St. Irenaeus: A Mormon?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Insomniac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Irenaeus clearly states in this chapter that God is Uncreated. Mormons do not believe this.

Also in that chapter:

“Now it was necessary that man should in the first instance be created; and having been created, should receive growth; and having received growth, should be strengthened; and having been strengthened, should abound; and having abounded, should recover [from the disease of sin]; and having recovered, should be glorified; and being glorified, should see his Lord. For God is He who is yet to be seen, and the beholding of God is productive of immortality, but immortality renders one nigh unto God.

This is theosis, or the beatific vision…“seeing God”, as only one who has been made incorruptible and immortal can. Not BEING God.
I have read in Catholic pages that the beatific vision is the

“The immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven…”

As I have understood it, this is the end point and goal of our journey with respect to our Father in Heaven (If this incorrect please correct me). I have not found in any explanation of this that we receive any of Gods nature from this, or the way we may experience divinity (again if this is wrong, please show me some theological writings that would better explain this to me)

The OP suggests that there might be some similarity to what Irenaeus wrote and what LDS believe to be true. Yes there are some differences, as you have pointed out, but the fact remains that the processes also found within your quote are similar to LDS thought. Where you left off on you quote Irenaeus goes on to point out that it irrational that man should think God should have made them gods from the beginning.

"…For we cast blame upon Him, because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods; although God has adopted this course out of His pure benevolence, that no one may impute to Him invidiousness or grudgingness. He declares, “I have said, Ye are gods; and ye are all sons of the Highest…”

So is writing of Irenaeus altogether like LDS writing, no it isn’t, however there are some thoughts that are, the above being one of them.

Paul
 
Today I was reading a library book about Christianity (in general), and it contains quotes from various Christians throughout history. One quote, attributed to St. Irenaeus, said: “God became man so that man might become God.” Had I not known who said that, I would have assumed it was Lorenzo Snow or some other Mormon Prophet.
St. Ireneaus, as some might have by now said here (I haven’t read the whole thread yet) is teaching about theosis, or the process of man reaching that state of holiness that is God-like; as Jesus stated, 'Be perfect just as your Father in heaven is perfect". Jesus Himself taught theosis.
 
I have read in Catholic pages that the beatific vision is the

“The immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven…”

As I have understood it, this is the end point and goal of our journey with respect to our Father in Heaven (If this incorrect please correct me). I have not found in any explanation of this that we receive any of Gods nature from this, or the way we may experience divinity (again if this is wrong, please show me some theological writings that would better explain this to me)

The OP suggests that there might be some similarity to what Irenaeus wrote and what LDS believe to be true. Yes there are some differences, as you have pointed out, but the fact remains that the processes also found within your quote are similar to LDS thought. Where you left off on you quote Irenaeus goes on to point out that it irrational that man should think God should have made them gods from the beginning.

"…For we cast blame upon Him, because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods; although God has adopted this course out of His pure benevolence, that no one may impute to Him invidiousness or grudgingness. He declares, “I have said, Ye are gods; and ye are all sons of the Highest…”

So is writing of Irenaeus altogether like LDS writing, no it isn’t, however there are some thoughts that are, the above being one of them.

Paul
He is still speaking of theosis.

Mormons believe in apotheosis.

I recommend, as a beginning point, this article at the Orthodox wiki. And this article in the old Catholic Encyclopedia.

The understanding of “immediate knowledge”, as theosis, is catholic theology. The second article I linked explains this.

Also, it isn’t logical at all to pick a quote here and there out of the ECF writings. What the ECFs have to say in in the context of a whole. It is as though Mormons are eves dropping on a conversation, and make assumptions about the ECF because of one thing they heard. It creates an inaccurate view, and is completely erroneous.
 
