Scriptural evidence for "pre-mortal existence". Is there any?

[KathleenGee]

Bdawg,

Your reference to that line in Wisdom does not justify pre mortal existence, which was answered in a reference given here by St. Thomas Aquinas. Such thinking was never taught in early Christian times…and if it were so, we would be taught it.

Also, think of how Mormonism invalidates our Church and our history, only being around less than 200 years old, with changing doctrines, etc.,…and then claims to be the real religion?

To say that we are putting ourselves in such a position…reflects on how little understanding there among the Restorationists in Salvation History…considering the claims Mormonism claims, as stated earlier in posts yesterday, they defy natural law.

God created this universe to rationality and order…one can not claim to this and that happening without being challenged, and providing an authentic experience that leaves signs, artifacts, common unity, and a greater understanding of Christ as Lord.

Mormonism constantly changes…our teachings are the same since the Apostles…we believe in the Apostles Creed, the Nicene. The saints who have come before us have increased our understanding of the Word of God in every generation, and deepen our understanding of God and broaden it…but never to the point of fracturing or fragmenting or pointing to other than that of True God and True Man. Never.

 

[Mormon_Cultist]

:ehh: My choice? In regards to what?

Opting to judge the validity of our theology based on your understanding of scripture. It’s never going to work. By all means express disagreement with our beliefs, and explain why thisnis so. But stating that ours is wrong just because yours is right doesn’t do anything: I could just as well do exactly the same, and things would get pretty boring very quickly.

Next, you share a passage from John 9:2 when people thought those infirmed were cursed because of family sin. Christ admonished them of that misunderstanding…it in no way shows whatever any concept of pre mortal existence.

The question that was asked was whether his parents had sinned, or if the man himself had sinned. He was born blind, so there was no way he could possibly have sinned in his mortal lifetime. The very fact that this part of the question could even be formulated, is if a concept of existence, cognisance and choice prior to mortal birth existed. If there was no concept of this, then half of the question does not make any sense whatsoever.

So this is why I said prior for a premortal to decide whether not they want to be born, that they were fully cognizant before conception…when Human life begins through the Spirit of God giving it life and the life from mother and father…a premortal would already be as some kind of semi god…meaning he already was divine…

Get your facts about our beliefs straight before repeating this nonsense please.
We do not decide whether or not we want to be born: in fact one of our hymns clearly states “we have been saved for these latter days”. Been saved, not saved ourselves.
Agreed that in Catholic theology anyone existing alongside God prior to the creation would also have to be God: but this is not the case in our theology; as I have repeatedly pointed out.

If your leaders have done such mistakes, then why trust them at all? If you are a true restoration church, why do you have such leaders? Then you are no better than the church or churches you are trying to replace, isn’t it?

We do not believe that any of our leaders other than the three members of The Godhead are infallible. Each of them is a human being just the same as the rest of us, and are guilty of doing and saying things that are incorrect. Providing they continue to remain worthy, they are still God’s chosen spokesperson and presiding officer of His church upon the earth.

I would be good if you do a self examination here. Question for you…how many LDS have ever received the actual wounds of Christ on their bodies, like St. Francis and St. Gemma Galgani?

This is relevant because?

 

[Mormon_Cultist]

I realize that the comment was rather blunt. However, I think it was meant to be more tongue-in-cheek than insulting. It reflects his basic view that the reason we (Catholics) see LDS beliefs as being so far off the mark, is due to the fact that its theology is way off kilter from a Catholic, or even a mainstream Christian, standpoint. I don’t think it was intended as an insult, just a general statement of his opinion.

I fear, however, that were I to make statements in a similar way, I would begin to accumulate infractions…
I know and fully appreciate that our theology and interpretations of the Bible are very different than yours, and those of mainstream Christianity in lots of places. However, this does not automatically discount them as incorrect: as your own Archbishop Fulton Sheen said, “The truth is still the truth even if nobody believes it, and a lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it”. A numbers game on opinions of interpretation, total converts, numbers leaving one to join another and vice versa mean nothing because what is actually true, remains true regardless.
In example; it has been stated that we claim to be demi-gods due to our belief in pre-existence. While I agree that Catholic theology would hold that anything co-existing with God prior to mortality would have to be God, our theology does not make the same claim, and therefore we are not claiming to be demi-gods, or equal to god or anything of the sort.
By attributing Catholic interpretation to our doctrine, you (collectively) attribute claims and ideas to us, which we do not have; I am not suggesting you deliberately misrepresent us, but you do not always portray our beliefs accurately.

