Thank you for your responses.
First, I disagree with your definition of soul. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “In Sacred Scripture the term “soul” often refers to human life or the entire human person. But “soul” also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value to him, that by which he is most especially in God’s image: “soul” signifies the spiritual principle in man.” (CCC 363) Again, to stress the point, there is nothing in Christian doctrine which states that man consists of a bodily shell filled with a soul; that is simply not a Christian concept.
Second, you have used trick language here by saying, “I agree that Jesus didn’t have to “progress” to become God with us.” This is not only not what I said, but completely twists the meaning of my words. You quote me in entirety, and then insist that I have said something I have not. In order for this to be an honest dialogue, both parties must be clearly understood by the other, and neither party is to misrepresent what the other has said. This is not only for the benefit of the conversation itself, but also for those reading who might be trying to learn. When I use the word shell, it is a matter of terminology only, and regardless people will understand it to mean what you are saying, as RebeccaJ clearly does. But quoting me and then misconstruing what I have said means either that I have failed to present things clearly to you, or I have and you choose to misrepresent them anyway.
Now, a similar point is only similar, and not the same. I referenced the LDS page to which SpeSalvi provided a link (a page which is not only an official LDS page, but provides references to LDS literature in support of its statements.) , refuting the claims made therein. It is Scriptural fact that Lucifer is a creation and that Christ created him. The Gospel of St. John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be.” The book of Genesis says, “In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth…” Between these two verses alone we know that God is the Creator, that nothing came to be without him, and that Jesus was both with God and is God. To place the word made in quotation marks as you do is, again, to misrepresent what I have said.
Angels are eternal, hence the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels, so they do not need to be granted eternal life. Angels are not human souls because angels are not in union with a body, and the idea that they can wear a body like a glove means that they are not in union with that body.
If souls were not in union with bodies, then it would make nonsense of sins such as mutilation and murder; should one body wear out, get another (opening the door to heretical reincarnation beliefs). It would mean that verses such as “by his wounds we are healed” are meaningless because the wounds are only on a body and not on God himself. It would make the Christ’s Sacrifice on the cross empty, as well as his words at the Last Supper that his flesh would be given up for us. It would be meaningless and valueless for God to put on a meat suit and have it tortured and executed while not being in union with that body. It would mean that the Incarnation did not happen, because by not being in union with the body God didn’t actually become man. But we know from Scripture that Christ actually became man and was God also. We know from Scripture that the wounds are on Christ himself and not just his body.
God sends angels to earth without them having to have flesh. The Angel of the Annunciation is just one example. The question, if we are all enfleshed angels, is why would humankind be so impressed with angels if we were the same but with a meat wrapper? Wouldn’t we know our own? And why would God, in that case, not simply send the next door neighbor to announce the Incarnation to Mary? Surely that would have been simpler.
These LDS beliefs about angels are definitely inconsistent with Catholic beliefs, you’ve got that right, and since the Catholic Church’s beliefs about angels define the rest of the Christian world’s beliefs about angels, that means the LDS beliefs are at odds with all of Christianity. In fact, they are at odds with Scripture, which would say in the book of Genesis that God placed an angel inside the body otherwise. If you are actually reading my posts, then you must know that breaking down things the way I’m doing is following St. Paul’s advice about testing the spirits. These LDS teachings fail the test.
You may not know this, ParkerD, but heresy is a direct attack on Jesus. Technical definitions of heresy aside, each heresy attacks the person of Jesus Christ. This is the reason I return to Jesus in my arguments. If what the LDS teaches attacks the person of Christ, then it is heresy and must be abandoned; and believe me, these LDS teachings attack the person of Christ.
The word “spirit” is used in different ways, and in the case of your argument, is an attempt to parse words and justify an unsupportable position. Satan did the same thing when he tempted Jesus in the desert. God sends either an angel with a message, or a person with a message. Humans are not derivative of angels, nor do angels make up any part of the human person.