L
LatterDayLady
Guest
Great post. :tiphat:
- Status
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
This is not an attack, it is a fact: When you use Biblical scripture, it is not with a Christian understanding, it is with an understanding that has other “scripture” attached to it.
You clarify this yourself when you say “biblical scripture”, as though there is some other scripture…there isn’t. It is one of the things that a former Mormon who is converting to Roman Catholicism learns, the Word of God, as it is, without the erroneous teachings that come from Mormon “scripture”. It is a new world, which breaks the bonds that Mormons have put on Biblical teachings, and opens the Truth to those who seek it. Truth having a name, Jesus Christ. The blind see.
Everything I’ve written to you concerning Christian belief has Biblical backing. I suspect you are stuck on the word Trinity. Just replace Trinity, with this: “Father, Son and Holy Spirit”, as that is what Trinity is referring to. One God, in three Persons.
Baptism is, among many things, entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven, where we are made joint heirs with Jesus Christ. Jesus is God, as is the Father and the Holy Spirit. God has Revealed this to us about Himself, and we believe what God has Revealed.
We know the Father through the Son, and we know the Spirit because the Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son. They have a relationship to each other, which is not known by us, other than what we know through the Son. “I am in the Father and He is in me.”
So it is, when we are baptized, we are baptized into the Life of the Holy Trinity, who IS, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
You see? All very Biblical.
You may choose to believe what you want, as well, but why would you think in such a manner? Jesus describes belief as essential to salvation. Believe in Him and be baptized.
You do not yet believe, and so I am not in agreement with you that you may choose to believe what you want. You are worth much more than that to God. You can believe what you want, but why would I want you to believe something that is false?
T
truthsave
Guest
First of all I have to say it is true you have the freedom to consider mormons christians, but this freedom denounce that you put yourself and your way of considering things on an higher level then Catholic, Orthodox and Protenstant and others. Even their babtism is not recognized as valid.
Then of course if you don’t trust the priest or representant of the religion you belong to it is ok, but don’t think that they say things just on a limited view marked by affinity or not. They consider things globally and they consider the mormon approach and theology. It is not a question or going against them is a question of saying what makes you Christians or not.
What you are saying is dangerous and open the door to a self conscious spirituality then really christian religion.It is has a certain mark of New Age aproach where the individual is considered to have the truth inside himself. He certainly has a truth, his truth, but not the truth. And from a New Age point of you individual truth is truth. Not for Christians. The belief in christianity is not in adapting a subject to things that can be accepted by each individual, it is not going to a restaurant and choosing from a menu the plate that each one of us prefer. It is trying, at least I saytrying, to stick with one menu.
Cannot call vegetarian who eats meat, even though he would prefer the appelation of vegetarian. Cannot call Christian anybody who say they believe in Jesus name if not what does it means:
***Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many [a]miracles?’
And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ ***Cross references:
Matthew 7:23 : Ps 6:8; Matt 25:41; Luke 13:27
Your saying about the consumption of the actual Body and Blood of Jesus and keeping a golden box containing a saint’s heart for veneration reveal some luck of will to know these things. Veneration of a relique is not for the object of the relique itself, it is because the Holy Spirit has been there has touched that part of that men or whatever. Remember that in the act are reported miracle of people wanting just to lay in the shadow of Peter, they where venerating the apostols since they were like vectors of the Lord Grace and Words and full of the Holy Spirit not of their own spirit.
Sorry about it but your post could be mesleading if not clarified.
B
bz5
Guest
But Parker, if Stephen literally saw Jesus literally standing next to the Father with a body, not just because God allowed him that comfort but because God is flesh and blood with Jesus standing next to him, then what does that do to the idea of the three levels of heaven? Doesn’t the LDS church teach that Jesus is in a lower level than the Father? With the Holy Ghost being in the third? Which brings me to another question I’ve never heard an answer to but would love to. There is a great stress in TV and print ads I’ve seen on “families are forever.” I used to think this referred to the traditional Christian belief that we would see our family in heaven again if we all went there. But then I came to understand that the family unit will actually be together for all eternity. But what does that mean? If I’m with my parents’ family, then is another version of me with my husband and kids? Where does that leave my in-laws, etc…? What if I were in a different level of heaven than my kids? What if we all became so exalted we had our own planets? We wouldn’t be together at all. Or is the idea of humans becoming gods of their own planets an idea that is falling out of favor in the LDS church? I’m serious - since you don’t know me and writing doesn’t always catch the mood of the writer, I hope I don’t sound flippant. I really want to know. Thanks!
T
Tony888
Guest
Stephen,
I urge you to start a letter writing campaign to Webster’s, and the other major purveyors of dictionaries. Once you get them to change their definition of Christian to your liking, I will stop professing to be Christian.
Until you complete this task, I urge you to stop living in a fantasy world.
As a first step, you could focus on a clear definition of what it means to be Catholic, get your own house in order. Per the recent Catholic survey in USA Today, a significant number (70%) don’t believe in the “Teaching Authority” of Rome, yet they still claim to be Catholic. In a PEW survey, I’ve seen that the majority don’t even believe in Transubstantiation?