I can sympathize with your view. But, this is a Catholic forum, so expecting us not to look at everything through that lens is not very realistic. If we weren’t interested in learning about others beliefs, we wouldn’t be posting here, in the Non-Catholic section. But, we’re also obliged to try to correct any misconceptions about the truth of Christianity as we know it. If we didn’t do that, we wouldn’t be doing what Jesus taught us all to do. Did He pull any punches when telling the Pharisees and Sadduccees how their interpretations of Scripture and its application to their daily life were wrong? Nope. In fact, He came right out and called them a “den of vipers”. So, I think we’ve probably been even more tolerant in our methods of explaining errors that we see, than He was with them.

Absolutely, tell me that I’m wrong: and tell me why. I know when you say it that I just need to add “in my/our view/belief/opinion” to the end, pretty much like you very likely do with my statements, because I’m not about to bother writing “well I believe” every time lol.

Which is the crux of the problem in LDS beliefs. LDS redefine terms to fit their theology, rather than trying to understand theology correctly, according to the original meaning of the terms that all Christians use. Using the same words is meaningless if the definitions are totally different. If you call an apple an orange, then ask me for a cup of orange juice, should you be surprised when you don’t get what you wanted? Would that be my fault or yours?

Which is precisely why I asked for your understanding of Eternal was before I answered. Only after did I understand that you attribute more to the word/concept than originally stated.
If I showed you an apple (which I am currently calling an orange remember) asked your name for it (apple, obviously), then asked for a cup of apple juice; I would be right to be confused at being offered a citrusy beverage.

If you order a Catholic Bible online, would you expect a Priest or a Nun to personally deliver it to you?

If I ordered it from the Catholic church’s central website, and you were a church as well known for proselyting as we are, then I certainly wouldn’t be surprised even if it was not what I had wanted or anticipated.

Actually, I was picturing the Romulan that said it, but I love that pic! (right click/save as)

All I meant was that the Romulan said it to Picard: you said it to me. That makes me Patrick Stewart in our little charade

“Q!!!” (One of my favorite characters in ST.)

Mine too: immortal and essentially all-powerful yet all he can think to do is play games.
Reminds me of a character in The Hitch-Hikers’ Guide to the Galaxy (in another of the five books, not the first and therefore not the film) who’s name I forget and at midnight cannot be bothered to check up on. By a science mistake he was made immortal, and get so bored he decides to set himself a quest:
To insult every living creature in the universe…
Every thing that has ever lived throughout time…
Personally…
In alphabetical order.

Mine, too. He was clearly saying He’s God. No question.

As far as He is the God of the Old Testament; the one who stated ‘I AM’ to Moses from the burning bush, yes.
But lets not start an argument over our favourite bits

I realize that. I just couldn’t help pointing out the irony.

Fair enough

Agreeance!

Much as I don’t necessarily agree with all of what she wrote, I do agree it’s much better written and researched than anything I produce. Thank you.

 

[Jerusha]

he decides to set himself a quest:
To insult every living creature in the universe…
Every thing that has ever lived throughout time…
Personally…
In alphabetical order.

The essence of the LDS faith.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
My choice? In regards to what?

Mormon_Cultist:

Opting to judge the validity of our theology based on your understanding of scripture.

And this the core of the issue. Would you consider the theology of JW’s vaild? Should I go on with the thousands of denominations and non-denominations? The other core issue is your religion flat out denies the Trinity and if you care to discuss the Trinity using the Bible-only,by all means-go for it. I’ll provide scores of verses clearly showing a Triune God. Precisely why so many Christians never get anywhere with Mormons. And why? Because your theology is outside of orthodox Christianity long established before Joseph Smith.

It’s never going to work. By all means express disagreement with our beliefs, and explain why thisnis so.

Exactly! Because Mormon theology differs vastly from Catholic,Orthodoxs and mainline Protestants,

But stating that ours is wrong just because yours is right doesn’t do anything: I could just as well do exactly the same, and things would get pretty boring very quickly.

