Did we have a pre-premortal existence?

[_Franktalk]

What? Lol. I had to google that one. here you go....

http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/bobs10c.html

You actually think that link makes a case that can be understood?

From the Septuagint

Deu 5

5:7 Thou shalt have no other gods before my face.

5:8Thou shalt not make to thyself an image, nor likeness of any thing, whatever things [are] in the heaven above, and whatever [are] in the earth beneath, and whatever [are] in the waters under the earth.
5:9 Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me,

5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord thy God will certainly not acquit him that takes his name in vain.

5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God commanded thee.

5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy God commanded thee; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live long upon the land, which the Lord thy God gives thee.

5:17 Thou shalt not commit murder.

5:18 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

5:19 Thou shalt not steal.

5:20 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

5:21 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, nor his field, nor his man-servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any beast of his, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

These are the Ten Commandments.

Here is what the Vatican says:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7F.HTM

IV. "You Shall Not Make For Yourself a Graven Image . . ."

2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: "Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure...."66 It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. "He is the all," but at the same time "he is greater than all his works."67 He is "the author of beauty."68

2130 Nevertheless, already in the Old Testament, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.69

2131 Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new "economy" of images.

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it."70 The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:

So the RCC changed what God wrote with His own finger.

Once more:

5:9 Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me,



You think it is Okay to pray to a stone or metal?

Here is a list from the Vatican

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... ommand.htm

Do you even know what your Church teaches? If you accept what the RCC tells you that is fine. But don't deny what they say or do.

[_Spektical]

My take is that God is merciful and sees the picture in total. To kill a baby when God commands it is to likely bring that baby to the arms of God. To allow that group of people to exist, grow and spread would only mean that those babies would become even worse than their parents. They would be bound for eternal separation from God and God's people would soon become just like them. It must also be remembered that these people had opportunity to flee the area.
That does not mean that God doesn't hear the prayers of the righteous. Rahab the harlot is an example. She saw that God was on the side of the Hebrews and God provided her with an opportunity to save herself and her entire family. So, God is selective and knows what He is about even when we do not... And no, I do not hold to reincarnation of souls. That idea is founded in a system of human works to gain eternal salvation by trial.

LittleNipper, if you ever believe that God is commanding you to kill a baby, please promise me you will immediately walk away from the baby, dial 9-1-1, and explain your reasoning to the person who answers.

[_gdemetz]

He he! I think he was just giving an extreme example.

[_Samantabhadra]

The idea of 10 commandments is anachronistic. No Jew in Jesus' day thought of there being only ten commandments, lists of the Deuteronomical laws extended into the hundreds. It's mostly based on this same passage, but the division into 10 specific commandments is a modern hermeneutic.

And jo, you are utterly & completely wrong about your history. Read... well, anything, actually. You're just wrong: Orthodox maintain the "Real Presence" of Christ in the Eucharist, and at an Orthodox Council in the 17th century they even went so far as to use a Greek translation of the technical term "transubstantiation," although the Orthodox have always maintained that the process by which ordinary bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of our Lord is radically incomprehensible.

[_madeleine]

What? Lol. I had to google that one. here you go....

http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/bobs10c.html

You actually think that link makes a case that can be understood?

From the Septuagint

Deu 5

5:7 Thou shalt have no other gods before my face.

5:8Thou shalt not make to thyself an image, nor likeness of any thing, whatever things [are] in the heaven above, and whatever [are] in the earth beneath, and whatever [are] in the waters under the earth.
5:9 Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me,

5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord thy God will certainly not acquit him that takes his name in vain.

5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God commanded thee.

5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy God commanded thee; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live long upon the land, which the Lord thy God gives thee.

5:17 Thou shalt not commit murder.

5:18 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

5:19 Thou shalt not steal.

5:20 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

5:21 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, nor his field, nor his man-servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any beast of his, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

These are the Ten Commandments.

Here is what the Vatican says:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7F.HTM

IV. "You Shall Not Make For Yourself a Graven Image . . ."

2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: "Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure...."66 It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. "He is the all," but at the same time "he is greater than all his works."67 He is "the author of beauty."68

2130 Nevertheless, already in the Old Testament, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.69

2131 Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new "economy" of images.

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it."70 The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:

So the RCC changed what God wrote with His own finger.

Once more:

5:9 Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me,



You think it is Okay to pray to a stone or metal?

