Why Did The Son of God Became Man?

[Tony888]

One of the teaching questions in the CCC is - WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?

Five specific reasons are given. I’ve summarized them below for brevity but here is a link to the CCC source

1. • For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven
   • in order to save us by reconciling us with God
   • so that thus we might know God’s love
   • to be our model of holiness
   • to make us "partakers of the divine nature"
   I believe the LDS theology agrees with the Catholics on all five points (maybe we should be called 5 point catholics?)
   
   I speculate that your Evangelical Protestant only buys in on the first four reasons. Clarification from other Protestants are welcome here.
   
   LDS have often been criticized for our beleif in the 5th point. For the peanut gallery, here is the full text on the 5th reason. I’m not a theologian but I believe LDS theology is in full agreement with this belief as it is stated in the CCC
   • The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”:78
   • "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79
   • "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80
   • "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81
   **I raise this thread because I am tired of Christians (especially Catholics) mocking the LDS for believing core christian doctrine. **
   
   I wouldn’t mind if they only disagreed with our full interpetation of the teaching, but no - they mock the full teaching in any form and imply it was a lunny invention of Joseph Smith.
   
   Here are just a few of the ECF quotes on the topic of deification, complied by a Catholic
   
   Justin - 1st Ap. 22 And we have learned that those only are deified who have lived near to God in holiness and virtue. (ANF 1.170).
   
   Justin - Dial. 124 …thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming “gods”, and of having power to become sons of the Highest. (ANF 1.262).
   
   Irenaeus - Adv. Her. 3.6.1 “God stood in the in the congregation of the gods, He judges among the gods.” He [here] refers to the Father and the Son, and those who have received the adoption; but these are the Church. (ANF 1.419).
   
   Irenaeus - Adv. 4.20.4 Now this is His Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, who in the last times was made a man among men, that He might join the end to the beginning, that is, man to God. (ANF 1.488).
   
   Theophilus - To Autolycus 27 Was man made by nature mortal? Certainly not. Was he, then, immortal? Neither do we affirm this. …He was by nature neither mortal nor immortal. For if He had made him immortal from the beginning, He would have made him God. … keeping the commandment of God, he should receive as a reward from Him immortality, and should become God. (ANF 2.105).
   
   Tertullian - Adv. Hermogenes 5 Well, then, you say, we ourselves possess nothing of God. But indeed we do, and shall continue to do—only it is from Him that we receive it, and not from ourselves. For we shall be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, “I have said, Ye are gods,” and “God standeth in the congregation of the gods.” But this comes of His own grace, not from any property in us, because it is He alone who can make gods. (ANF 3.480).
   
   Clement of Alexandria - Exhortation 1 …the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God. (ANF 2.174).
   
   Clement of Alexandria - Strom. 7.10 …they are called by the appellation of gods, being destined to sit on thrones with the other gods that have been first put in their places by the Saviour. (ANF 2.539).
   
   Origen - Against Celsus 3.28 …they see that from Him [Christ] there began the union of the divine with the human nature, in order that the human, by communion with the divine, might rise to be divine, not in Jesus alone, but in all those who not only believe, but enter upon the life which Jesus taught, and which elevates to friendship with God and communion with Him every one who lives according to the precepts of Jesus. (ANF 4.475).
   
   Hilary of Poitiers - De Trinitate 10.7 For when God was born to be man the purpose was not that the Godhead should be lost, but that, the Godhead remaining, man should be born to be God. Thus Emmanuel is His name, which is God with us, that God might not be lowered to the level of man, but man raised to that of God. (NPNF, second series, 2.9.183-184)

 

[Ahimsa]

The key difference between LDS and traditional Christian understandings of divinization (also called theosis) is this:

1. LDS teaches that a human being may become God.
2. Traditional Christian understanding (I’ll use the Eastern Orthodox understanding, since that’s what I know best) teaches that a human being may become one with God’s Energies (Love, Peace, Joy, etc.) – thus, becoming “God”, since God’s Energies are, simply, God. However, a human being may never become one with God’s Essence.
3. A traditional Christian would intepret the LDS theology as saying that a human being may become one with God’s Energies and one with God’s Essence. And such a theology would be considered heterodox by a traditional Christian.