You do not have to say it,your beliefs say it loud and clear. And if you take it as an offense,then I am sorry,but the TRUTH is very offensive to the human ear. Geeee…do you think the Jewish priest took offense to Jesus?

 

[KathleenGee]

Mormon Cultist,

You are speaking of fully cognizant pre mortals…we do not believe in such…and I read a number of years ago that these spirits could decide whether or not they want to come here…and there are links that show ideas such as these, and then as this one person noted, you go back to find it…after it has been posted here on CAF, and it has been pulled

The Mormons watch CAF with a thousand eyes.

The great apostasy, and Mormonism making the claim that our doctrine is corrupt…it has to be only the Apostles Creed as the apostasy was after the death of the last apostle…and so now Mormonism is the true religion. One thousand Eight hundred and Thirty years later…

It is like going to China that has existed for thousands of years as Christianity…even before…and then instead of the Catholic Church, the Mormon religion tells China it is corrupt and Mormonism is the one who can understand Chinese teachings according to the Book of Mormonism…you are doing the same thing to Christianity and to our Church.

And your ideas, be they pre mortal existence…are not recognized, and have not been recognized. I think the Catholic work of the Church, discerning the Revelation, is most thorough and faithful to the reality of Christ.

Mormons come on here saying they don’t believe in this or that…and then former Mormons come on showing us what they do believe.

You don’t believe in Scripture as the source of Revelation. You believe in a controversial men with his other co-religionists?..putting together ideas and concepts that have no bearing or witness to the experience of reality.

Either you believe in the Tradition of Scripture…the Apostles/Nicene Creed, the Holy Trinity…Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Atonement of sin or you believe in the Book of Mormon which is outside the historical and geographical and anthropological of the Holy Land…You can’t have it both ways…

 

[KathleenGee]

Finally, what in the world does pre mortal existence even have to do with salvation, sanctification, and our final union with God anyway?

Ours is the God of order and rationality…

 

[Nicea325]

Mormon Cultist,

You are speaking of fully cognizant pre mortals…we do not believe in such…and I read a number of years ago that these spirits could decide whether or not they want to come here…and there are links that show ideas such as these, and then as this one person noted, you go back to find it…after it has been posted here on CAF, and it has been pulled

The Mormons watch CAF with a thousand eyes.

The great apostasy, and Mormonism making the claim that our doctrine is corrupt…it has to be only the Apostles Creed as the apostasy was after the death of the last apostle…and so now Mormonism is the true religion. One thousand Eight hundred and Thirty years later…

It is like going to China that has existed for thousands of years as Christianity…even before…and then instead of the Catholic Church, the Mormon religion tells China it is corrupt and Mormonism is the one who can understand Chinese teachings according to the Book of Mormonism…you are doing the same thing to Christianity and to our Church.

And your ideas, be they pre mortal existence…are not recognized, and have not been recognized. I think the Catholic work of the Church, discerning the Revelation, is most thorough and faithful to the reality of Christ.

Mormons come on here saying they don’t believe in this or that…and then former Mormons come on showing us what they do believe.

You don’t believe in Scripture as the source of Revelation. You believe in a controversial men with his other co-religionists?..putting together ideas and concepts that have no bearing or witness to the experience of reality.

Either you believe in the Tradition of Scripture…the Apostles/Nicene Creed, the Holy Trinity…Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Atonement of sin or you believe in the Book of Mormon which is outside the historical and geographical and anthropological of the Holy Land…You can’t have it both ways…

Exactly! Either Jesus saves us or not or Joseph Smith simply out-smarted the Son of God with “out-of-this-world” beliefs and teachings?

 

[Nicea325]

Finally, what in the world does pre mortal existence even have to do with salvation, sanctification, and our final union with God anyway?

Ours is the God of order and rationality…

Yep and according to one Mormon here,we can be “gods” if we choose? Sounds like a familiar story about an angel in Heaven who wanted to be “God” himself? Hint…hint…the Devil.

 

[TexanKnight]

I know and fully appreciate that our theology and interpretations of the Bible are very different than yours, and those of mainstream Christianity in lots of places. However, this does not automatically discount them as incorrect: as your own Archbishop Fulton Sheen said, “The truth is still the truth even if nobody believes it, and a lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it”. A numbers game on opinions of interpretation, total converts, numbers leaving one to join another and vice versa mean nothing because what is actually true, remains true regardless.

