequence in order that she could gain what must have surely appeared to her as a greater good–the gaining of wisdom through experience, through “going to school”.

 

[zerinus]

What is the Biblical basis, if any, of believing that Adam was Michael in his pre-mortal existence?

If this has already been answered, please point me to the post.

There is no biblical support for this doctrine as far as I know. This is what we have learned from modern revelation to the Church. But the doctrine is not contradicted by the Bible either.

 

[campeador]

The above situation would not have come about if the opportunity to choose between good and evil had not been introduced into the world through Eve’s choice. She chose to accept a dire consequence in order that she could gain what must have surely appeared to her as a greater good–the gaining of wisdom through experience, through “going to school”.

Genesis 1:31 “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.”

 

[KathleenGee]

The wisdom you have shared here, Parker, is all that we should draw on, but it is not the basis of what tempted Eve.

Satan would never use an essence of God Himself to draw a soul away from God.

Likewise,

St Michael and Adam are two different persons with their own roles and destiny.

 

[ParkerD]

Genesis 1:31 “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.”

Campeador,
Yes–a beautiful verse. That expression occurs after Genesis says that God had created man and woman (meaning Adam and Eve specifically). They were part of the “very good” creation. Then in Genesis 2, we find that the creation of Eve was specifically because it was “not good that the man should be alone.” So that same word “good” applies to the relationship between Adam and Eve, and Adam was taught that concept and was well aware of the “need” for their relationship in the eyes of God. Adam needed Eve, and Eve needed Adam.

So Adam preserved the relationship he had been given as a vital “good” from God. That is why the words are very significant: “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me”–he is reiterating that he understood that she had been given to him for a vital purpose, a good purpose, a purpose that God knew about and cared about and emphasized as important.

 

[campeador]

So Adam preserved the relationship he had been given as a vital “good” from God. That is why the words are very significant: “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me”–he is reiterating that he understood that she had been given to him for a vital purpose, a good purpose, a purpose that God knew about and cared about and emphasized as important.

Genesis 3:12 “And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.”

Genesis 3:17 “And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:** cursed** is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”