Here is a list from the Vatican

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... ommand.htm

Do you even know what your Church teaches? If you accept what the RCC tells you that is fine. But don't deny what they say or do.

Franktalk, the CCC isn't a rewrite of scripture. If you want to discuss rewrite of scripture, let's start a thread on the JST!

CCC is first and foremost a teaching tool. That is what the word "catechism" means, to teach. No commandment is left out, no meaning is changed, none of the ten are rejected. It is teaching the ten commandments in the light of Christ, i.e., the greatest commandment, beatitudes, etc. A comparison of the CCC to LDS culture would be lesson manuals.

Sometimes Catholics pray in front of statues, but we are never praying to the statue.

Mormons have sacred images, I've seen it in Mormon homes myself. Pictures of temples and the Christus statue seem to popular among Mormons. Also, American Mormons have a patriotism that venerates the US flag. These images have special meaning to Mormons. They are images that are held at a level that is above other images.

Islam is the only religion I know of that bans, 100%, any sacred images, in theory. Even they hold mosques and certain flags as sacred enough to kill over.

[_Franktalk]

The idea of 10 commandments is anachronistic. No Jew in Jesus' day thought of there being only ten commandments, lists of the Deuteronomical laws extended into the hundreds. It's mostly based on this same passage, but the division into 10 specific commandments is a modern hermeneutic.

And jo, you are utterly & completely wrong about your history. Read... well, anything, actually. You're just wrong: Orthodox maintain the "Real Presence" of Christ in the Eucharist, and at an Orthodox Council in the 17th century they even went so far as to use a Greek translation of the technical term "transubstantiation," although the Orthodox have always maintained that the process by which ordinary bread and wine becomes the Body and Blood of our Lord is radically incomprehensible.

As for the Ten Commandments in Exo 34:28 they re mentioned as Ten. Of course there are more. But a reasonable read would show the ten that I indicated in an earlier post. What the RCC did was inline with what the Pharisees had done to the Law of Moses.

Right now I am reading a book written by William Bennett in 1837 on the history of the Eucharist. He stated at that time the Church of England did not believe that Christ flesh and blood were actually present. The book is titled "The Eucharist, its history, doctrine, and Practice." A good read by the way. Free from Google books.

The issue with East and West over the Eucharist was the issue of leavened bread or not. The East said Christ would not manifest in leavened bread. But what I have found is that different periods of time people felt one way and at others they held a completely different opinion. It is possible that Jo found such a time. I will let her respond with her source.

[_Franktalk]

Franktalk, the CCC isn't a rewrite of scripture. If you want to discuss rewrite of scripture, let's start a thread on the JST!

CCC is first and foremost a teaching tool. That is what the word "catechism" means, to teach. No commandment is left out, no meaning is changed, none of the ten are rejected. It is teaching the ten commandments in the light of Christ, i.e., the greatest commandment, beatitudes, etc. A comparison of the CCC to LDS culture would be lesson manuals.

Are you sure?

From the Vatican

"9 "The ministry of catechesis draws ever fresh energy from the councils. the Council of Trent is a noteworthy example of this. It gave catechesis priority in its constitutions and decrees. It lies at the origin of the Roman Catechism, which is also known by the name of that council and which is a work of the first rank as a summary of Christian teaching. . "12 The Council of Trent initiated a remarkable organization of the Church's catechesis. Thanks to the work of holy bishops and theologians such as St. Peter Canisius, St. Charles Borromeo, St. Turibius of Mongrovejo or St. Robert Bellarmine, it occasioned the publication of numerous catechisms."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3.HTM

And what did the Council of Trent say?

They said let us tell you how to interpret the scriptures. They said the Pope is the final authority. How odd that a God that made us needs a man to tell us how to read His Word. So if the Pope signed off on the Catechism does that mean it carries the final authority? So does one use the teachings of the Catechism to understand the Bible or does one use the Bible to understand the Catechism?

For me if any church leader told me something that disagrees with my understanding of scripture I would reject that leader. Which the LDS can do. Please show me where the members of the RCC can kick out a Pope?

[_gdemetz]

FrankTalk, check out "Bishop of Rome under Constantine I" at Wikipedia. There is a painting of him offering his crown to Sylvester "and it {the Roman church} exercised all the power of the beast {kingdom} before it {the Roman empire}. It's under the painting of his vision of the cross (mark of the beast)!