Perhaps. But the issue is not numbers of people. The issue is numbers of falsehoods and false teaching and truly awful comments that have come from LDS leaders. That alone shows the LDS is false.

In example; it has been stated that we claim to be demi-gods due to our belief in pre-existence. While I agree that Catholic theology would hold that anything co-existing with God prior to mortality would have to be God, our theology does not make the same claim, and therefore we are not claiming to be demi-gods, or equal to god or anything of the sort.
By attributing Catholic interpretation to our doctrine, you (collectively) attribute claims and ideas to us, which we do not have; I am not suggesting you deliberately misrepresent us, but you do not always portray our beliefs accurately.

We do not attribute Catholic interpretation. We use God’s Interpretation. God claims he was THE ONLY GOD and that He knows of no other Gods. So, either God lied or He is not God because if He were, he would know of other Gods if they existed. Again, you can;t run from the Bible.

 

[Nicea325]

Mormon_Cultist;8855839:

I know and fully appreciate that our theology and interpretations of the Bible are very different than yours, and those of mainstream Christianity in lots of places. However, this does not automatically discount them as incorrect: as your own Archbishop Fulton Sheen said, “The truth is still the truth even if nobody believes it, and a lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it”. A numbers game on opinions of interpretation, total converts, numbers leaving one to join another and vice versa mean nothing because what is actually true, remains true regardless.

Perhaps. But the issue is not numbers of people. The issue is numbers of falsehoods and false teaching and truly awful comments that have come from LDS leaders. That alone shows the LDS is false.

In example; it has been stated that we claim to be demi-gods due to our belief in pre-existence. While I agree that Catholic theology would hold that anything co-existing with God prior to mortality would have to be God, our theology does not make the same claim, and therefore we are not claiming to be demi-gods, or equal to god or anything of the sort.
By attributing Catholic interpretation to our doctrine, you (collectively) attribute claims and ideas to us, which we do not have; I am not suggesting you deliberately misrepresent us, but you do not always portray our beliefs accurately.

We do not attribute Catholic interpretation. We use God’s Interpretation. God claims he was THE ONLY GOD and that He knows of no other Gods. So, either God lied or He is not God because if He were, he would know of other Gods if they existed. Again, you can;t run from the Bible.

To be honest, I have found discussing with Mormons is not much different than JW’s. One gets no where since they are far-out in left field.

 

[pablope]

We do not believe that any of our leaders other than the three members of The Godhead are infallible. Each of them is a human being just the same as the rest of us, and are guilty of doing and saying things that are incorrect. Providing they continue to remain worthy, they are still God’s chosen spokesperson and presiding officer of His church upon the earth.

 

[StephenKent]

You should sharpen your research skills.

You should sharpen your research skills.

In 1865 the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints condemned the personal writings of Orson Pratt, found in his publication known as The Seer. Said the Church: “*The Seer *contains doctrines which we cannot sanction, and which we have felt impressed to disown, so that the Saints who now live, and who may live hereafter, may not be misled by our silence, or be left to misinterpret it. Where these objectionable works, or parts of works, are bound in volumes, or otherwise, they should be cut out and destroyed.”

Pratt, a convert to the Latter-day Saint movement, must have gotten his personal convictions on this point from somewhere, but it was not from Joseph Smith. I guess to this day the Latter-day Saints feel like the love and understanding that should prevail between Roman Catholics and Mormons suffers all too much from an incomplete understanding of the context of pesonal statements made by those converts to Mormonism who in the early years found themselves in leadership positions in a fledgling church and who may have brought with them baggage from a prior belief system.

Latter-day Saints should be accorded the same control over what is and what is not binding on them as rightly are the Roman Catholics. (See, e.g., Canon 827 § 4: “Books or other writings dealing with questions of religion or morals cannot be exhibited, sold, or distributed in churches or oratories unless they have been published with the permission of competent ecclesiastical authority or approved by it subsequently.” (vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2Q.HTM).)

The quotations from the Times and Seasons publication – the first of which actually is from Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 811 – can no more be attributed to John Taylor than can the posts we here make be attributed to the Catholic Answers Forums. John Taylor was the editor of the newspaper (see, e.g., Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 814; , but he was in no way the author of all of its contents. The first of the two statements you quoted from the Times and Seasons is unattributed (something common in early American newspapers).