So your actions are:
- get your own house in order
- petition websters
P
ParkerD
Guest
Hi, bz5,
I hope you are doing well.
I understand that when a person hears bits and pieces, they don’t get a very good picture in their minds.
First, very important: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are all in the Celestial glory, and the Father has a body of flesh and bones. There is a change in resurrected bodies such that the word “blood” isn’t accurate, but “flesh and bones” describes the Father and the Son.
The Son will visit the Terrestrial glory and thus those who have that glory will receive His presence, but not continually since He visits by coming from the Celestial glory and then returning there.
Stephen saw in vision the Father standing by the Son, in their Celestial glory. The Holy Ghost was with Stephen in that experience, and the Holy Ghost will continually be present with those in the Celestial glory.
The Holy Ghost will provide comfort and peace for those whose resurrection is to the Telestial glory. Those in the Terrestrial glory will also have the comfort and peace afforded by the Holy Ghost, plus as I noted the visits of the Son and thus joy in His presence.
To be with “families forever” means to be living in extended familial relationships, like on this earth only with more knowledge about and rejoicing together with our ancestors also–not all in one large “mansion” but having frequent interaction with each other, and all living in one “Celestial kingdom” place. I would expect to visit with my parents and my children “every day” (though time will have a different dimension than we have here on earth.)
An important aspect of those extended family relationships is that what enables the fullness of those relationships is the sealing ordinances that bind the generations together.
Any governing or organizing of new “earths” will be done from the Celestial glory through the power of faith and the power of the everlasting priesthood, wherein those who receive that opportunity will have become one with God and with Christ.
'Wishing you well, sincerely.
S
scipio337
Guest
By Webster’s definitions, Muslims (who are told to read the ‘Injeel’, but to ignore the ‘alterations’, or ‘corruptions’, which is ‘anything that disagrees with the Qu’ran’. Sound familiar?), Ba’hai (who view Abraham, the Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, Báb and Bahá’u’lláh as 'messengers of God), and Rastafarians (who worship Haile Selassie I as a reincarnation of Jesus) are Christians too.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Sorry, it isn’t up to you to decide who is Christian and who is not. The Catholic Church, after much consideration, not some knee-jerk reaction, has decided that their theology constitutes an entirely different religion and therefore does not even consider them Christian heretics.
T
truthsave
Guest
This is a very good synthesis of mormon teaching and would be nice to put on comparison with traditional Christianity.
ParkerD:
It is and much more harder then trying to immagine the ocean without ever seing the ocean from a glass of sea water. Since the difference between a glass of sea water and the ocean is much smaller then from wehat we can conceive and theFather.
ParkerD:
Parker:
Raphael told Tobia when he revealed his nature that when Tobia saw him eating he thaught he was eating.
As far as concerning what kind of “special” relation we will have as angels with other family members became other angels Jesus didn’t talk about it so if I say something I would invent it. And if He didn’t talk about it it means it is not important for our salvation.
(to let Him say something more then He said you have to accept mormonism)
I leave the talk about the Holy Spirit. It is a matter that Jesus Christ didn’t talk about. He just said He would have sent the Conforter.
It is good just to point out the differences without polemic.
For traditional christians: Flesh and bones are the phisical support for men in their material fall that led to phisical death. The Father doesn’t need any phisical or spiritual support: He is. There is no need in Him. He just is. The father doesn’t need Glory He is Glory. He cannot be separated by Glory. If you can seprate Him from Glory He is not the Father. Wathever we can conceive is not really applicable to the Father.
It is and much more harder then trying to immagine the ocean without ever seing the ocean from a glass of sea water. Since the difference between a glass of sea water and the ocean is much smaller then from wehat we can conceive and theFather.
Again for traditional Christianity: There are not degree of glory. Glory is to live with the Son and the Father
Parker:
for traditional Christians: if you receive the mercy of the Son you will love the Son and who love the Son loves the Father, and who loves the Father loves the ohters like the Son loved us. So there is no need of individual love over the family and wife. we will be like angels. This is what He said talking about mariage in the Gospel. And angels don’t have flesh and blood like humans have. How are they I don’t know. Neither is explained since when they appear to man they take a visible nature that could be visible to us.
Raphael told Tobia when he revealed his nature that when Tobia saw him eating he thaught he was eating.
As far as concerning what kind of “special” relation we will have as angels with other family members became other angels Jesus didn’t talk about it so if I say something I would invent it. And if He didn’t talk about it it means it is not important for our salvation.
(to let Him say something more then He said you have to accept mormonism)
I leave the talk about the Holy Spirit. It is a matter that Jesus Christ didn’t talk about. He just said He would have sent the Conforter.
It is good just to point out the differences without polemic.
B
blueadept
Guest
I’m glad I didn’t have either of these approaches in dealing with my LDS wife whom I still credit in making me embrace my Catholicism instead of being the lukewarm Catholic I was prior to getting our marriage blessed in the RCC. Arguing with LDS and telling them they shouldn’t be considered Christians is the most useless conversation between Catholics and LDS members that can exist IMHO. Do we disagree?..Obviously. So any ecumenical efforts between the two faiths should avoid this particular subject since it doesn’t produce any Christ-like attributes.