[_madeleine]

Franktalk, the CCC isn't a rewrite of scripture. If you want to discuss rewrite of scripture, let's start a thread on the JST!

CCC is first and foremost a teaching tool. That is what the word "catechism" means, to teach. No commandment is left out, no meaning is changed, none of the ten are rejected. It is teaching the ten commandments in the light of Christ, i.e., the greatest commandment, beatitudes, etc. A comparison of the CCC to LDS culture would be lesson manuals.

Are you sure?

From the Vatican

"9 "The ministry of catechesis draws ever fresh energy from the councils. the Council of Trent is a noteworthy example of this. It gave catechesis priority in its constitutions and decrees. It lies at the origin of the Roman Catechism, which is also known by the name of that council and which is a work of the first rank as a summary of Christian teaching. . "12 The Council of Trent initiated a remarkable organization of the Church's catechesis. Thanks to the work of holy bishops and theologians such as St. Peter Canisius, St. Charles Borromeo, St. Turibius of Mongrovejo or St. Robert Bellarmine, it occasioned the publication of numerous catechisms."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3.HTM

And what did the Council of Trent say?

They said let us tell you how to interpret the scriptures. They said the Pope is the final authority. How odd that a God that made us needs a man to tell us how to read His Word. So if the Pope signed off on the Catechism does that mean it carries the final authority? So does one use the teachings of the Catechism to understand the Bible or does one use the Bible to understand the Catechism?

For me if any church leader told me something that disagrees with my understanding of scripture I would reject that leader. Which the LDS can do. Please show me where the members of the RCC can kick out a Pope?

The Council of Trent was in response to the Protestant's, who were removing books from the Bible, and interpreting passages to suit their own agendas. Who do you think I would believe? The Bishop's of Christ's Church, who have the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or those who would tear Christ's Church apart, for their own self-interpretations. Which incidentally, self-interpretations can vary from one extreme to another. A fact easily seen by all the different denominations that have broken from mainline Protestantism.

The Magisterium is guided by the Holy Spirit, and as such will not err when it comes to teachings of faith and morals. Which, it hasn't. There is no Catholic teaching that is conflict with the Bible. Mormon teaching, however, is in conflict with just about everything, from top to bottom. So if you're thinking about leaving a religion, that's the one for which you should run from, as fast as you can.

[_Franktalk]

The Council of Trent was in response to the Protestant's, who were removing books from the Bible, and interpreting passages to suit their own agendas. Who do you think I would believe? The Bishop's of Christ's Church, who have the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or those who would tear Christ's Church apart, for their own self-interpretations. Which incidentally, self-interpretations can vary from one extreme to another. A fact easily seen by all the different denominations that have broken from mainline Protestantism.

The Magisterium is guided by the Holy Spirit, and as such will not err when it comes to teachings of faith and morals. Which, it hasn't. There is no Catholic teaching that is conflict with the Bible. Mormon teaching, however, is in conflict with just about everything, from top to bottom. So if you're thinking about leaving a religion, that's the one for which you should run from, as fast as you can.

So according to you another receives the Holy Spirit and then they interpret the Bible in some proper way. If we are guided by the Holy Spirit directly and form our own views for some reason that is not proper in your eyes. I agree that many do indeed interpret scripture all over the map. This is the fault of man and not the Holy Spirit. In order for scripture to say what the RCC wishes it to say then many areas of scripture have to be put aside and considered in error. Like the Book of Daniel or Revelation. In my view all of scripture must be true. Whatever interpretation we hold to must make all scripture one integrated message. Over the years I have formed some views of scripture and most scripture is now coming together for me. I see all religions as a subset of the truth. Each one holds some ideas which are right and some which don't add to our understanding. This also applies to the LDS. They do not hold all truth. Anyone who declares that they or their religion knows it all just does not get just how complex the message is. But to give up on a personal quest and rest on another's interpretation is setting yourself for a fall.

Many people use history to tell them what to do with their faith. They see a church which has a long history and it seems to go back to Christ. If you accept that history then it is easy to accept what others tell you about how they over time have figured it all out. But this whole of reasoning is something which Christ hates. He wishes us to have a personal relationship with Him.

http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/why- ... itans.html

and

http://yahushua.net/nicolaitan.htm