 

[Tony888]

The key difference between LDS and traditional Christian understandings of divinization (also called theosis) is this:

1. LDS teaches that a human being may become God.
2. Traditional Christian understanding (I’ll use the Eastern Orthodox understanding, since that’s what I know best) teaches that a human being may become one with God’s Energies (Love, Peace, Joy, etc.) – thus, becoming “God”, since God’s Energies are, simply, God. However, a human being may never become one with God’s Essence.
3. A traditional Christian would intepret the LDS theology as saying that a human being may become one with God’s Energies and one with God’s Essence. And such a theology would be considered heterodox by a traditional Christian.

Ahimsa, so you are saying :

• my quote of the CCC is accurate for Catholics “that a human being may become God”
• LDS share this teaching and take it at face value: “that a human being may become God”
• however, modern Catholics interpret it as .“become one with God’s Energies”

**Would you please provide a doctirnal reference for your modified interpretation of the text? **I’ve heard the same response from many Catholics, so I’m just looking for the source of your understanding.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Theosis do teach that we may become like God. Remember, man was created in the image and likeness of God. It depends though to what degree the LDS teaches how man becomes divine. While we become divine, we don’t really become equal with God.

 

[PaulDupre]

One of the teaching questions in the CCC is - WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?

*]to make us "partakers of the divine nature"

Catholics understand “partaking of the divine nature” as referring to the Eucharist, in which we actually, physically “partake” of the nature (“body, blood, soul and divinity”) of Jesus Christ. When we eat regular food, we change that food into us. But when we eat the food that is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, He changes us into Him. It is our hope that He will increase, while we decrease, until there is nothing left of our sinful and fallen will and all that is left in us is His perfect divine will.

That is what it means. It has nothing to do with the ego-maniacal Mormon idea of exaltation.

 

[hn160]

God had to become man in order to die for man, if it was just a man that died on the cross, that would have been a poor savior.

 

[PaulDupre]

Ahimsa, so you are saying :

• my quote of the CCC is accurate for Catholics “that a human being may become God”
• LDS share this teaching and take it at face value: “that a human being may become God”
• however, modern Catholics interpret it as .“become one with God’s Energies”

He didn’t say it was the Catholic understanding. He clearly stated that it was the Eastern Orthodox understanding as he sees it.

The Orthodox share many beliefs with us, but they are not Catholic.

Paul

 

[ConstantineTG]

God had to become man in order to die for man, if it was just a man that died on the cross, that would have been a poor savior.

God became man so that man may become god.

 

[KathleenGee]

I do not know how much history of thought and beliefs with practice other people know about Mormonism.

Mormons here in the past have used the Catholic Catechism 460 as proof we Catholics also have our past teachers, including reference to St. Thomas Aquinas showing the Church contains thought the same as Mormons in becoming gods.

The entire catechetical teachings up to 460, as well as the writings and faith of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Ireneaus teach the opposite. Mormonism is so totally different than Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Christianity to the point it is not considered a branch of Christianity.

God said, “I Am Who Am”. Satan tempted Eve to get knowledge to be as gods…independent of God. True wisdom only can come from God.

It is through Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word the Father spoke, that the universe was made. Father, Son, Holy Spirit, always in the state of being of God.

Man is the greatest of God’s creation. He fell into sin. And to be restored to God, God Himself became Man to be restored to us. The Cross is the only thing that gives meaning to suffering. And as Christ came to us in His final visitation before His ascension into heaven, He walked with His disciples on the Road to Emmaus, taught them everything they knew, and had sacred meal with them, their hearts burning within them…Jesus Christ giving us new life, new depth of living life, of living reality.

After this, through our faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Redeemer, we know God in Christ as our nourishment and our connection with the divine, to become extensions of His living love to others.

In this new dimension of Christ, Who draws all mankind to Himself, we now know that God is with us, not only in the tabernacle, but God Who walks along with us in daily life, Who makes our burdens light, and yoke easy.

St. Paul said we have no idea of what awaits us in heaven, how wonderful it will be.

Why did the Son of Man become Man…to restore humanity back to God one person at a time. But never to be gods.