The second was by someone who identified himself or herself simply as “A.B.C.,” writing from Germany (John Taylor was in Nauvoo, Illinois, serving as editor of his newspaper). And note that the second quotation that you provide is within the following context:

"There are many very peculiar sayings about Babel, Babylon, the beast, mother of harlots, and abominations upon the earth, which, when rightly understood by the Saints, according to revelation, means the church, or kingdom of the devil: for revelation saith there are but two: the church of God and the church of Satan. How shall we discern between the two?-“By their fruits ye shall know them, Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [Here intervenes a lengthy quotation from the book of Revelation 17:1-8] It will readily be perceived in the foregoing extract, that John had ***no ***more reference to the Roman Catholic, and Protestant churches, who had a form of godliness, denying the power, than he had to all Babylon from Nimrod down. . . .”

 

[TexanKnight]

In 1865 the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints condemned the personal writings of Orson Pratt, found in his publication known as The Seer. Said the Church: “*The Seer *contains doctrines which we cannot sanction, and which we have felt impressed to disown, so that the Saints who now live, and who may live hereafter, may not be misled by our silence, or be left to misinterpret it. Where these objectionable works, or parts of works, are bound in volumes, or otherwise, they should be cut out and destroyed.”

Pratt, a convert to the Latter-day Saint movement, must have gotten his personal convictions on this point from somewhere, but it was not from Joseph Smith. I guess to this day the Latter-day Saints feel like the love and understanding that should prevail between Roman Catholics and Mormons suffers all too much from an incomplete understanding of the context of pesonal statements made by those converts to Mormonism who in the early years found themselves in leadership positions in a fledgling church and who may have brought with them baggage from a prior belief system.

Latter-day Saints should be accorded the same control over what is and what is not binding on them as rightly are the Roman Catholics. (See, e.g., Canon 827 § 4: “Books or other writings dealing with questions of religion or morals cannot be exhibited, sold, or distributed in churches or oratories unless they have been published with the permission of competent ecclesiastical authority or approved by it subsequently.” (vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2Q.HTM).)

The quotations from the Times and Seasons publication – the first of which actually is from Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 811 – can no more be attributed to John Taylor than can the posts we here make be attributed to the Catholic Answers Forums. John Taylor was the editor of the newspaper (see, e.g., Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 814; , but he was in no way the author of all of its contents. The first of the two statements you quoted from the Times and Seasons is unattributed (something common in early American newspapers).

The second was by someone who identified himself or herself simply as “A.B.C.,” writing from Germany (John Taylor was in Nauvoo, Illinois, serving as editor of his newspaper). And note that the second quotation that you provide is within the following context:

"There are many very peculiar sayings about Babel, Babylon, the beast, mother of harlots, and abominations upon the earth, which, when rightly understood by the Saints, according to revelation, means the church, or kingdom of the devil: for revelation saith there are but two: the church of God and the church of Satan. How shall we discern between the two?-“By their fruits ye shall know them, Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [Here intervenes a lengthy quotation from the book of Revelation 17:1-8] It will readily be perceived in the foregoing extract, that John had ***no ***more reference to the Roman Catholic, and Protestant churches, who had a form of godliness, denying the power, than he had to all Babylon from Nimrod down. . . .”

Make up your mind, please. You went from saying it was not taught to saying one of the “apostles” who taught it was, in effect, censored. That does not explain how the temple ceremonies used Catholic Priests as agents of Satan or how McKonkie, another “apostle” called the Catholic Church “The Great and Abominable Church”.

Seriously, SK…do research into your Church’s PAST. The present looks all pretty…the past…even 50 years ago, looks pretty grim

 

[KathleenGee]

Problem with premortal existence…it reflects the same dichotomy of all other non-Catholic beliefs in that diety is mixed with nature, vs the concept of God as separate from creatures.

There is no purpose in Christianity to have a belief in pre mortal existence for sanctification of life in Christ, absolutely nothing, but musings on another form of lore and myths about man…a form of spiritual narcissism…

Yes…Mormon Cultist here before but using another name.

There are pockets in England that are still terribly bigoted against Catholics. They literally destroyed all the monasteries that helped populations around them, and when they were gone, poverty came to England.

