faith4
-
Posts
165 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by faith4
-
-
Pleas do not take this as criticism of you personally. I do enjoy your input - especially because you bring things to the table differently than those things I usually consider - and I do not want to change that you see things differently than me but at the same time I also want to make certain things I understand as clear as possible.
As best as I can determine the first commandment G-d gave to our very first parents was to be fruitful and to multiple and replenish the earth. I believe that the way and means to be obedient to G-d and his commandment is to marry and have children. Because of my belief in that G-d that gave that specific commandment - I personally believe that for my self or any one that respects that G-d that they will reject any teacher that refuses to respect that commandment and that G-d that gave that commandment. In short I do not believe that one can devote themselves to the G-d that created Adam and Eve and commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth, through celibacy. It is an obvious and blatant contradiction. Or as Christ said - If you love me (G-d) keep my commandments. Those that do not keep G-d's commandments do not love him. The doctrine that anyone can devote themselves to G-d to any degree; by ignoring his first commandment ever given to man - have been deceived.
I do not take your beliefs to be a criticism, I also enjoy a good conversation in which differences in beliefs can be respectfully spoken of. :)
The very first command was indeed to be fruitful and multiply, although, in your belief, that was actually a command that could not be fulfilled unless they transgressed another command, which was to not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge. So in order to be blessed and respect Gods first command, they first had to disobey Him and introduce death and sin.
Now, do you think Mother Theresa didn't respect God? Should she have been rejected by the people she served b/c she didn't have children of her own? And what about St. Maximilian Kolbe, who offered his life in exchange for another man, who had a family and who was chosen to die in a concentration camp by starvation? I'm pretty sure somewhere in the Bible Jesus says that there is no greater love than to lay down ones life for a friend...well how about dying for a stranger b/c of your love for God? And in the cell which St. Max was placed w/other men condemned to die by starvation, he taught and ministered to them w/o fear, showing them Gods love. He didn't die of starvation however, one of the last men left alive in the cell, the nazi's killed him w/an injection of carbolic acid. And, how about the young missionaries serving in your church? They devote 2 complete years to their work, and they aren't married w/children yet. In fact, their personal life at home is strictly limited so that they can focus on their missionary work. Is it an "obvious and blatant contradiction" for these missionaries to live celibate lives during this time? I guess, according to your own statement, they can't possibly devote themselves completely to God during these two years, which require celibacy.
Elder Dennis B. Neuenschwander of the Seventy spoke of the importance of obeying the mission rules: “Mission rules are important in the same way commandments are important. We all need to keep them, understanding that they give us strength, direction, and limits. The smart missionary will learn the intent of the rules and make them work for him. Your mission is a time of discipline and single-minded focus." (in Conference Report, Oct. 1991, 59; or Ensign, Nov. 1991, 43).
Missionary Handbook: "As your call letter states, you are expected to devote all your time and attention to serving the Lord, leaving behind all other personal affairs," the Missionary Handbook indicates. "Do not become preoccupied with communicating with family and friends."
Hmmmm...now imagine how wonderful it would be to devote your entire life to a life of discipline and the single-minded focus of serving God, however God so chooses. It takes a humble heart and a strong will to say "yes" to God and live a life of celibacy. "And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times more, and will inherit eternal life." Matt 19:29.
"some [are celibate], because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it". Matt 19:12
-
His Apostolic Authority allows the continuation of the Good News to be preached to all the nations, and that the doctrines themselves remain guarded from heresy. None of them (who were bad), not even John XII, changed dogma to justify his sinful life. It does not make them sin-proof or suddenly supernatural, all Popes still have to rely on Gods grace to achieve holiness. They will have to face judgement, as we all do, but they will be held to a higher standard b/c they were a Pope, and as such, should not have used the office for corruption. And infallability has nothing to do with how a Pope chooses to live his life, nothing. Not that that is any excuse!!! A man who is elected Pope should know better, and I believe they will all be judge accordingly!!