I have read in Catholic pages that the beatific vision is the

“The immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven…”

As I have understood it, this is the end point and goal of our journey with respect to our Father in Heaven (If this incorrect please correct me). I have not found in any explanation of this that we receive any of Gods nature from this, or the way we may experience divinity (again if this is wrong, please show me some theological writings that would better explain this to me)

The OP suggests that there might be some similarity to what Irenaeus wrote and what LDS believe to be true. Yes there are some differences, as you have pointed out, but the fact remains that the processes also found within your quote are similar to LDS thought. Where you left off on you quote Irenaeus goes on to point out that it irrational that man should think God should have made them gods from the beginning.

"…For we cast blame upon Him, because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods; although God has adopted this course out of His pure benevolence, that no one may impute to Him invidiousness or grudgingness. He declares, “I have said, Ye are gods; and ye are all sons of the Highest…”

So is writing of Irenaeus altogether like LDS writing, no it isn’t, however there are some thoughts that are, the above being one of them.

Paul
Irenaeus can’t be confused with the mormons. His views are nothing like mormonism.

The Catholic view is that of theosis. The Catholic encyclopedia speaks of God dwelling within us. It isn’t simply to know God as the angels know Him. The Roman liturgy speaks of theosis as well, of us becoming like God. And if you really want to see more about it read the eastern liturgies. As I said, the Maronite liturgy teaches exactly what Sts. Irennaeus, Athanasius, and Ephrem taught.
 
The basis of theosis is that the second person of the Trinity, who is spirit, put on flesh and became man. He became the God-man. He united within one person(His person is divine) the divine and human natures. As a result man can recieve the divine nature(According to eastern Catholics Grace is nothing other than the Holy Spirit) and like Christ we can become god-man. We can unite the human and divine natures within our one human person. This is all obtained through communion in Christ.
 
A primary difference between Catholic and lds doctrine is, Mormons believe as man is god once was. Mormons believe God was not always God but was once a man on a planet. Catholics believe God was always God without beginning or end. Mormons believe their God is a polygamist with many wives who sexually created spirit bodies for intelligences to in habit in a pre-existence before life on earth. Then this God along with some of his wives came to the earth and sexually made bodies for their spirit children to come down to inhabit the earth and gain experience preparing them to become gods themselves.

It is a very mortal type of god who needs to have sex to create spirits, or earthly bodies for that matter. Joseph Smith was likely just using the knowledge of how things come about on earth to get his followers to fall for the idea that God didn’t use any greater power of creation then we do.

Mormon women have an eternity of being one of thousands of a single mans wives, and going through endless pregnancies to produce children. And while I have a great love of children I am sure God has a far greater power of creation then this painful method.

The vision of Catholic unity with God is a far greater and more pleasant sounding eternity. Sharing all God has and sharing it with our loved ones is far beyond the mortal like godhood of Mormonism. Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, the things that God has prepared for those that love him…

Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
 
Irenaeus can’t be confused with the mormons. His views are nothing like mormonism.

The Catholic view is that of theosis. The Catholic encyclopedia speaks of God dwelling within us. It isn’t simply to know God as the angels know Him. The Roman liturgy speaks of theosis as well, of us becoming like God. And if you really want to see more about it read the eastern liturgies. As I said, the Maronite liturgy teaches exactly what Sts. Irennaeus, Athanasius, and Ephrem taught.
You are assuming here that what Irenaeus wrote about is reflected in theosis which was taught in the forth century. Theosis, which some connect with the “beatific vision” is a teaching, I believe, which is an interpretation, of writers of the 4th century and later, on what the early Fathers were teaching about the true relationship we have with the Father, in an attempt to harmonize these thoughts terms of the developing doctrines and traditions of the 4th century.

Any suggestion that theosis is the same as LDS though would be incorrect there is quite a bit of difference except that both conclude that mans destiny is to share in the divine nature, and to become like our Father in Heaven, but not equal too. The thoughts expressed by Irenaeus and others on the matter appear to be in harmony in spirit to what LDS believe on the subject.

