Jump to content

GOD the man


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Brahms said:

If not Mary's own words maybe someone who was ordained as an apostle of Jesus Christ wrote something about it.  I'd even read the words of former-day Catholic Popes, and even latter-day Popes.

https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/angelus/2021/documents/papa-francesco_angelus_20211208.html

From Pope Francis

Quote

The angel calls her “full of grace”. If she is full of grace, it means Our Lady is void of evil: she is without sin, Immaculate

 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Brahms said:

We are all that way... void of evil, without sin, immaculate... when cleansed by the power of the atonement of Jesus Christ.

The Pope doesn't say there that Mary never committed a sin.  

You are seriously challenging the statement by MN that the Immaculate Conception is Catholic doctrine?  Are you completely uneducated about Catholic belief?

Quote

Now, if at any time the Blessed Mary were destitute of Divine grace even for the briefest moment, because of contamination in her conception by the hereditary stain of sin, there would not have come between her and the serpent that perpetual enmity spoken of from earliest tradition down to the time of the solemn definition of the Immaculate Conception, but rather a certain subjection.

https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_08091953_fulgens-corona.pdf

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
On 9/2/2022 at 6:14 PM, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

In reality, all we know of the “Father”, is what we know of the “Son”, as he was and is a mirror image of the Father. So yes, God (Jesus Christ) was once a man as we are. 

We know that there are many God members of The Council of Gods, but it is my personal belief the only God we humans deal with is the Savior, aka Jehovah aka Jesus Christ. 

All we can have for any of this are the feelings of our hearts, but in prayer I have never sensed that I am interacting with more than one Person.  For me, Christ is the Father of our salvation whereby we are born again, and becomes our Father through divine investiture. With all reverence, I feel that Father is our Grandfather God whom we love and honor, but when we need something we go to our "Dad", Jesus Christ. ;)

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Brahms said:

I accept that as what he believes because he said he believes it.  I am now asking why he believes it while asking for any evidence he has in support of his position.  Specifically on the idea that Mary never committed a sin.

I've heard of the term "immaculate conception" before but I thought that was about no sin being involved in Mary's conception of, involving becoming pregnant with, Jesus.  This is the 1st time I've heard they believe Mary never committed a sin.

So does the above quote I provided that states Mary was never “destitute of Divine grace” satisfy your call for evidence of Mary’s perpetual sinlessness in Catholic belief?

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Brahms said:

No, because that quote didn't say Mary never committed a sin.  We all have God's divine grace even when we wallow in sin.  In all we do, his hands and arms are stretched out still.

Quote

The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature".138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long. 
 

https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1K.HTM

Is the Catechism good enough for you?

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Brahms said:

It depends on the definition of the word "was", I think.  We know he "is" a man now, a glorified and perfectly good man but if he ever "was" something other than what he is now, inquiring minds would now like to know what he was then.

Well then you should learn our beliefs, He "was" as we are now and we can become as He is now.

I was joking about the ekg.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Brahms said:

I've heard of the term "immaculate conception" before but I thought that was about no sin being involved in Mary's conception of, involving becoming pregnant with, Jesus.  This is the 1st time I've heard they believe Mary never committed a sin.

The belief is that Mary was born without ORIGINAL SIN.

And I accept that as well.

In fact I believe we are ALL born without original sin, even you and me.  So for me, Mary was just like we all are.  :)

Of course that does not include an implication that she never actually sinned, but in my opinion it is possible.  But actually as I see it, these beliefs are all irrelevant to the atonement during which we believe that Christ experienced the consequences of all sin and pain so that he can be "there" with us when we need Him.

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Of course that does not include an implication that she never actually sinned, but in my opinion it is possible. 

Not according to LDS doctrine:

https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2008/03/the-atonement-of-jesus-christ?

 

Quote

This infinite Atonement of Christ was possible because (1) He was the only sinless man ever to live on this earth and therefore was not subject to the spiritual death resulting from sin, (2) He was the Only Begotten of the Father and therefore possessed the attributes of godhood that gave Him power over physical death,6 and (3) He was apparently the only one sufficiently humble and willing in the premortal council to be foreordained to that service.7

 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Brahms said:

When he was as we are now then he was then a man as we are now.  Inquiring minds may wonder if he was ever anything other than a man. I consider a boy to be a young man so he would still be a man then. 

Of course.

But it is our belief that He is so far ahead of us in intelligence and therefore righteousness that he achieved Godhood in the pre-earth life, but as I said experienced all it is to be human including the CONSEQUENCES of sin though he committed no sins Himself.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Ok, I agree, I was wrong.

###########

Edit. I am not sure those words say that physical death is only caused by sin. Gotta think it through.

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Calm said:

I am just explaining why some Saints in my experience misinterpret what is meant by the phrase “100% man and 100% God” and think it is an illogical phrase.  Perhaps teddy views it this way as I get that impression at times from his writings, but it could be something else. If that is one of the filters with which he studies the nature of God, it would, imo, explain why he gets other details wrong. The principle has been explained by Catholics and iirc I have quoted the Catechism on it a time or two, but that might have been something else…my point is teddy has been exposed to the Catholic thought (at least several times on this board on this issue if he reads others’ posts on the subject and not just his own), what is meant by 100% man and 100% God and yet teddy g presents the Catholic teaching incorrectly still. It seems therefore likely he has a very strong assumption that is interfering with the absorption of the actual beliefs Catholics have shared on the board. 

Thank you for explaining. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Brahms said:

Mary's own words to that effect would count as evidence, to me.  Testimony is a form of evidence, whether it is borne by a true or false witness.

If not Mary's own words maybe someone who was ordained as an apostle of Jesus Christ wrote something about it.  I'd even read the words of former-day Catholic Popes, and even latter-day Popes.