Now, not many were like this, but God honors our free will and lets our choices run their course, whether good or bad, b/c Christ has come and set us free from sin, yet we still have to choose that freedom from sin, every day. But God's Grace is far greater than man sinfulness, and that's what we should be relying on, not the personal holiness of a man, even if he is the Pope. After all, when Christ said, I am the vine and you are the branches, he wasn't saying that a branch could ruin the whole vine, but if a vine did die, it would be pruned off so as to make the rest of the vine healthier.
Maybe this makes a little more sense to you, but if it doesn't, I understand, you are after all LDS, I don't expect you to agree with me :) God bless!
-
Yes, I was once Catholic... and that's why I say, it's a contradiction. It is. You can't explain that away by that cop out line above... it's like saying, "Family is very important in God's Kingdom but giving yourself to your Family is not giving yourself wholly to the Lord and His Church". Surely you see how illogical that is... It's like Family is a hindrance to full service to God and His Church.
Say what you might like, it's not a cop out line to me and I don't see it as illogical at all :) I am a married woman, my vocation in life, my calling, is to be a mom. My "cross" consists in me living this married life and bringing up children, with patience, humility and love. I can give myself to God in this vocation, by just being a good mom, constantly showing Gods love to my husband and children through my actions of caring for them, and vice versa with my husband, who shows Gods love and faithfulness to me and our boys. It's not always easy (as I'm sure you know, being a mother yourself), but I offer each day as a prayer, and this is how I serve Him. My family is not a hindrance, it is my vocation, and I give myself wholly to it.
But there are people who don't feel called to be a parent. Just b/c they aren't parents doesn't mean their daily life of sacrifice and work, also done in humility and love, is any less acceptable to God. In fact, to believe otherwise is to judge those people, believing that what they're doing w/their life is illogical and therefore unacceptable.
Jesus Himself taught that celibacy is granted by God to certain individuals. "He [Jesus] answered, "Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom that is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it." (Matt 19:11-12).
Check out 1 Corinthians 7 as well, St. Paul goes over this very topic and he makes it quite clear that not everyone is called to marriage, and that is a good thing for those who accept it.
"Indeed, I wish everyone to be as I am, but each has a particular gift from God, one of a kind and one of another. Now to the unmarried and to widows I say: It is a good thing for them to remain as they are, as I do...Only everyone should live as the Lord has assigned, just as God called each one...Are you bound to a wife? Do no seek separation. Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife...I should like you to be free of anxities. An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But a married man is anxious about the things of the world, how he ma please his wife, and he is divided...I am telling you this for your own benefit, not to impose a restraint upon you, but for the sake of propriety and adherence to the Lord without distraction."
I hope your day is going well, God bless :)
-
Be careful what you say here, faith4... I completely disagree with you as a Catholic. The election of a pope is by divine election. Saying that it is not invalidates the Apostolic Authority. As an LDS, I completely agree with you... That's why I believe that the Catholic Church does not have Apostolic authority...
On the question of how the Holy Spirit divinely guides the Church during a conclave:
“I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. … I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined.”
-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)
-
Elder Uchdorf, nor any of the LDS prophets are not popes... different teachings on the role of the pope vis-a-vis the prophet as well as what heaven means as well as intercessions...
Every man sins - prophet, pope, nurse, programmer... whatever. But to be elected by God to lead a Church in the capacity of the Pope... if that is not heaven-worthy (in the Catholic understanding of heaven), then Catholics are in trouble... because if a Pope's standing in Christ is in question... how much more for the ordinary joes.
A Pope does not claim to receive direct revelation from God. What he does claim to do, is be the steward of the deposit of faith, and to proclaim the Good News to the world. This will continue, as it always has despite persecution, until the Parousia.
Also, God does not elect the Popes. The Holy Spirit can aid the election with divine guidance, but the Cardinals who are voting are still men with free wills. They can choose to ignore that little voice, just as we all do when we want to do something our way. In the Acts of the Apostles when the 11 came together to choose a replacement for Judas, they set standards for who should replace Judas and then chose someone from that list of considerations. Gods ways are not our ways, but we do know that all things work for the good for those who love God. It's called trust and faith.