My wife is a better Christian as a Mormon while I’m a better Christian as a Catholic. So who shows a better example of true Christianity now even though we are now a year civilly divorced? She filed for it stating irreconcilable differences due to religion and is heavily looking for a LDS husband. For myself, I continue to honor my marriage vows that were between us and God regardless of her current actions. Which one is showing the better example of the intent of what Christ had in mind in regards to marriage?
P
ParkerD
Guest
SteveVH,
Since the “much consideration” you have noted entirely disregarded the New Testament and went off on its own tangent, then “Doxiemom” is merely showing she knows the New Testament well enough to recognize its teachings without needing to be beholden to the Catholic church for its interpretation or its “consideration”.
B
blueadept
Guest
I believe Doxiemom can totally respect the Catholic Church’s position and still show ecumenism towards LDS members. So I guess I’m respectfully disagreeing with your statement.
D
Denise1957
Guest
I’m sure that SteveVH can respond to this question better than I, but I’d just like to mention (and it’s been mentioned many times already) that it’s understandable that many Mormons would consider themselves as Christian. But the Mormon religion itself is not Christian - not even close. I try to separate the religion from it’s adherents, in that many Mormons truly believe that they are Christians, and therefore they are not necessarily culpable. And then there are those Mormons who know that it isn’t Christian, but try to infer that it is, which is deceptive.
S
SteveVH
Guest
I am really just stating a principle. This has nothing to do with being respectful or pleasant to Mormons. The great majority that I know are very good people and sincere in their faith. But there can be no more ecumenism between Mormonism and Christianity than with Islam and Christianity. Ecumenism within Christianity is for the purpose of unity. The contradiction in beliefs between Mormonsim and Catholicism negates this possibility. It is a different religion altogether. We can work together for the greater good in areas such as family and life issues, but there is a great chasm between us as far as doctrine and belief. The only institution that possesses the authority to determine whether a set of beliefs is Christian or not, is the Catholic Church for the simple reason that it is the Church founded by Jesus Christ and has been given the authority of Christ. The Church was very slow in making this determination but once it did, it is not open to personal opinion as far as those who call themselves “Catholic” are concerned.
S
SteveVH
Guest
And just how did the Catholic Church disregard the New Testament in making its determination, Parker? Don’t you mean your interpretation of the New Testament along with the influence of “another testament” not even found in the New Testament and in many ways contradictory to the New Testament? Doxiemom is free to believe what ever she chooses to believe but it has no bearing on the findings of the Catholic Church and Catholics are bound to follow the Church, not each individual’s personal opinions. If I have to choose between the opinion of Doxiemom, or any other person for that matter, and my Church, the Church will win out every time.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
Christians do not take translations and put forth thoughts like this…the wod that is TRANSLATED as saint is this…Always check the Greek before you decide to teach something that may look like your foot is in your mouth…Perhaps you may want to adjust the undergarments.
concordances.org/greek/40.htm
hagios: sacred, holyOriginal Word: ἅγιος, ία, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: hagios
Phonetic Spelling: (hag’-ee-os)
Short Definition: set apart, holy, sacred
Definition: set apart by (or for) God, holy, sacred.
40 hágios – properly, different (unlike), other (“otherness”), holy; for the believer, 40 (hágios) means “likeness of nature with the Lord” because “different from the world.”
The fundamental (core) meaning of 40 (hágios) is “different” – thus a temple in the 1st century was hagios (“holy”) because different from other buildings (Wm. Barclay). In the NT, 40 /hágios (“holy”) has the “technical” meaning “different from the world” because “like the Lord.”
[40 (hágios) implies something “set apart” and therefore “different (distinguished/distinct)” – i.e. “other,” because special to the Lord.]
So rewrite your thoughts with the word “hagios”…and if you truly believe that the word Saints is what is meant then let me know…the possibility is not definite…so sad, trying to teach what you do not know…
B
blueadept
Guest
Then why do you consistently engage Mormons then? Both churches believe they have the proper priesthood authority while the other one does not in regards to who belongs to the ‘true church’ of Christ. Beating each other up on the issue of who is a Christian is rather pointless.
Half my relatives are Mormons on my father’s side so it’s rather pointless to portray myself in your version of Catholicism IMO and there is better way to be Christ-like and stand up for the RCC.
P
ParkerD
Guest
Denise,
I certainly agree that Latter-day Saints are not “Catholic Christians” nor Protestant Christians. But they are Biblical Christians, as was Paul, as were Peter and John and all the apostles, and as were the majority of the “saints” to whom Paul addressed his letters.
S
scipio337
Guest
Which translation of the Bible did the Apostles use, and what books were included in it?
P
pablope
Guest
Sorry Parker…but wrong. There was no NT at that time. If you are comparing yourself to them…then you would be Septuagint or OT Christians.
- Status