I rely on faith from God to me personally to assure me whether what someone is sharing is true, and at this point I am still searching for more light and truth on this issue.

You sound like me, but If your faith from God is true, listening to your own heart, then why rely AT ALL on statements of men?

Sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse!

I gave up on truth from men long ago.  For me, I don't believe anything unless confirmed by the Holy Ghost.

That's all the "evidence" we need in these matters

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Is this a serious comment?  If so, how do you see this happening?

The Holy Ghost and varying levels of accountability and what we understand to be "wrong". Can you sin without knowledge that the act is wrong?

Nope

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Ok, I agree, I was wrong.

###########

Edit. I am not sure those words say that physical death is only caused by sin. Gotta think it through.

I was only responding to Mary being possibly sinless in the context of LDS doctrine.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

So here you answered your own question 

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, Brahms said:

Scripture!  Carried too far I could believe in ideas not supported by scripture, which can also be called the words and statements of men.  So when possible I like to find supporting written evidence which might turn out to be new scripture to me.

But without confirmation that scripture is "True" where is your confirmation for that?

I asked a JW once how he knows the bible is true and his answer was " because it says it is the word of God".

Can you see the problem?

Circular reasoning.  It claims to be true so it is. 

It's like a Catholic asking a saint to pray for her as if the individual cannot pray for herself.

And who actually wrote the words on the plates/parchment etc.?

Men's interpretation what they allege God told them.

I prefer to go directly to the "Source" for the "translation".

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
38 minutes ago, Brahms said:

I can still remember how it was when I discovered that the Book of Mormon is scripture. 

Exactly my point. You needed no evidence from men to do that

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

It's like a Catholic asking a saint to pray for her as if the individual cannot pray for herself.

The second does not follow from the first. Latter-day Saints ask others to pray for us all the time (temple prayer roll, for example).  In no way do we assume that means we cannot pray for ourselves or our own prayers aren’t good enough.  Why would it be any different for a Catholic asking anyone else to pray for them, whether their Saints or others?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Calm said:

The second does not follow from the first. Latter-day Saints ask others to pray for us all the time (temple prayer roll, for example).  In no way do we assume that means we cannot pray for ourselves or our own prayers aren’t good enough.  Why would it be any different for a Catholic asking anyone else to pray for them, whether their Saints or others?

Excellent point, thanks.  Never saw it that way!

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Brahms said:

Without men who wrote the Book of Mormon the Book of Mormon would not have been written.  I am very thankful for the men who wrote those words. 

Of course, you are missing the point, and confirming mine.  The only way you know those words of men are true, is by confirmation from the spirit.

Being thankful for the words of men has nothing to do with their "truth".

You may be thankful for the Lord of the Rings without believing it's scripture.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Brahms said:

Without men who wrote the Book of Mormon the Book of Mormon would not have been written.

Hmmmm.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Brahms said:

I don't know if God our our Father in heaven ever committed a sin.  I do know that regardless of whether or not he ever did, he is now as though he never did. 

 

The Bible defines sin as a transgression against the Beloved's law (1 John 3:4). It is also described as disobedience or rebellion against the Beloved (Deuteronomy 9:7), as well as acting as though one is independent from Him. The original translation means ‘to miss the mark’ of the Beloved's holy standard of righteousness.

In what why, therefore, can the Beloved sin against Himself?

 

Link to comment

I would once again suggest that there is no difference I can think of between the Catholic concept of the Godhead, its nature, current status, or makeup and that of Evangelicals or more broadly of Protestants. There are differences in the doctrines around Mary and ecclesiology, but not of the Godhead - three persons in one - indivisible and separate. Outside of some gigantic supernatural event, I do not believe that there will ever be proofs of or for that in which we individually faith. That is why I appreciate the British English concept of faith as a verb. In my tradition faith is almost always a noun -something we have, not something we do. Studying at the University of Kent, I have gotten a whole new appreciation for the British use of our common language! Of course then I often have to correctly translate it all into Spanish - a whole other challenge!

I would also like for my LDS friends to appreciate that what is commonly known as the Reformation in church history circles was not based on disagreements on all or even most points of Christian doctrine. Because of in-group-out-group conflict and bias, a chasm has at times developed between Catholics and Protestants - I grant that. However I also believe it is a chasm that can be bridged with patience, love, the ability to "receive" the other, and the power of the Holy Spirit to make each of us comfortable with our own provisional certitude. It is when doctrine turns to dogma and then to duty that we mount the ramparts to either defend or attack the other. End of sermon! Best to all.

Edited by Navidad
Link to comment
18 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

We know that there are many God members of The Council of Gods, but it is my personal belief the only God we humans deal with is the Savior, aka Jehovah aka Jesus Christ. 

All we can have for any of this are the feelings of our hearts, but in prayer I have never sensed that I am interacting with more than one Person.  For me, Christ is the Father of our salvation whereby we are born again, and becomes our Father through divine investiture. With all reverence, I feel that Father is our Grandfather God whom we love and honor, but when we need something we go to our "Dad", Jesus Christ. ;)

I understand some of what you said, but the Holy Ghost bears witness to the Son, and only speaks the words,of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ only bears witness of the Father, and speaks only his words. Thus any blessing, or words we Christ received are from the Father, Elohim. Reducing them to terms like Dad, or Granddad, is language that seems to common language downplay their divinity. (See John 12:49, and John: 16:13, and others). All blessing come from the Father, given first to the Son to speak or rely to the Holy Spirit, why echoes them (word for word, and blessing by blessing, there is perfect order, no short cuts, no deviation. As for God being surrounded by “gods”, or “Counsel of Gods” your capitalization not mine. Of whom do you speak? 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...