And Popes are not, and should not be, the measuring rod of holiness, I do not hold the Pope to be the "most holy man on earth" at all times (JPII was definitely a very holy man). By the lives of the Saints should one judge the Church, after all, "a medicine must be judged not by those who buy it but by those who actually take it. A Church must be judged by those who hear and obey, not by those who half-hear and disobey when obedience is difficult. No Catholic is compelled-not by the Church, not by Christ-to be holy. His will is solicited, aided, not forced." At all times God raises up some pretty amazing Saints, from the "ordinary Joe's", to help guide His Church.
I am not concerned in the least that we had a couple of rotten apples in the bunch, they are men after all, and this just proves to me that Gods promises are so much greater than that.
-
Unless you want to be a Priest or a Nun... then your vow of celibacy precludes you from having a family. It is a contradiction. Yes, yes, your bride is the Church in Religious Order and Jesus did not get married... or did he?
Truth. How elusive you are when we have but one stick to base it upon...
At least the Catholics and the LDS agree that the Bible cannot be the sole basis of truth.
Lol, no, not a contradiction!
Weren't you once Catholic?! Although celibacy is the standard, and has been for a very long time, it is not dogma, so who knows, maybe someday it will change. Protestant pastors who convert (mostly Anglicans/ Epicsopalians) can become priests, even though they are married, in fact, I have met a few in my own diocese. And for married women, we can join a third order carmelite if we choose, in order to follow a more disciplined rule, which some people do better with that than others. Marriage is a vocation and considered a Sacrament, good and holy. It is precisely in this holiness and goodness found in marriage that makes celibacy also good and holy b/c it is a sacrifice of one's whole self. "The value of fasting from food is not derived from a belief that food is evil. Rather, fasting from food is commendable and spiritual b/c it is the sacrifice of something good for an even greater good. God asked the Israelites to sacrifice only the strongest and healthies animals-not the worst. When a man sacrifices the prospect of marriage and a family, he is not rejecting sex as something vile and evil. Instead, he is making a substantial sacrifice." Taylor Marshall, The Crucified Rabbi.
I don't see religious celibacy as a contradiction, they give themselves wholly to the Lord and His Church, our Family in Christ, to help teach and lead us to God. :)
-
I will try to respond as best as I can to your questions. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints there is not so much “official doctrine” as there is in many churches. There is no real theology and thus there is not much in the way of scholarship or official scholars. There is some doctrine but the reality is that, though the doctrine is somewhat different than most religious thought, there are very little doctrinal specifics. Like scripture; though there is a tapestry of principles in doctrine the specifics are vague. In essence LDS are very behavior oriented and specific but at the same time dogmatically vague. It has been expressed that in such matters the effort is to teach correct principles and have people govern themselves. Thus the church mission is in essence upside down and it is believed that the church structure and hierarchy is temporary and instituted to support and prepare the family (not individual per say) that we believe the family is what is eternal both in principle and actuality. Thus the LDS understanding is that there is no place for an individual in heaven – that without family and relationship within that divine family (or if you will – oneness in the family of our Father in Heaven) it is impossible for heaven to exist.
Excommunication is not so much because of doctrine or to protect doctrine or to protect the church but to protect the family and ensure it is eternally viable and sustainable. Thus excommunication in purpose is intended not to punish but to wipe an individual slate clean, to allow a reset and start over for an individual to repent and establish a new, one’s place in their family covenant before G-d. In essence the single purpose of the church is to prepare a people (family including ancestors and descendants) to dwell forever in the society of G-d. Also realizing that every individual person descended from Adam and Eve is ours and G-d’s family.
Since family is central to my understanding of G-d, his purpose, mercy, compassion and goodness – I see the history of the world much different than you do. Thus Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were not great leaders as they were great family men dedicated to preserving the eternal family covenant and example of family. Other individuals of history focused on doctrine and theology – I do not see of much importance unless their efforts are in the sustaining, even by example, the family covenant – that I believe is important and the essence of true religion and understanding and believing in G-d as our Father.
Thus my general rule is about families – those that use scripture and other excuse to displace themselves or others from family – are not much use to me. But those that dedicate themselves by covenant to family – I believe are rich soil for the seed of G-d otherwise hidden in scripture and in all creation that brings forth and adds to life.
