Reading through Luke with my Mormon Friends

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lucy_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lucy_1 said:
…questions I could pose about specific verses which might nudge them in the right theological direction?
Click to expand...
RebeccaJ said:
The Mormon will be working on proselytizing you…
Click to expand...
lol - The OP looks for ways to make inroads with a Latter-day Saint. The OP is warned of possible attempts of the Latter-day Saint to make inroads with the OP.
 
Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints ----- I hear and read a lot from others, nonetheless my shared discussion is with other members, virtually in this Covid-19 life now, until physically services/meetings occur in the future. Speaking for myself, I read the Book of Luke, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, thusly my process, personally, involves what I do, reading, pondering as someone who has read scripture since childhood, ---- my response is mine only — to be clear for those on this topic ---- scripture study continues drawing closer to God and His son, Jesus Christ.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
I was always confused how they square that with Matthew 1:18
Click to expand...
Matthew 1:18 Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The short Latter-day Saint answer would be that in Matthew 1:18 Mary conceived by or through the power of the Holy Ghost, not that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost. John 1:14 clearly states that the God the Father begat Jesus.

From the Book of Mormon - Alma 7:10 Mary shall be overshadowed and conceive by power of the Holy Ghost,

How do Catholics see these two Bible verses in relation to each other?
 
gazelam said:
The Bible plainly states that Satan is one of the sons of God.

Job 1:6 One day, when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, the satan also came among them.

I hope this helps…

Job 2:1 One day, when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, the satan also came with them.
Click to expand...
Those verses do not say that Satan was one of the sons of God, only that Satan also came when the sons of God did. If I crash a family reunion, does that make me a member of the family?
 
I see it as a miracle, not some sex act. Im sure others see it the same way. Its funny but your church is kind of the same way. First God had sex with marry. Then your prophets had multiple wives and numerous children (until Utah wanted statehood and was told that polygamy was wrong so it was given up on the downlow). You will have a wife(s) in your heaven and children. See the pattern? All about sex. Its not biblical, just a bunch of horny men getting their kicks and saying God said it was okay.
 
You know, every time I try to have a discussion with you, it ends up being a circular argument, so I’m good , I’ll let people with more patience debate you.
 
Apache78 said:
Then your prophets had multiple wives and numerous children
Click to expand...
That’s the funny part! Their prophets? Consider the first two. The Book of Mormon says that polygamy is okay if God commands it as a way to raise up seed unto him. Ask a Mormonite to tell you about Joe’s seed. He had a lot of notches on his bedpost but where are the children he produced?

Then there was Bring-em Young. He had something like 54 wives and 56 children. Not a very good return on his womanizing, wouldn’t you say?

But those two prophets . . . you gotta hand it to them. They definitely had their ways with the ladies.
 
Last edited:
I recall reading that Smith’s wife was not happy with his plural marriages.
 
They have this famous chapter in their Doctrine and Covenants which describes the conditions surrounding polygamy. There are three significant requirements.
  1. The first wife must give her consent. Emma not only did not give her consent but didn’t even know about some of them.
  2. The plural wife must be a virgin. Joe married women who were already married to other men so that one doesn’t fly.
  3. The plural wife must not be espoused to anyone else. Oops!
Joe flunked that test.
 
And g likes their “official” doctrine. The official doctrine of the church according to their Doctrine and Covenants regarding plural marriage until 1876 (long after Joe died) was:

“Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.”

So what about the men who had more than one wife and the women who had more than but one husband?
 
Probably explained to you several times. So why not once more.

Men beget men. The first chapter of Matthew is a genealogy of men (humans). Then verse 18 of Matthew tells us that Jesus is of human (Mary) and divine (Holy Spirit) origins. (It isn’t saying the Holy Spirit is the Father of Jesus.)

God begets God. God from God. John that you quoted, is a Trinitarian doctrine.
 
Gazelam,

I was wondering if you could answer a question for me. Why does the Mormon Church use the King James Bible? Thanks for your help!
 
gazelam said:
only begotten of the Father ,
Click to expand...
First you need to understand that begotten would not have been used in the original as that word only came into existence in the 14th century.
The Greek word is monogenes. It has two primary definitions
  1. Being the only one of it’s kind within a specific relationship
  2. Pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind.
The only begotten of the Father than means that He is the only one of His kind, He is unique.
 
ColoradoCatholic said:
Why does the Mormon Church use the King James Bible?
Click to expand...
You realize, don’t you, that they only accept the Bible as far as it is correctly translated, which is why Joe Smith also wrote his version of the Bible, which he never finished. But Mormonites use Joe’s corrections to the King James Bible in a lot of their footnotes.

What is even more interesting to me is this. When Joe wrote the Book of Mormon, he lifted pages and pages of scripture from the King James Bible, the version of which has what we know today to contain translation errors. When he wrote his version of the Bible, he made those corrections. But the Book of Mormon is supposed to be the most correct of any book on the earth. If that’s the case, why did his translation have errors unique to King James and not have the “inspired” wording that he used in his Bible translation. It makes no sense other than it was all a fraud.
 
thank you for that explanation but I was asking Gazelam
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top