 

[KathleenGee]

Also, the quote CC460 is also taken out of context…the catechism doesn’t say, and ever will say we will become gods…this is Mormon projection…and taking our catechism gravely out of context…St. Thomas was referring to the Eucharist as well.

To become as gods is not our goal, but to partake in the life of God through Christ.

Article 2, 'And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord"…Article 3 ‘The Only Son of God’…IV. Lord…essentially, Christ’s Lordship over the world…

Article 3: “He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, and was born of the Virgin Mary”

Paragraph 1: The Son of God become Man

CC457: The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by reconciling us with God, who loved us and sent His Son to be the expiation for our sins…

CC458…The Word became flesh so that thus we might know God’s love…

CC459 The Word became flesh to be our model of holiness…

CC460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”, 2 Peter 1:4: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres: 3, 19, 1: PG 7/1, 939. For the Son of God became man so that we might become God:, St. Athanasius, De inc. 54,3 PG 25, 192B. “The only begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, sot hat he, made man, might make men gods.” St. Thomas Aquinas, Opusc: 57:1-4.

St. Athanasius was very embattled fighting Arianism, Christ separate from God.

My instructor from the archdiocese had us write in our catechism…now seeing the issue Mormons have using it…‘We enter into God, but not become or replacing Him.’

At the 48th annual Eucharistic Congress, there is a document by Cardinal Turkson referring to Opusc: 57:1-4 explaining what St. Thomas means. I have studied the Summa under a Dominican priest…It is on the Vatican website…but I was unable to get the link here.

St. Thomas Aquinas said in his Summa explaining the nature of God…human intellect compared to God is instead having the eye of an owl next to the sun.

Consider the eye of an owl can only see in darkness…

Awhile back several Mormons were continuing to use CC460 as ‘proof’ that even our great saints and catechism would agree with them…

I think the Mormons should start studying St. Thomas Aquinas and other saints and what they really taught about God and mankind. When I read older Mormon materials and arguments, they were not like the ones we are seeing now.

 

[Tony888]

Also, the quote CC460 is also taken out of context…the catechism doesn’t say, and ever will say we will become gods…this is Mormon projection…and taking our catechism gravely out of context…St. Thomas was referring to the Eucharist as well. .

Kathleen, how can you say that when I provided explicit quotes to what the CCC stated? I’ve highlighted it again below. Blatant denial of self evident facts is not a valid debate technique

Paragraph 1: The Son of God become Man

CC457: The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by reconciling us with God, who loved us and sent His Son to be the expiation for our sins…

CC458…The Word became flesh so that thus we might know God’s love…

CC459 The Word became flesh to be our model of holiness…

CC460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”, 2 Peter 1:4: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres: 3, 19, 1: PG 7/1, 939. For the Son of God became man so that we might become God:, St. Athanasius, De inc. 54,3 PG 25, 192B. “The only begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, sot hat he, made man, might make men gods.” St. Thomas Aquinas, Opusc: 57:1-4.

St. Athanasius was very embattled fighting Arianism, Christ separate from God.

My instructor from the archdiocese had us write in our catechism…now seeing the issue Mormons have using it…'We enter into God, but not become or replacing Him.
.

Since the CCC is the primary lay manual of Catholic doctrine, I expect there must additional interpretation published that clarififies the explicit meaning in the CCC. Some statements by your local instructor do not supersede what is explicit in the CCC

Neither myself nor the LDS doctrine claim that deification means we replace God, that is a fantasy of the anti-Mormons

At the 48th annual Eucharistic Congress, there is a document by Cardinal Turkson referring to Opusc: 57:1-4 explaining what St. Thomas means. I have studied the Summa under a Dominican priest…It is on the Vatican website…but I was unable to get the link here.

St. Thomas Aquinas said in his Summa explaining the nature of God…human intellect compared to God is instead having the eye of an owl next to the sun.

Consider the eye of an owl can only see in darkness…

Kathleen, Yes we are the eye of an owl next to the sun. But why do you limit what God can accomplish?

Awhile back several Mormons were continuing to use CC460 as ‘proof’ that even our great saints and catechism would agree with them…

I think the Mormons should start studying St. Thomas Aquinas and other saints and what they really taught about God and mankind. When I read older Mormon materials and arguments, they were not like the ones we are seeing now.