Well put Traveler :) I recognize my Church in your description of your own church as well, for the family is also very important to us. I'm including a link to Familiaris Consortio, an Apostolic Exhortion written by St. John Paul II, on the role of families in our society. I'm sure you are a very busy man, but if you have the time, please read it, though it is a bit long, yet quite enriching and profound.
-
What has always bugged me is that a Catholic Pope is the most holy man on earth for a Catholic. I don't understand why the church would canonize one Pope and not another. All dead Popes should be in heaven, if they're not, he had no business being a Pope.
Not always so. The Pope should be a holy man, and lead an exemplary life in virtue and charity, but he is still just a man, and as such, is not guaranteed to be in a state of being which is protected from temptation. Our faith is in God, not in men. Yet, for those who were notorious for their sins (not as many as you think, the good far outweigh the bad), not a single one of them attempted to change the doctrines to allow the indulgence of his own temptations, none of them every tried to "justify" their sinful behavior.
Elder Uchtdorf put it very well in the October GC, "And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine. I suppose the church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and his doctrine is pure. But he works through us-His imperfect children-and imperfect people make mistakes...It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men...This is the church of Jesus Christ. God will not allow His church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny."
I found this statement quite ironic.
And when you think about it, it makes sense that satan prefers going straight to the top when it comes to the Church, he can't harm the deposit of faith, the teachings, b/c they are being proteced by the Holy Spirit, but he can still tempt souls away from following those teachings. And who would make a bigger difference as far as leading people away, a Pope, who is recognized around the world, or a farmer in a village who is unknown outside his village? The one whose sin will make the biggest splash, the head honcho of course! Much larger ripple effect!! If he can bring down a Pope, he can lead thousands of souls to abandon the faith.
And besides, Jesus didn't promise His Church would be perfect on earth. I like the parable of the wheat and weeds in Matt 13:24-30. Jesus sowed good seed (His teachings) and Satan came along sowing bad seed to try and mess up the harvest, but Jesus tells His angels to leave the weeds in the ground, growing with the wheat. Jesus explains the meaning of this parable to the Apostles in the same chapter, verses 36-40.
-
That's right! It's much easier to stay awake when you're standing, sitting, then standing then kneeling in the span of 1 hour. I am the chorister (the person that stands up infront of the congregation and waves her hands in time to the song during sacrament meeting) for about 5 years now and it used to be that I would give the sign to stand up for the intermediate hymn if the song has a fast tempo (somebody else chooses the songs). But 2 years ago, we changed bishops and the new bishop told me not to do that anymore! So, we don't even stand up for the intermediate hymn anymore and when we have a 1PM schedule, I spend a lot of time elbowing my husband and kids to stay awake...
My kids still fall asleep occasionally, depending on which Mass we go to...and depending on which priest says the homily, lol. We have one priest, a sweet old man (retired), whose voice makes me want to fall asleep, it's so slow and soothing.
-
True, but we do know what he doesn't look like-and a white European wasn't it
Lakumi, have you seen the documentaries on the Shroud of Turin? The History channel did one maybe 3 years ago, following a group of scientists who put together a computer model of the face in the shroud, it was really neat!!! The Shroud is considered to be the burial cloth of Jesus (obviously something which is debatable), in case you've never heard of it. The Shroud will be on display next year from May-August (ish) in Turin, my husband and I are now planning a trip to go see it :)
-
I was in the choir in the Catholic Church for most of my Catholic life. At high mass, we unpack the drums and I get to be the cantor. My first time at the LDS Sacrament Meeting I almost fell asleep it was soooooo dull.... it didn't help that they picked molasses tempo for all 4 songs - including the Opening and Closing Hymn...
Recently, I attended Catholic Mass (I've been LDS for 12 years) and I felt that it was too loud... the choir director was also the pianist and he was playing while standing up and waving one hand like he's in an Elton John concert...
I guess I'm so used to the LDS "hushed" services now.
