The ancient Israelites had no god BEFORE YHWH but many after. It was not until Elijah that true monotheism became part of the religious world of the ancient Israelites.
Of course some will see no difference because of a belief that Jesus and God are two separate and distinct “personages”. And from the way Mormons describe and treat Jesus, He seems to be a subordinate God in the Mormon pantheon. But it’s not Catholics that are confused. It’s just that Mormons disbelieve anything that doesn’t “make sense” to them, that’s been pretty well established by the testimony of diverse Mormons posting to this forum. It’s no wonder God/Heavenly Father has been made into an anthropomorphic being in Mormonism ~ that “makes sense” to some people.
You’ve never seen me accuse Mormons of polytheism. Ever. I don’t believe Mormons are polytheistic at all. I don’t see a great deal of difference between the Catholic Trinity and the Mormon Godhead as long as you take away the speculation of King Follet. In any event, I was never sure as a Mormon that anyone was required to believe in the teachings of the King Follet sermon. I know Mormons who believe Jesus was eternally God just like we Catholics do. I know other Mormons who don’t. I sure don’t see anything wrong with just praying to God the Father in the name of Jesus. I don’t see anything wrong with praying directly to Jesus as God or asking the saints for intercession either. Is it polytheistic for me to ask you to pray for me? That’s all we’re doing when we ask Mary to pray for us. We certainly don’t believe she is a Goddess. She’s still alive like all the Saints are and we are so there’s no reason I can’t ask for her prayers just as I can ask for your prayers.
Look I am trying to be respectful, but the above sentences are self-contradictory.
The council of the Gods is biblically based, and it was not Brigham Young who said this, and you mis quoted what was in fact said.
I’m not wrong but you may think as you will. You will anyway.
The context of each makes it clear. Sorry if you can’t discern the difference, but hey, you’re only human. Maybe you should study more? A good RCIA class would be a great start.
Or things makes “no sense” to YOU. The diversionary tactics that you are using, perhaps only reflexively, are not going to work on me.
A properly catechized Catholic understands that the Catholic faith makes sense. There is no mystery or magic ~ and magic is a pejorative by the way.
Do not think to transfer your lack of understanding to me. The fact that someone cannot understand something does not transfer that lack to others.
It’s part of a poem he wrote. I don’t have access to it any longer as I no longer have the book that it was in, but it also had something in there about heavenly Mother as well. (IIRC correctly.)
Nope, not at all. Before Elijah the Israelites had YHWH as their primary God but also allowed the worship of other deities in the outer areas of the Temple. Also, Jeroboam had allowed the worship of the golden calf instead of YHWH. Elijah came and undid all this by destroying the priests of Baal and returning the Israelites to the monotheism of YHWH.
Please read my posts before assaulting them. I said that JSJ (Joseph Smith Junior if you are unfamiliar with the usage) spoke of the council of gods. Please see Doctrines and Covenants (D&C)121:32 Also: ‘It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us; . . . God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did’ (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-46).”
Tell me where you think you find it in the Bible. I find it in D&C 121 and Abraham 4 in the Mormon scriptures. Even in those instances, it would be easy to define the Council of the Gods as consisting of the three members of the Godhead and perhaps some exalted angels who are under authority of the Godhead. In D&C 121 it talks of the Eternal God of all other gods (note the small g). The Book of Mormon defines the Eternal God as the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. There really is no reason to believe Mormons have jumped to polytheism in their scriptures. The only exception is King Follet. Even in Abraham 4 the Gods seem to be limited to the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and perhaps Michael the Archangel (who Mormons believe later was born as Adam). I don’t accept either the Book of Mormon or the Book of Abraham as scripture, but it would seem the Book of Mormon definition of God would be the most authoritative. I’m not sure why Joseph Smith moved away from the Book of Mormon idea into his speculation about Gods and gods.
If that’s what you’re really doing, I have no problem with it. Also you reflect a mature understanding of our view of the Godhead. I wish other catholics could see it this way.
Yep. That’s what they are doing. It’s the same as having pictures of your grandparents up there. You can pray to them and ask for intercession as well. You generally don’t see pictures portraying God the Father in Catholicism because we believe Him to be pure spirit. Since Jesus took flesh we do have pictures of him and we have pictures of saints for the same reason. The pictures remind us of the saints, but we’re not actually praying to the statue or the icon – we’re praying to the person who they represent. Note the Hail Mary’s final verse: “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.” These prayers are always prayers for intercession – if we are asking for anything else then it is misdirected.
Catholics know that they are asking for the prayers of saints. If YOU don’t know that, that deficiency belongs to you, doesn’t it? Is it fair to transfer your lack of understanding to millions of people that you neither know nor have ever talked to? Unless and until you have interviewed all these as-yet-imaginary people, you cannot say any of this. You can only suppose. Why do you condemn an entire faith on the basis of your own flawed supposition? That makes “no sense”.
Remember what is refered to as “The Council of the Gods” was actually the “meeting” which occurred in pre-earth life in which we all participated. In a sense it is a misnomer in that the only “Gods” which were there were the Father son and HG. But all humans were there, and certainly all who would find Christ were there. Though I admit the bible does not refer to the “council” in those terms, I think there is biblical evidence that there was a plan, that we pre-existed, and there is evidence of what occurred and the aftermath of the council.
So from the bible, we learn that something big happened at the foundation of the world which included us and us somehow being chosen to come to this world and find the gospel of Jesus Christ. Latter day revelation gives us more information, but I won’t go there since you don’t believe in latter day revelation.
Let the record also reflect that we don’t all accept the Mormon explanation of scripture since we do not view things through the Mormon prism.
I’m well aware of the Mormon interpretation of these scriptures. I believe Catholics would see the scripture in Revelation as occurring at the time of Christ’s work on earth rather than before the world began. Note the previous six verses in the same chapter of Revelation:
The war in heaven seems to occur at the time of the birth of Christ to Mary and in response to Christ’s triumph on earth. The wrath of Satan and his angels were directed at the emerging Christian Church which God protects. The woman is symbolic of both the Virgin Mary and the Church of which she is the Mother. The scripture in Luke which you quoted would seem to affirm the Catholic interpretation since the fall of Satan is seen at the time of the ministry of the Apostles.
Litany of the Saints is my wife’s favorite part of the Easter Vigil Mass
I didn’t participate in that thread, but really, Rebecca–no evidence at all? That’s absurd. Perhaps you mean that you didn’t think the evidence the Mormons provided amounted to much? Or that you thought the contrary evidence outweighed it?
We just went through a whole thread where Mormons were unable to provide any evidence for this imagined apostasy. Sorry, but you have been deceived.
Bukowski pointed out that Jesus also said, “I am the door.” Is he really a door? He didn’t say, “A door symbolizes me,” after all. His point was that Jesus sometimes spoke metaphorically, and sometimes he meant what he said literally. So just because Jesus said, “this is my body,” it does not automatically mean that we MUST interpret this to mean that bread turns into actual human flesh.