I only argue that we share a common teaching, not that we agree on the full interpretation or fulfillment of the teaching. I have yet to see an RCC provide a source of Doctrine that refutes what is explicit in the CCC.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The Orthodox share many beliefs with us, but they are not Catholic.

This is a false understanding of Orthodox belief, since every Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholic believes in essentially everything the Orthodox believe save for the role of the Pope in the Church today.

Also, Blessed Pope John Paul II talks a lot about deification/theosis in Theology of the Body.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I have yet to see an RCC provide a source of Doctrine that refutes what is explicit in the CCC.

That’s because we believe what the CCC teaches, why would we refute it. What we don’t believe is that LDS teaching in this is anything like Catholic teaching.

This is exhaltaion as taught by your prophet, seer, revelator, president of your church:

The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his kingdom. In other words, we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fullness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring

.

There is no where anything from the ECF that even hints at what your church teaches.

Words you might want to look up in order to gain a Catholic understanding of OUR teachings would include, partake, share, adoptive.

Theosis and exhaltaion are nothing alike because the are founded on entirely different understandings of the nature of God and the nature of man.

 

[Ahimsa]

Ahimsa, so you are saying :

• my quote of the CCC is accurate for Catholics “that a human being may become God”
• LDS share this teaching and take it at face value: “that a human being may become God”
• however, modern Catholics interpret it as .“become one with God’s Energies”

**Would you please provide a doctirnal reference for your modified interpretation of the text? **I’ve heard the same response from many Catholics, so I’m just looking for the source of your understanding.

Yes, your quote is accurate, but it must be understood correctly.

Eastern Catholics would use the phrases “God’s Energies” and “God’s Essence”, but most Catholics are not Eastern, but Latin.

Among Latin Catholics, St. Aquinas is very important. Aquinas also distinguished God’s Essence from God’s Energies, but Aquinas uses different terms. Aquinas “made a distinction between ‘uncreated grace’ – the very inner life of the Trinity – and ‘created grace’ – the effects that being drawn into that life of love have on humans…[Created grace] enables persons to share in the relationship of mutual friendship with the trinitarian mystery of God. What is ‘natural’ to the Trinity is extended to humans ‘by adoption’” [578, “Grace”, *The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism].

The key idea here is that, in Catholicism, whether the language is of Essence/Energies, or of uncreated/created grace, a human being may “become God” only in the sense of sharing in God’s Life (Energies, or created grace), and not by becoming God Himself (Essence, or uncreated grace), thus keeping human “integrity and autonomy” while entering into union with God – thus, in that sense, “becoming God” or “becoming gods”.

Whereas in LDS, a human being, though never replacing God, becomes himself a God, having the same essence as God, while still being a separate God.

 

[KathleenGee]

To try to use ancient writings that affirm the Eucharist, and then to say they show we are on the same page with Mormonism in seeking divinity, is off the top.

Not only that, LDS come on here, as another poster said, not to inquire about what Catholics believe…The Mormons need to come on here and let us know straight up what their religion is teaching them about the Catholic Church-- the devil church, the great abomination, what they say and what they have ritualized about the priesthood, and their perceptions of the rest of Christianity.

Their beliefs about our faith our spurious. They deny the faith of our clergy and faithful who have lived and endured through many hardships, to the point of martyrdom down through the ages.

Not only does Mormonism invalidate Christianity, it sees itself coming out of the lost tribe of America…its thinking about the beginning of God in opposition to Judaism. It is very different from Judaism as well. You ask a Jew…and I did…what they think of the ancient tribe in America…it is so far out they just chuckle.

I read on ex-Mormon what they were taught, they pulled up DC quotes – the same I read while in the Mormon bookstore, on its ideas about our church and Christianity, and how committed in the Mormon church think they will exceed the Roman Catholic Church. I suspect this idea related to how they expect to gain membership accessing church records to get baptism of the dead – under the appearance of being a benevolent geneology society. Mormons earn their way in exaltation by doing these ceremonies in their temples. Constructing new temples around the world to get new members in death is one of their ideas of getting new members and taking them away from Roman Catholicism, Christianity and whatever belief is out there.

This idea of membership is so contrary to the fruit of partaking in divine grace through our relationship and growth in Christ.