I've attended several LDS services over the past 14 or so years, and my main problem is my bum hurts from sitting for so long. I'm so used to standing, sitting, standing, sitting, kneeling, standing, kneeling...you get the point
The music is not very different from my parish, we use a piano, sometimes organ, but rarely any other instruments (except maybe a flute or violen here and there), and we typically use traditional songs. -
I am of the mind that such "signs" serve a purpose and do relate to the time in which we are living. I believe that if the truth were to be known that we would be surprised how little time is left on one hand and how unprepared we actually are on the other.
I agree. Although I believe we are not to focus too much on the whether or not this or that is a "sign", we are to take it all in with perfect faith and confidence, and live every day w/purpose, b/c we truly never know when our last day will be anyway.
-
Faith4, Thank you for your post. I wanted to respond specifically to your post for many reasons. My particular journey seems to have been quite different than yours. It appears to me that your love, knowledge and respect of G-d is based on and in Biblical scripture. Mine is quite different – my love, knowledge, understanding and respect of G-d is despite Biblical scripture. For me love and respect for G-d is a matter and result from my own experience, study and analysis.
I have found scripture unreliable in that, rather than foster consensus of logic and reason, I find scripture to be overly ambiguous; so much so that the more scripture is studied the more disagreement there seems to be in what exactly scripture is communicating and the greater there seems to be anger between those that disagree. And this is not a recent or new phenomenon but a longtime historical result that has existed with the beginning of early Christian effort to canonize scripture and make heretics of those that disagree with the popular notions of scripture at a particular time and place.
Jesus did not say that his disciples could be identified by any particular interpretation of scripture but rather by the love such disciples have for others – a love and compassion particularly shown to extend to their enemies. As a general rule (meaning that there are some few exceptions) I have personally found through a wide opportunity of experience that those dedicated to scripture and particular interpretations of scripture to be prominently among the least loving and compassionate towards others.
What I have found is that those that love and respect others (kind of along the lines to which Jesus spoke) – and I do not know or recall even a single exception – honor and respect themselves and their abilities to function honestly and rationally with others much more than with scripture.
My love, respect and knowledge of God began when I was very, very young actually, long before I discovered the treasures found in the Scriptures. :) Easy misunderstanding since I apparently quote too much Scripture for your taste. The past year and a half has brought me on an incredible journey of fully, discovering this treasure, among others, and answering Gods call. He is so so beautiful!! I am often times brought to tears of joy for what He has done for me, and I know now there is absolutely nothing in this world I wouldn't do for Him. And everyone's journey is different and unique, ours are completely different, as they should be, separated by time, location, memories, knowledge, family life, etc. No two people are the same, which is why we are told to not judge one another, that alone is Gods job. And true love, respect, and knowledge of God is also brought by personal experiences and study, you are not the only one my friend :)
Concerning disagreement of Scriptures, I agree that too many groups of people lay claim to the true interpretation, yet allow their disagreements to lead to anger and division. Which is why Christ did leave a visible Church, with His authority to teach, until the Parousia. In Luke's Gospel, (this will be the only biblical quote, I promise) Jesus says to His disciples, "Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me" (Luke 10:16). Notice the direct line of authority, the Father sends the Son, the Son sends the Apostles w/His authority, such that listening to them, and the men they in turn authorize, is equivalent to listening to Jesus and thus also to the Father. Jesus desired his believers to be one, and not divided, why would he therefore leave his followers w/ambigious teachings?
But it is curious to me that you think (at least this is what I understand from your post), that Jesus did not identify any particular interpretation, except by the love shown by his disciples (which btw, there was only one interpretation at the time, the Apostles and their disciples, you know, the teachings received directly from Jesus, so who else would He point to?). Do not Baptists love one another? Do not Catholics love one another? What about Presbyterians, Pentecostals, non-denomationals and Lutherans? What about the LDS and their love for others? And of course, Buddhists, Muslims and everyone else? You can not just simply place entire groups under some large all-encompassing umbrella labeled "not enough love to be up to Jesus' par". There will always be great saints and great sinners, with everyone in between, in each group.
