[quote="Crux_Sacra, post:15, topic:278394"]
The LDS and the Catholic Church use very specific terminology in apologetics. This must be done in order to get across the specific meaning so there is no misunderstanding, even if the other party disagrees. If you do not like the word "shell", you may substitute for it the word "vessel" or some other suitable term. Whichever is used, the concept remains in your proposal of an empty thing filled with something else.
According to the Catholic Church, 'The human body shares in the dignity of "the image of God": it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit.'
Truthfully, I should not even use the terms "human shell" or "bodily shell" because they are probably incorrect, too, but I simply do not know what to call flesh which is not in union with a soul. The fact remains however, that without being in union with a soul it is not human.
CCC 365 goes on to say, 'The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the "form" of the body: i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.'
Angels and human spirits are two different things, and if the web page SpeSalvi provided is any indication, their are some serious flaws in the theology displayed. Foremost among them is the belief that there is any more than one Son of God. Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God. Lucifer is an angel, and even if he belonged to the highest Choir, he is still not a son of God. In order for one to be the Son, he must be begotten of the Father. Lucifer was made, not begotten. Jesus Christ was begotten, not made. Through Jesus Christ all things were made, and that means Lucifer as well. To call them spirit brothers is to lower Jesus to the level of angel (Arianism) or elevate Lucifer to the level of God (Satanism). Neither is correct. Second, Jesus Christ did not have to progress toward eternal life because he is already eternal since he is God. Jesus Christ came so that we might have eternal life. The Gospel of John roundly trounces these concepts.
Thirdly, this web page says something very strange about how angels can receive physical bodies but not demons. First, angels are not human souls, but even so, the angels who did not rebel did not sin, and therefore do not need to be redeemed. Second, not being human and not having sinned, angels are not destined to die. Why would God allow an angel to become human and seek redemption and eternal life if angels do not need redemption or eternal life? Third, fallen angels cannot be redeemed anyway, their punishment is eternal, hence the eternal fire meant for them. Fourth, if an angel is in possession of a human body, it's called possession. In full-blown demonic possession, a person invites the demon in, and the demon takes over. How could it if it were prevented by God from receiving a body? And Scripture is very clear that fallen angels possess people and Christ casts them out.
I don't see the need to belabor the issue about the human body, the soul (which means the body animated by the spirit placed in it by God), and their creation. I agree that Jesus didn't have to "progress" to become God with us, the Son of God with all power in heaven and earth. But He did "increase in wisdom" as a child.
I am fine with your belief that Christ "made" Lucifer, although I disagree but I think it makes a similar point that Christ is pre-eminent in eternity, and indeed is the Only Begotten Son.
I don't refer in any of my thinking to a belief that Lucifer was a son of God who rebelled. The scriptures teach that he was an angel, a son of the morning, who rebelled against God and sought to deceive other angels and they also rebelled and were cast out of heaven, to the earth.
Here is an important verse using the term "angel" that refers to the "destroying angels" who were the final plague of the ten plagues suffered by the Egyptians:
Psalms 78:49 He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, by sending evil angels among them.
Jesus cast out "evil spirits", it is true. The terms "evil angels" and "evil spirits" can be viewed as synonymous.
If there is such a thing as "evil spirits", which there is, then with all the scriptures about "spirits" such as the teachings of Paul ("try the spirits, whether they be of God")
there is just as much a plausible reason to believe that there are "good spirits".
There is no Biblical source for the entire set of beliefs that are advanced about angels not having the possibility of coming to this earth later from having been a spirit in the pre-mortal life where they received a calling from God to come to earth with a message from Him.
So, the Latter-day Saint belief that angels are a select few spirits sent to earth with a message from God during their time in pre-mortal life before they come to earth and receive a physical body, is not inconsistent with the Bible, but I certainly agree that it is inconsistent with Catholic beliefs about angels.
Again, a good spirit is placed into the body of each person born into this world. This is not "demonic". When an evil spirit "possesses" a person's body and mind, that means that "evil spirit" was one of the fallen angels and has intruded the body or mind of the person, but that doesn't mean they don't also have their own spirit. The evil spirit would then be trying to "possess" a body by means of force, and the person's own "good spirit" will hopefully be able to overcome the adversity of the evil spirit.