You have to look at the history of their beliefs and their practices, how they evangelize, what happens in the process to those who are going into the Mormon religion. They have a very developed outward exterior, but those who have lived in Mormonism for a long time, and want out, suffer alot.

It takes alot of gall with such contrary beliefs and methods to then start using Eucharistic teachings as being akin to Mormonism. It is very dishonest and manipulative. I studied professionally under the assistant of then Arcbhishop Levada, and it was set up to correct errors, and CC 460 was the only teaching that our instructor, from the Vatican, had us make note to. So you stand up against me, you are standing up against our teachings and making them into something else. That is violating.

Tony, if you want to study a simple piece on CC460, then go do a search on the reference I gave you regarding Cardinal Turkson. You are taking so much of what we hold as the sacred summit of our faith, – the Eucharist – the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity and using them for your purposes. On a previous post, you couldn’t understand why we would be violated regarding religion’s deceptive and inappropriate access to our sacramental records.

I have read more of St. Justin the Martyr, knew the extenuating circumstances of those times and the great concern of believers to protect the Eucharist which was happening in his time.

Your church is more centered on Joseph Smith, your practices and songs show that. In your Mormon bookstore, I saw more materials on Joseph Smith than anything on Jesus Christ.

Instead, use Joseph Smith, and not our sacred teachings to prove your beliefs are correct. Mormonism is a completely different entity from Catholicism. It appears to me to obsess and covet what the Catholic Church is and has, and its method of explaining itself is very different than times past, because it is indeed studying our methods of presentation and explanation.

The Catholic Church does not single out Mormonism or put itself in competition with it, or do the underhanded things it does to get members, label it with bad language, and systematically teach our people how we disagree with it.

Mormonism simply blankets and stereotypes all religions as corrupt, and only its correct…it does not care about pagans…Mormonism cares about getting Christians into its rank.

Knowing what I know and people who have been damaged by your beliefs, I ask you to stop misinterpreting and misusing the constructs of our faith. You come here to invalidate our faith and set up Mormonism as a false model comparable to ours. Mormonism never was or will be like the Catholic Church. Use your own materials.

 

[wmscott]

Ahimsa, so you are saying :

• my quote of the CCC is accurate for Catholics “that a human being may become God”
• LDS share this teaching and take it at face value: “that a human being may become God”
• however, modern Catholics interpret it as .“become one with God’s Energies”

**Would you please provide a doctirnal reference for your modified interpretation of the text? **I’ve heard the same response from many Catholics, so I’m just looking for the source of your understanding.

To be more specific, doesn’t Mormonism teach that after we die we get to become a god of our own planet?

 

[wmscott]

To try to use ancient writings that affirm the Eucharist, and then to say they show we are on the same page with Mormonism in seeking divinity, is off the top.

Not only that, LDS come on here, as another poster said, not to inquire about what Catholics believe…The Mormons need to come on here and let us know straight up what their religion is teaching them about the Catholic Church-- the devil church, the great abomination, what they say and what they have ritualized about the priesthood, and their perceptions of the rest of Christianity.

Their beliefs about our faith our spurious. They deny the faith of our clergy and faithful who have lived and endured through many hardships, to the point of martyrdom down through the ages.

Not only does Mormonism invalidate Christianity, it sees itself coming out of the lost tribe of America…its thinking about the beginning of God in opposition to Judaism. It is very different from Judaism as well. You ask a Jew…and I did…what they think of the ancient tribe in America…it is so far out they just chuckle.

I read on ex-Mormon what they were taught, they pulled up DC quotes – the same I read while in the Mormon bookstore, on its ideas about our church and Christianity, and how committed in the Mormon church think they will exceed the Roman Catholic Church. I suspect this idea related to how they expect to gain membership accessing church records to get baptism of the dead – under the appearance of being a benevolent geneology society. Mormons earn their way in exaltation by doing these ceremonies in their temples. Constructing new temples around the world to get new members in death is one of their ideas of getting new members and taking them away from Roman Catholicism, Christianity and whatever belief is out there.

This idea of membership is so contrary to the fruit of partaking in divine grace through our relationship and growth in Christ.