Your church was founded in 1830, "restored", correct? Why is it now visible and hierarchal and definitive in its interpretations? The members of your church, must believe and practice what the prophet teaches in order to be worthy of the Temple, and reach the celestial kingdom, right? Why is now so different than when Jesus was here? Is Jesus now pointing only to the LDS interpretation, along w/love for one another? Do your church leaders appreciate members coming forward w/different interpretations and leading others in error to believe them over the leaders? What exactly would happen in such situations, would the leaders not warn the member and eventually excommunicate that person for leading others away from truth into heresy? What about all the schisms and splinter groups which broke off your church when Smith died, all claiming to be the true branch of LDS with the true authority? You're right, these things are not a recent and new phenomenon, nor will they ever stop happening due to the sinful nature of man.
What I have found over the years, through personal experience and studying Church history and the writings of the some of the greatest saints in history, is that those who are dedicated to Scripture, lovingly, joyfully, and beautifully submit themselves to the Word of God in His Church, and are some of the most compassionate and loving people who have ever walked this earth. There are many, many, many exceptions to your general rule, and I am so sorry that you have come to such an unsatisfactory conclusion of those who love Scripture. God bless Traveler :)
-
Thank you AndyPG :)
-
For myself, it's not so much having "faith in myself" but being able to love myself, the person God made me to be. And by finally accepting my whole self as a unique and beautiful creation, whom God loves beyond my understanding, can I finally allow His love to radiate from myself. I ask Him daily to pour His Grace and Love into my soul, to "fill my cup", so that I may "pour it out" to others. Everything I am and everything I give to others (patience, love, time etc), comes from Him and is a gift which I now recognize can overflow to others.
Now, this is not the same as having "blind faith". God did give us an intellect, the ability to make choices, think for ourselves and draw conclusions from the information around us. All the clues which point to Him are there, they always have been, we just have to be willing to look for them, in honesty and humility. As I mentioned in my above post, the Scriptures are truly inspired by God, not b/c "blind faith" says so, but b/c Jesus logically fulfills the OT, in such a way as to be miraculous. I never even realized how wonderfullly the OT and NT complete each other, they go hand in hand! Everything Jesus says and does finds merit in the OT, fulfilling what was written and completing it. There are thousands of exegitical books on Scriptures, scrutinizing every line of the Gospels, and all the different meanings which can be gleaned from them. I just finished the book Jesus of Nazareth, by Pope Benedict XVI, and it was amazing, I'm completely blown away by the beauty of the Scriptures, and how deep and alive the messages are. It's like a treasure which can never be exhausted, b/c this simply did not come by man alone.
I highly recommend you read Theology and Sanity by Frank Sheed. It's not an exegesis on Scriptures (though he of course sites from the Bible, among other sources), but it addresses precisley your concern about using logic and reason in finding Truth, for God is not a God of contradiction. From his book:
"My concern in this book is not with the Will but with the Intellect, not with sanctity but with sanity. The difference is too often overlooked in the practice of religion. The soul has two faculties, and they should be clearly distinguished. There is the Will: its work is to love-and so to choose, to decide, to act. There is the intellect: its work is to know, to understand, to see: to see what? to see what's there.
To many, the idea of brigning the intellect fully into action in religion seems almost repellent. The intellect seems so cold and measured and measuring, and the will so warm and glowing...Many again who do not find the use of the intellect in religion actually repellent, regard it as at least unneccessary-at any rate for the layman-and possibly dangerous. One can, they say, love God without any very great study of doctrine. Indeed, they say, warming to their theme, some of the holiest people they know are quite ignorant. All this is so crammed with fallacy as to be hardly worth refuting. A man may be learned in dogma, and at the same time proud or greedy or cruel: knowledge does not supply for love if love is absent. Similarly, a virtuous man may be ignorant, but ignorance is not a virtue. It would be a strange God who could be loved better by being known less. Love of God is not the same thing as knowledge of God; love of God is immeasurably more important than knowledge of God; but if a man loves God knowing a little about Him, he should love God more from knowing more about Him: for every new thing known about God is a new reason for loving Him...After all, the man who uses his intellect in religion is using it to see what is there. But the alternative to seeing what is there is either not seeing what is there, and this is darkness; or seeing what is not there, and this is error, derangement, a kind of double darkness. And it is unthinkable that darkness, whether single or double, should be preferred to light."