I find interesting that many articles written on the teaching of theosis makes a contrasting reference to LDS thought. I wonder, if it was not for what the LDS believe it may be that this teaching of the early writers of the church would have remained unknown by the majority of church goers.

This chapter on the progression of man toward divinity is not the only thing that Irenaeus has written that is similar to LDS thought here is another one.
  1. [They say, moreover], that there is this distinction between the habitation of those who produce an hundred-fold, and that of those who produce sixty-fold, and that of those who produce thirty-fold: for the first will be taken up into the heavens, the second will dwell in paradise, the last will inhabit the city; and that was on this account the Lord declared, “In My Father’s house are many mansions.” For all things belong to God, who supplies all with a suitable dwelling-place; even as His Word says, that a share is allotted to all by the Father, according as each person is or shall be worthy. And this is the couch on which the guests shall recline, having been invited to the wedding. The presbyters, the disciples of the apostles, affirm that this is the gradation and arrangement of those who are saved, and that they advance through steps of this nature; also that they ascend through the Spirit to the Son, and through the Son to the Father, and that in due time the Son will yield up His work to the Father, even as it is said by the apostle, “For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”For in the times of the kingdom, the righteous man who is upon the earth shall then forget to die. “But when He saith, All things shall be subdued unto Him, it is manifest that He is excepted who did put all things under Him. And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” (Irenaeus Against Heresy V Chapter XXXVI)
Paul
 
Mormons believe God was not always God but was once a man on a planet.
How come this isn’t a belief that you often hear about with Mormon missionaries? 😊 Do you have to be Mormon to finally find out these beliefs? Is there a link to a site which has official Mormon teachings which states this?
Mormons believe their God is a polygamist with many wives who sexually created spirit bodies…
No, come on seriously?

I don’t know much about the Mormon faith and their doctrines (don’t really care to) but it seems to me that Mormonism is different depending on the particular Mormon. Am I the only one who has the same opinion? I suppose one could say the same things about Catholics though. 🤷

God bless
 
Irenaeus can’t be confused with the mormons. His views are nothing like mormonism.
It would be pretty difficult to believe the bit about Christ visiting the lost tribes in the Americas, if you didn’t know America existed. Not to mention abandoning belief in the Trinity (including a Trinitarian formula of baptism), accepting the angel Moroni as a source of revelation, picking up an Aaronic priesthood…

The number of ways in which Joseph Smith was a million miles from St. Irenaeus are hard to number.
 
How come this isn’t a belief that you often hear about with Mormon missionaries? 😊 Do you have to be Mormon to finally find out these beliefs?

No, come on seriously?

I don’t know much about the Mormon faith and their doctrines (don’t really care to) but it seems to me that Mormonism is different depending on the particular Mormon.

God bless
Well I was hoping some powerful Mormon defender would jump in here and try to deny the charges but it appears they are not going to stick their neck out on this one so here goes.

LDS Doctrine and Covenants (Mormon official scripture)promises the faithful LDS couple that they can achieve godhood in the same manner as God the Father:
Code:
    "...if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity,... they shall [have]...a continuation of the seeds [children] forever and ever. Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting,... Then shall they be gods, because they have all power,... and continuation of the lives,... [endless procreation of spirit children]" (Doctrine and Covenants Section 132:18-22)
Now before some complain about the additions in the brackets let’s let some Mormon top leaders explain them.

LDS Prophet Joseph Smith taught that God was once a mortal man:
Code:
    "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. ...I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil,...

     He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, ...you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves,  the same as all gods have done before you,.. and be able to dwell in everlasting burnings" (History of the Church, Vol. 6, Ch. 14, p. 305-6).
Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt said:
Code:
    "If we should take a million of worlds like this and number their particles, we should find that there are more Gods than there are particles of matter in those worlds." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, page 345)
Gods wife (wives) Apostle Bruce R. McConkie explained the doctrine:
Code:
    "Implicit in the Christian verity that all men are the spirit children of an Eternal Father is the usually unspoken truth that they are also the offspring of an Eternal Mother. An exalted and glorified Man of Holiness (Moses 6:57) could not be a Father unless a Woman of like glory, perfection, and holiness was associated with him as a Mother....