You have to look at the history of their beliefs and their practices, how they evangelize, what happens in the process to those who are going into the Mormon religion. They have a very developed outward exterior, but those who have lived in Mormonism for a long time, and want out, suffer alot.

It takes alot of gall with such contrary beliefs and methods to then start using Eucharistic teachings as being akin to Mormonism. It is very dishonest and manipulative. I studied professionally under the assistant of then Arcbhishop Levada, and it was set up to correct errors, and CC 460 was the only teaching that our instructor, from the Vatican, had us make note to. So you stand up against me, you are standing up against our teachings and making them into something else. That is violating.

Tony, if you want to study a simple piece on CC460, then go do a search on the reference I gave you regarding Cardinal Turkson. You are taking so much of what we hold as the sacred summit of our faith, – the Eucharist – the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity and using them for your purposes. On a previous post, you couldn’t understand why we would be violated regarding religion’s deceptive and inappropriate access to our sacramental records.

I have read more of St. Justin the Martyr, knew the extenuating circumstances of those times and the great concern of believers to protect the Eucharist which was happening in his time.

Your church is more centered on Joseph Smith, your practices and songs show that. In your Mormon bookstore, I saw more materials on Joseph Smith than anything on Jesus Christ.

Instead, use Joseph Smith, and not our sacred teachings to prove your beliefs are correct. Mormonism is a completely different entity from Catholicism. It appears to me to obsess and covet what the Catholic Church is and has, and its method of explaining itself is very different than times past, because it is indeed studying our methods of presentation and explanation.

The Catholic Church does not single out Mormonism or put itself in competition with it, or do the underhanded things it does to get members, label it with bad language, and systematically teach our people how we disagree with it.

Mormonism simply blankets and stereotypes all religions as corrupt, and only its correct…it does not care about pagans…Mormonism cares about getting Christians into its rank.

Knowing what I know and people who have been damaged by your beliefs, I ask you to stop misinterpreting and misusing the constructs of our faith. You come here to invalidate our faith and set up Mormonism as a false model comparable to ours. Mormonism never was or will be like the Catholic Church. Use your own materials.

You go girl, keep em straight

 

[KathleenGee]

It is all about fraud…and the great disconnects Mormons have…they can do but we can’t…if we protest, we are uncharitable and hurtful…but what they can say and do against our Church is OK.

I pray for the Mormon people every day…and am coming to the point now…that this is from now on the better walk for me…

God bless, Wm!!

 

[FabiusMaximus]

KathleenGee,

I very much agree that the Mormon Church is not a Christian group and that the Catholic Church is far preferable.

That being said, shouldn’t you get your information from Mormon sources, instead of Ex-Mormon or anti-Mormon sources? Wouldn’t you expect the same from Evangelicals investigating the Roman Catholic Church?

 

[SteveVH]

One of the teaching questions in the CCC is - WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?

Five specific reasons are given. I’ve summarized them below for brevity but here is a link to the CCC source

1. • For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven
   • in order to save us by reconciling us with God
   • so that thus we might know God’s love
   • to be our model of holiness
   • to make us "partakers of the divine nature"
   I believe the LDS theology agrees with the Catholics on all five points (maybe we should be called 5 point catholics?)
   
   I speculate that your Evangelical Protestant only buys in on the first four reasons. Clarification from other Protestants are welcome here.
   
   LDS have often been criticized for our beleif in the 5th point. For the peanut gallery, here is the full text on the 5th reason. I’m not a theologian but I believe LDS theology is in full agreement with this belief as it is stated in the CCC
   • The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”:78
   • "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79
   • "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80
   • "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81
   **I raise this thread because I am tired of Christians (especially Catholics) mocking the LDS for believing core christian doctrine. **
   
   I wouldn’t mind if they only disagreed with our full interpetation of the teaching, but no - they mock the full teaching in any form and imply it was a lunny invention of Joseph Smith.

1. 
   First, I haven’t seen anyone mocking you for believing in core Christian doctrines. Our objections lie in the fact that you actually don’t believe in core Christian doctrines, but use the same or similar language in order to appear as if you do.
   
   After the first glance it becomes readily apparent that you are not even close to Christian doctrine in your actual beliefs. If you call a dog’s tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? It still has ony four.