-
So if you know, the basics of all that, but don't believe it, are you still held in the same regard as someone who fell away or walked away from it?
Similar to most Christian faiths, what Anatess is saying (I believe) is that God will judge us according to our knowledge, what we truly know in our minds and hearts. God knows all, there is nothing we can hide from Him. We are each judged separately for our knowledge and charity towards others.
-
Hello again Traveler :) As a Catholic, I obviously don't consider Scriptures to be tainted. Neither do I subscibe to the thought that this is "unquestionably" so. There have been thousands of exegises books written on the Scriptures, and from the few I've read, are very profound and deep in their logic and reasoning. As St. Augustine says, "The New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is unveiled in the New". I find the Bible to be a love letter, written from God to all of us, it is truly beautiful and moving, a living Word, and not a dead letter.
To keep this short, the Scriptures are considered divinely inspired by God b/c they were written by many human authors and spanning many different generations, yet Jesus Christ fulfills over 300 OT prophecies. The Dead Sea Scrolls further substantiates that these prophecies were written long before the birth of Jesus, and were not altered to "fit" His life.
"To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in the task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more" Dei Verbum 11.
Can flaws and mistakes be found in the Bible? Typo's, I'm sure, and other simple mistakes of the like, most likely. But the message Itself? No. This does not mean however that interpretations of the Bible can be w/o error, especially in the light of so many different churches nowadays claiming that their interpretations are correct while others are false.
-
This is one of my favorite quotes which I think fits in well here as good spiritual advice :)
"Not to accept everything, but to understand everything; not to approve of everything, but to forgive everything; not to adopt everything, but to search for the grain of truth that is contained in everything.
To repulse no idea and no good will, however awkward of feeble.
To love souls as Jesus Christ loved them, unto suffering, unto death".
Elizabeth Leseur
-
I consider that to be without the Father to be a spiritial corruption. When Jesus was on the cross he cried out (in verse 46 of Chater 27 of Matthew
Not only did Jesus sacrifice his physical body (death) he sacrificed his spirit as well (second death) when he was spiritually forsaken of his Father - The atonement was both physical and spiritual and was necessary that he can confort, forgive and raise us up in all things that we suffer. Just as he was able to raise up his physical he was able to raise up his spirit as well having power over death. The atonement of Christ was infinite - meaning in part, not just physical.
Jesus never truly felt abandoned by the Father, He was trying to recite Psalm 22, the prayer of an innocent person. It begins as a lament, but ends in praise of God, and there are several verses in the Psalm which allude to Jesus' Passion and crucifixion.
-
I think a letter written by you to him would be a good first step, especially since he's opposed to counseling. Find some quiet time to think and pray (I know that's hard w/a baby, but this about your peace of mind and marriage), and compose a letter expressing how you feel. Don't give it to him right away, set it out slowly and carefully and not in anger. Once you're finished read it carefully before giving it to him to make sure it has everything you want to say to him, w/o putting anything in that'll make him angry (no accusatory language, that'll only make him dismiss your letter). Acknowledge his worry about the second coming, yet remind him that he is a husband and father, and as such needs to lead his family in prayer, towards God. As the husband and father, he is primarily responsible for his families faith formation and spiritual growth.
I don't know him at all, all I know is what you wrote, but it seems to me that he might be "obsessed" with this subject b/c of the nature of it, he feels an urgency to be ready, so he doesn't want to stick it on the back-burner. Like I said, I don't know what you're truly going through or how bad this situation is, but suggest to him that sometimes the best way to prepare, is in prayer, and through faith just trusting that God will provide and everything will turn out fine. Perhaps you can mention that the scripture study you planned is also a good way to spiritually prepare for the second coming, and it'll be more rewarding since it will include you as well.
Also, keep in mind how young your marriage is, and that you have a young baby. I remember those days, and it was tough! Our marriage suffered as well, for several years, though our situation was different, but now as I look back, I'm glad we made it through the "refining", and I can now truly love and appreciate him for who he is.
Good luck, I'll keep you both in my prayers!