 

[KathleenGee]

Mormonism has hijacked the Bible and turned it into a man oriented exegesis that was not its intent. This in itself brings about moral questions regarding integrity, especially in light of Joseph Smith’s claims that all doctrine is corrupt.

Also, along side Mormonism, here on State side, there is a movement started…World Net Daily was giving a book alot of publicity on their site, that it was Emperor Constantine who started the Catholic Church. The Mormons who come on here, especially some former Catholics, are now believing this and spouting it here.

Emperor Constantine was a pagan until a few days before his death. He gave Christianity the legal right to exist, saw its great value, and restored and rebuilt many churches.

By the end of the 2nd century, the Christian Church was already an institution with a clearly defined system of authority based on Sacred Scriptures, the Apostles Creed, hierarchy of bishop, priest, deacon and our liturgies were already developed before St. Justin the Martyr explained the Mass to a Roman Emperor in 155AD.

St. Paul himself saw the Church as of supernatural origin…the Church as the New Eve…and like wise the woman of 12 Revelation with a crown of 12 stars around her head…representing the 12 apostles.

One single man, Luther, with a population already wanting its own separation from Rome…decided in the 1500’s that the Church Christ established was not divine, that He did not establish His church…and so we have divisions and ongoing controversy as the world goes down without witness of belief in Christ and the unity of faith.

Regarding Constantine as being the real founder of the Catholic Church…In February 303, Emperor Diocletian ordered all Christian places of worship to be destroyed and their sacred books handed over; attending Mass was illegal. This destruction happened from 303 to 312, the first being destroyed was that right next door to Diocletian with the emperor watching.

Prior to Emperor Diocletian, a series of governors persecuted Christians starting in 193 that Tertullian wrote about, then several good leaders, up to Decius, 249-51, who threatened Christians with the rack, many of them apostasizing…during the reign of Decius, — Pope Fabian was martyred…the Catholic Church and its hierarchy already clearly existing, there was a cooling off and then again more persecutions with the martyrdom of Pope Sixtus I, Cyprian of Carthage and Deacon Lawrence.

The final persecution began with intellectual assault led Porphyry who died in 303…which coincided with the reign of Diocletian. These persecutions almost destroyed Christianity.

A second decree under Diocletian was issued and this time, ‘bishops, priests, deacons were especially singled out, where later greater numbers of Christians in all ranks were seized. They had their eyes and tongues gouged out, their feet sawed off; they died at the stake or in a red-hot chairs’…others thrown out to wild beasts to watch as a sport or thrown into dungeons.

This was at a time when Christians were only 10% of the population. It was in the Eastern part of the Christian world that most of the blood flowed. There was a reprieve by Galerius where Christians were free to worship.

After Galerius died, then Maximinus Daia resumed persecution against Christians. Maximinus was the new conquerer of Italy and Africa, and he resided in Rome. During this time, Constantine became Emperor by his troops in 306. Constantine claimed it was the Christian God who gave him victory in 312.

IF people seeking the truth of the Church would break away from false accusations and misrepresentation of history, that would be a great help.

And witnessing the early Christian martyrs trumps any purpose or meaning to fully cognizant pre mortals…it is about man mixing with nature and gods…the focus on self and not on God for our purpose in life.

 

[StephenKent]

. . .one of the “apostles” who taught it was, in effect, censored.

Both Churches rightly enjoy their St. Dominics (see wikipaintings.org/en/domenico-ghirlandaio/st-dominic-burning-heretical-writings-1490#supersized-artistPaintings-248738).

For example, no one should consider the Catholic Church or its present-day adherents bound by any of the statements or writings rejected by her earlier Councils. (See, e.g., tinyurl.com/8yn8ho3.) She did not teach what she rejected.

 

[TexanKnight]

Both Churches rightly enjoy their St. Dominics (see wikipaintings.org/en/domenico-ghirlandaio/st-dominic-burning-heretical-writings-1490#supersized-artistPaintings-248738).

For example, no one should consider the Catholic Church or its present-day adherents bound by any of the statements or writings rejected by her earlier Councils. (See, e.g., tinyurl.com/8yn8ho3.) She did not teach what she rejected.

lol…we were all wondering when you would start LDS Tactic 14- the “bring up a Catholic Defense”

It will not work here. You simply cannot compare things said by “Prophets, Seers and Revelators” with something said by a Priest or Bishop or even Pope who does not claim to talk to God. Please do yourself a favor and refrain from that tactic. It truly weakens your argument.

