Quote:
Originally Posted by Faded
Essentially, the hangup you keep coming back to: If the Protestant Reformation produced false doctrine, then calling it inspired is contradictory. Fair enough.
|
Is it just me, or are we getting better at our dialogue, Faded? Regardless, I thank you for that small concession. I’m pleased you were at least able to see my point. You got a lot further than anyone else ever did in Priesthood/Gospel Doctrine, back in the day.
;0)
And that’s what I like about these message boards. We can take as much time as we need and go as deep as necessary until we at least have understanding, if not agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faded
Erik, can you answer my question then? Why do Protestant faiths stop short of completely denouncing the Catholic Church? Doing anything less than that is fence-sitting. Essentially, they are willing to accept the Catholic Church as the true "Body of Christ" passed down from the Apostles, yet they reject the Catholic Church and separate themselves from it. So is the Catholic Church right or is the Catholic Church wrong? Protestant denominations seem to like to have it both ways. How does that make any sense?
|
If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re asking why Protestants rejected some aspects of Catholicism (e.g., authority via sacred tradition/apostolic succession, Purgatory, the canonical status of certain books labeled “Apocrypha”) but not all of them (e.g., the Trinity, the Incarnation/hypostatic union, ex nihilo creation, the canonical status of the 39 books of the Hebrew Bible and the 27 books of the New Testament).
The short answer, in my opinion, is that the things we share in common are the core elements of the Christian Faith. Not to say the things we dispute are inconsequential, but they’re not as essential as the doctrines on which we do agree. C.S. Lewis wrote a whole book about the common elements of the Christian Faith—
Mere Christianity, and I highly recommend it to LDS (especially the ones who routinely overlook the Christian forest and get hung-up on the imperfections and differences among the trees).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faded
The number one point you have focussed on in virtually all posts, and you're primary reasoning for absolute rejection of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the Trinity.
|
Interesting observation, and though I did use that word a couple of times on this thread, I don’t think it’s accurate overall—unless you read Trinity every time I write Jesus. Not that that would be an unfair inference, as I am Trinitarian. But I actually try to steer around Trinity debates with LDS.
If I were to state my “primary” reason, it would be more elemental than the beliefs expressed in the ancient creeds and illustrated in the “Trinity Shield.” My
primary reason for rejecting LDS doctrine is that
I cannot accept that Jesus is, or ever was, anything less than God. Period. He is not a created being. He is not an “organized intelligence.” He is not your “spirit brother.” He is not “a God.” He is God. The only God. The eternal God. The man who took upon himself the sins of the world and died an excruciating and shameful death on a cross—was God. Christianity makes a staggering claim when you think about it—that God died. God died, in my place, for my sin. I find that amazing—and I find it compelling. And every alternative explanation of Jesus, from Mormon to Muslim, is interesting and worthy of debate and discussion, but utimately the alternatives ring hollow for me. It comes down to Jesus. And I think if you do the math, you’ll find Jesus is the most common theme across my posts. There's nothing that interests me more.
Regards,
--Erik