-
Well it is a pity you live so far away, I would let you come over anytime to pick fresh fruits, veggies, and herbs out of my garden so you could always have good foot to eat :)
On this subject of love, I absolutely love to garden, I am always so amazed at the beauty and goodness of God's creations! While the beauty and peace I find in gardening nourishes my soul, the food itself nourishes my families bodies, and taking care of my family is another great love of mine :) Thank you Lakumi for the laugh! God bless!
And thank you to everyone who has so far replied :)
-
love is truly trusting someone not to ever poison my food
Lol!!
Then you must show a lot of love to the hosts and cooks who make your food when you go out to eat!! -
Hello everyone! I would like to ask those willing to answer, what love means to them. Perhaps you can share a story, song, or scripture verse which touches you, and teaches you how to share the love of God with others (I'm not asking for sacred experiences though). I live in a highly populated LDS neighborhood, and I have some really great friends who are LDS, and I really love the respect we have for one another's respective faiths. I enjoy learning about other people stories, and how God has shaped their lives, and the main reason why I joined this forum is b/c I have alot of respect for your faith and I enjoy learning about it. :)
-
So here is my straight forward rhetorical logic - If someone must make a choice to receive a consequence (good or bad) and someone else can reap the same consequence (good or bad) having not made a choice - that proves to me that injustice has occurred. If G-d is involved in such a thing - then that G-d is unjust. If someone tries to interpret because of their religious background - it does not matter - just like Adam and Eve they are given a choice and they get to decide what it is that they believe. I believe that the True G-d gives us all the choice to personally interpret what it is we want to believe. I also believe that ever person will make an account of what they want to believe to that very G-d. A thing I plan to do - make my own account to G-d as to what I believe to be just. BTW did you know that Satan loves to quote scriptures before G-d to create his version of how things should be understood?
Perhaps you can clarify what kind of justice you want to believe in - if you disagree with my logic.
The Traveler
So now I am satan? No worries, as I mentioned earlier, God is my only judge, and I know He takes my words and actions into account, as He does yours as well. :)
I believe in God, my righteousness, Hope, Love, Salvation and Justice. I do not seek to discover a different version that I feel better suits the whims of man online, God is my Light, and it is His Truth I seek, not yours.
We see injustice recorded throughout human history, no one can rightfully argue that justice has been a balanced virtue in every human heart, b/c it hasn't. But it's our choice. That doesn't mean God isn't Just, it means we have free will and He does not step in every time an injustice occurs, to stop it. He is our Justice. He is our Hope through the suffering in this life. Was Jesus' own death justified by the Pharisees? No, they wanted Him dead b/c of envy, and He paid the price for their choice. An injustice was done to Jesus, and He is God, therefore is God unjust? No, b/c it was through that injustice we were redeemed. And injustice is part of our fallen human nature. Something we must personally choose to overcome if we want to follow in Christ's footsteps.
"What then are we to say? Is there injustice on the part of God? Of course not! For He says to Moses: "I will show mercy to whom I will, I will take pity on whom I will." So it depends not upon a person's will or exertion, but upon God, who shows mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, "This is why I raised you up, to show my power through you that my name may be proclaimed throughout the earth." Consequently, he has mercy upon whom he wills, and he hardens whom he wills. You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can oppose his will?" But who indeed are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Will what is made say to its maker, "Why have you created me so?" Or does not the potter have a right over the lcay, to make the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose and another for an ignoble one?" (Rom 9:14-21).
So, I agree w/you, God does give us a choice, we can continue in sin, or we can choose the path less traveled b/c it is usually ridden w/persecution and suffering in humility and love. Instead of getting angry at insults, we learn to turn the other cheek and pray for those persons. The Beatitudes (Matt 5:3-12) are Jesus' teachings on how to act in times of injustice and suffering.
I will no longer comment on this thread, although your thinly veiled insults at my beliefs and faith will not cause me to lose any sleep, I know I can have a more meaningful discussion w/someone more tolerant of a different perspective.
"When ridiculed we bless; when persecuted, we endure, when slandered, we respond gently" (1 Cor 4:12).
God bless Traveler, I continue to pray for your mother, and for you as well.
Truth? Is Scripture - Scripture
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
I have already cited biblical verses which do uphold that this is a good and acceptable teaching.