    "This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in plainness by the First Presidency of the Church... they said that 'man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father,' that man is the 'offspring of celestial parentage,' and that 'all men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity.' " (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, page 516)
As recently as 2007 both Apostle Boyd K. Packer and Dallen Oakes, during an interview for PBS, explained that God the father has a resurrected body. Apostle Packer stated:
Code:
    "That vision [Joseph Smith's 1820 vision] taught us some things. We learned about the personality of God the Father, a RESURRECTED BEING, as part of our gospel."
Polygamy in heaven? While church leaders no longer allow the practice of polygamy here on Earth, they do allow a living man to be sealed to another woman after the death of his wife, or after divorce. This leads to the obvious situation of establishing multiple sealings on Earth that, according to Mormonism, will necessitate polygamy in heaven.

This doctrine was reaffirmed in October of 2007 at the funeral for the second wife of President Howard W. Hunter, the fourteenth President of the LDS Church. The Deseret News reported:

President Hinckley affirmed the eternal nature of the marriage between Sister [Inis] Hunter and the former church president, whose first wife, Claire Jeffs, died after a long battle with Alzheimer’s disease and is now buried beside him in the Salt Lake Cemetery.

Inis Hunter “will now be laid to rest on the other side,” he said. “They were sealed under the authority of the Holy Melchizedek Priesthood for time and for all eternity,” he said, recalling the marriage ceremony he performed for them in the Salt Lake Temple in April 1990. (“Sister Hunter’s humor and cheerfulness remembered as she is laid to rest,” Deseret News, Oct. 22, 2007).

Another example of plural sealings is Apostle Russell M. Nelson 's marriage in 2006 to a BYU professor. The BYU NewsNet for April 7, 2006 announced the temple marriage of Apostle Nelson, age 81, to Wendy Watson (see [link]). His first wife died in February of 2005 and this was the first marriage for his new wife. This would mean, according to LDS beliefs, that Nelson has two wives sealed to him for eternity.

Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth president of the LDS Church, remarried twice after the death of his first wife, and in his book, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 2, p. 67, he remarked: “…my wives will be mine in eternity.”

Harold B. Lee, the eleventh president of the church, also remarried after his wife 's death and was sealed to another woman and was looking forward to a polygamous relationship in heaven. He, in fact, wrote a poem in which he reflected that his second wife, Joan, would join his first wife, Fern, as his eternal wives:

My lovely Joan was sent to me: So Joan joins Fern
That three might be, more fitted for eternity.
“O Heavenly Father, my thanks to thee”
(Deseret News 1974 Church Almanac, p. 17)

Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
 
(CONTINUED) Further short sighted teachings…

Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt set forth some important details and problems concerning the birth of spirit children to celestial beings:
Code:
    "In the Heaven where our spirits were born there are many Gods, each one of whom has his own wife or wives, raises up a numerous family of sons and daughters... each father and mother will be in a condition to multiply forever and ever. As soon as each God has begotten many millions of male and female spirits, and his Heavenly inheritance becomes too small, to comfortably accommodate his great family, he, in connection with his sons, organizes a new world, after a similar order to the one which we now inhabit, where he sends both the male and female spirits to inhabit tabernacles of flesh and bones.... The inhabitants of each world are required to reverence, adore, and worship their own personal father who dwells in the Heaven which they formerly inhabited.... The number of the sons and daughters of God, born in Heaven before this earth was formed, is not known by us. They must have been exceedingly numerous... The amount of population now on the globe, is estimated in round numbers at one thousand million. If we take this estimation for the average number per century, during the seven thousand years of its temporal existence it will amount to seventy thousand millions *.... It will be seen, from this estimation, that about seventy thousand million sons and daughters were born in Heaven, and kept their first estate... If we admit that one personage was the Father of all this great family, and that they were all born of the same Mother, the period of time intervening between the birth of the oldest and the youngest spirit must have been immense. If we suppose, as an average, that only one year intervened between each birth then it would have required, over one hundred thousand millions of years for the same Mother to have given birth to this vast family.... Should the period between each birth, be one hundred times shorter than what is required in this world, (which is very improbable,) it would still require over one thousand million of years to raise up such a numerous progeny.... But... it is altogether probable that the period required for the formation of the infant spirit, is of the same length as that required in this world... If the Father of these spirits, prior to his redemption, had secured to himself, through the everlasting covenant of marriage, many wives... the period required to people a world would be shorter... if it required one hundred thousand million of years to people a world like this... it is evident that, with a hundred wives, this period would be reduced to only one thousand million years." (The Seer, March 1853, pp. 37-39)
Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)*
 