Let me explain: If you compare your Prophet or Apostle (who claim to be Prophets, Seers and Revelators) with one of our Priests, Bishops, Saints, or Popes, then you MUST be claiming that your folks really are not prophets since our guys are not. I will accept your declaration…your prophets are really not prophets. NOW we can compare.

 

[Telstar]

While I appreciate all the effort that went into your 2 posts on the subject of the LDS view of the Catholic Church as the “Great Babylon”, “harlot”, etc., referred to in the Apocalypse of St. John, that particular scripture is not really where the problem lies, nor is it a problem with the people of either church. Your explanations of Babylon and the rest of it are fairly interesting, but the LDS condemnation of the RCC (which is a historical fact) is only loosely based on that Bible book. So, you might be able to explain away those passages, and tell Catholics that the LDS don’t interpret them that way (even if they just don’t do it, publicly), but, the true source of the contention from inside LDS beliefs, toward the RCC, comes from what Joseph Smith wrote in the BoM and other sources that LDS refer to as ‘scripture’. That’s the real heart of the problem that can’t be explained away as easily.

Most Catholics are totally unaware of the many references in the BoM of the “great and abominable church”. But, it doesn’t take a lot of bra(name removed by moderator)ower to figure out that the entire 13th chapter of 1 Nephi refers to the Bible as “the book” that came “from the mouth of the Jew” (Jesus), and the “church” that wrote and spread it is clearly the RCC, which is unceremoniously referred to as the, “great and abominable church; and I saw the devil that he was the founder of it”. Since Jesus founded the Catholic Church, what does that say about Him, and what does it say about the “angel” that supposedly appeared to Joseph Smith in his ‘vision’, that condemned the RCC as being “abominable”?* 24 And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God.

25 Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God.

26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.

27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.*
2 Nephi 28 is another chapter that alludes to the fate of “that great and abominable church” in an extremely unflattering way. If there are other Catholics reading this thread that have a strong stomach and have never read them before, I urge them to read these chapters, and search for more references to the “great and abominable church” in the BoM and other LDS ‘scripture’. There can be no doubt from the descriptions, which “church” those words refer to, and it’s not difficult to see the twisted views that they portray of our Church.

I find it disingenuous for LDS to come here and try and cover up their beliefs. If they say they’re unaware of them, then I can only guess that they’re recent converts, or not very well versed in the BoM (which I sincerely doubt), or are sticking to their “milk before meat” premise for divulging their more controversial beliefs to anyone outside the church.

 

[KathleenGee]

StephenKing,

You are using tactics started in 2008 or so by Mormon sophists to use Catholic teachings against us.

Considering the writings of Joseph Smith himself…I read some of his DC remarks as Telstar is showing here, at your LDS bookstore…

You can’t use Catholic/Christian sources to prove your point while at the same time labelling them as corrupt…or elsewhere as Smith as done. The whole construct of Mormonism is based on man and manipulating, using God to become another one.

Subsequently, to become as gods is the forbidden fruit and the cause of the fall of mankind; yet the forbidden fruit is the belief, the reflection, aka obsession of man made spiritworld of Mormonism…

To all Mormon posters, it is unethical to use Catholic sources to prove your belief in the forbidden fruit, the downfall man…and likewise consider us and our priesthood as corrupt.

And yes, I read of the Satanic rituals…I call them that as well as the labelling of the Church and Christianity in general as corrupt…those Mormon rituals that blasphemed Christ’s sacrament of Holy Orders.

Yes, I will finally state it. When I was at the Mormon bookstore, reading Pratt’s writings on the Catholic Church and Christian believers was so shocking and disturbing…and electrifying…I encountered the light and power of Lucifer…I was shaking, saw Mormon Documents, these small blue books and began reading texts here by Smith…it is not of God.

So again, considering what I have shared with you of Mormonism, the randomness and disconnects of Mormon teachings and claims with the experience of the real world that has documents and artifacts and signs proving concrete signs of the former…please do not use Catholic sources to prove Mormonism.

Please do not use the fruit of the Living Tree of Life, Jesus Christ to prove the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil…

The fruit of the old Eve is opposite of the fruit of the New Eve, Christ’s Church.