I don’t know much about the Mormon faith and their doctrines (don’t really care to) but it seems to me that Mormonism is different depending on the particular Mormon. Am I the only one who has the same opinion? I suppose one could say the same things about Catholics though. 🤷

God bless
Mormons of my generation were taught this sort of thing as little kids. We probably took it about as seriously (collectively speaking) as Catholic kids, who are taught that Jesus impregnated his mother, sired himself through her, died, came back to life, ascended to heaven, and awaited his mother’s assumption to become his bride.

When you’re taught silly things as a child, you generally believe them until you hit puberty, when you realize just how goofy it all sounds, and you put it out of your mind in favor of chasing girls and hanging out with your friends. At the time you have your own kid, you start believing again, simply because you imagine that’s the way you should be a good parent.

If you talk to the Mormon missionaries, you should augment their teachings with your own study. Their job is to convert you, not give you the straight scoop. It’d be similar to going to RCIA, and expecting to hear about how all Jews are responsible for Christ’s torture and execution (upon our heads and upon our children’s). Plenty of Catholics were taught things like that, but it’s not something you want to spook outsiders with. It’s only when you get into the temple (about a year after your baptism) that the LDS teachings on the pre-existence and eternal progression are taught. By then you’re invested.
 
It would be pretty difficult to believe the bit about Christ visiting the lost tribes in the Americas, if you didn’t know America existed. Not to mention abandoning belief in the Trinity (including a Trinitarian formula of baptism), accepting the angel Moroni as a source of revelation, picking up an Aaronic priesthood…

The number of ways in which Joseph Smith was a million miles from St. Irenaeus are hard to number.
No one is saying that the writings of Irenaeus touch on the things you have touched on here, however, the writings of Irenaeus or even Justin Martyr are examples of how differently first and second century writers differ from those of the fourth century.

The way I see it, first century writers when compared to forth century writer are closer to LDS though on maters of who God and Jesus is, and the state of those that are judged worthy of an abode in heaven.

Paul
 
No one is saying that the writings of Irenaeus touch on the things you have touched on here, however, the writings of Irenaeus or even Justin Martyr are examples of how differently first and second century writers differ from those of the fourth century.

The way I see it, first century writers when compared to forth century writer are closer to LDS though on maters of who God and Jesus is, and the state of those that are judged worthy of an abode in heaven.

Paul
You may want to re-read posts 30 and 31 on this thread. I am sure First century writers never wrote anything as absurd as these Mormon teachings on God. The Apostles etc. Irenaeus and Justin Martyr are often quoted even today by Catholic defenders showing the continuity of the faith and how it is unchanged from the beginning. One must keep in mind that every thought someone wrote down was not dogma. However dogma was taught and carried down without change from the beginning. Therein lies the truth…

Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
 
You may want to re-read posts 30 and 31 on this thread. I am sure First century writers never wrote anything as absurd as these Mormon teachings on God.
I don’t see that either, but that is not we are talking about is it? We are talking about what he wrote about the progress one must go through to become a god. Further to that, he didn’t add any more than that our goal through salvation was to be a god. LDS expand on what that might look like, whether it is accurate or not is of no consequence the basic principle is the same.
The Apostles etc. Irenaeus and Justin Martyr are often quoted even today by Catholic defenders showing the continuity of the faith and how it is unchanged from the beginning. One must keep in mind that every thought someone wrote down was not dogma. However dogma was taught and carried down without change from the beginning. Therein lies the truth…
Tiber diving team of 2004 (we go deeper to penetrate the darkness with the light)
Interesting, LDS believe the Jesus carries out the will of the Father, that it was Jesus that communicated to Moses in the Burning bush, and who was called the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Below is what Justin Martyr had to say on the issue.

“…I again replied, “Even if this were so, my friends, that an angel and God were together in the vision seen by Moses, yet, as has already been proved to you by the passages previously quoted, it will not be the Creator of all things that is the God that said to Moses that He was the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, but it will be He who has been proved to you to have appeared to Abraham, ministering to the will of the Maker of all things, and likewise carrying into execution His counsel in the judgment of Sodom; so that, even though it be as you say, that there were two—an angel and God—he who has but the smallest intelligence will not venture to assert that the Maker and Father of all things, having left all supercelestial matters, was visible on a little portion of the earth…”

Paul
 
a few years ago there were some people trying to prove that life on Earth started as a byproduct of extraterrestrial visitors. they used a whole slew of “evidences” one of which as I recall was a section of Ezekiel whihc they claimed contained written descriptions of spacecraft.

when you get right down to it, it is always about interpretations and context. If you take things badly out of context, and apply strange interpretations to them then you get odd results.

this is why we should stay close to the Church that Jesus built on the Apostles. the correct interpretations are to be found there. the farther we get away from the Apostles the stranger our interpretations get, until we are building up sects rather than the Church.
 
a few years ago there were some people trying to prove that life on Earth started as a byproduct of extraterrestrial visitors. they used a whole slew of “evidences” one of which as I recall was a section of Ezekiel whihc they claimed contained written descriptions of spacecraft.

when you get right down to it, it is always about interpretations and context. If you take things badly out of context, and apply strange interpretations to them then you get odd results.

this is why we should stay close to the Church that Jesus built on the Apostles. the correct interpretations are to be found there. the farther we get away from the Apostles the stranger our interpretations get, until we are building up sects rather than the Church.
So much, that I don’t know what the last point Paul G was trying to make.

:confused:
 
Interesting, LDS believe the Jesus carries out the will of the Father, that it was Jesus that communicated to Moses in the Burning bush, and who was called the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Catholics believe the same (at least the knowledgeable ones). As you point out (perhaps inadvertently), it has been Catholic teaching since the days of the ECFs.

The LDS have a very distorted view of what Catholics believe. My older brother, who went to the same Catholic schools I did but is now a Mormon, insists that Catholics don’t believe in a bodily resurrection, even though both creeds state that we believe in “the resurrection of the body”. Why does he think that? Because the Mormon Church tells him so.

Weird.

Paul
 
a few years ago there were some people trying to prove that life on Earth started as a byproduct of extraterrestrial visitors. they used a whole slew of “evidences” one of which as I recall was a section of Ezekiel whihc they claimed contained written descriptions of spacecraft.
The difference here is this is not an obscure story found in a set of Old Testament verses. It appears to be a detailed explanation of Christian thought in Justin’s time
when you get right down to it, it is always about interpretations and context. If you take things badly out of context, and apply strange interpretations to them then you get odd results.
this is why we should stay close to the Church that Jesus built on the Apostles. the correct interpretations are to be found there. the farther we get away from the Apostles the stranger our interpretations get, until we are building up sects rather than the Church.
I’m open to discussion, what do you think Justin has said here, or what is the main interpretation of the church on this issue

Paul.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top