T
TexanKnight
Guest
Wrong. Nothing needed to be restored because John never left the earth, and being the obedient apostle, he spent the 1500 years preaching and baptizing…
- Status
T
theidler
Guest
No one’s brought up the notion too that if there are many many Gods, and “Heavenly Father” was just one God of many, once human like us, who was the original God? There is no Uncaused Cause! There is nothing to start the chain of contingency…
It simply makes zero sense. The acrobatics that Mormons have to do in order to even give a fair apologetic of Mormon doctrine and theology is unreal. :whacky:
It simply makes zero sense. The acrobatics that Mormons have to do in order to even give a fair apologetic of Mormon doctrine and theology is unreal. :whacky:
K
Khalid
Guest
I think I brought that up several pages back, under the general heading of “philosophical absurdities caused by the doctrine of eternal progression” and “philosophical absurdities arising from the doctrine of pre-existent intelligence and God as an organizer of chaos, instead of de novo creator”.
T
theidler
Guest
Whoops, sorry Khalid, I missed that.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
J
Janderich
Guest
I hope everyone on this forum can respect how sacred we feel ordinances in the temple are. The temple is almost completely concerned with ordinances. Because of how sacred we feel they are we avoid talking about them much outside the temple. Let me try and explain what I mean when I say they are “sacred”.Cornelius here…
I found out when I took out my endowment with my missionary class at the MTC (back in 1977 was called the LTM). We all went to the Provo temple and got our secret new names at the washing and annointing (which was really creepy). The man who gave me the little piece of paper with the name “Cornelius” machine-printed on it told me that the name had been given to me by revelation and to be sure not to forget the name. They say that to everyone.
So when we were all bunched up in a crowd waiting to go into the endowment room, several of the nervous elders were glancing at their little pieces of paper. It would have been hard not to see that they all said “Cornelius”. So much for revelation, I thought.
I think that was the beginning of the end for me. And then the endowment itself…also very creepy.
Ordinances primarily involve symbolic actions and inward covenants. As with any ordinance these symbolic forms may be viewed from different perspectives. On its face there is not much special about such a symbol. Take the ordinance of the sacrament. At face value I could explain it in these terms, “I pretend bread represents a dead body, after someone says a prayer, I eat it.” Based on such an explanation I can imagine someone who has never participated in the sacrament thinking, “that is strange and weird.” While others may believe what I have just said is blasphemy. The difference in these two thoughts has to do with what I believe the symbol represents and my commitment to the covenant made. The temple and the ordinances we perform to us are very similar.
T
theidler
Guest
That’s fair enough Janderich.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
Sacred? I used to be LDS. I have been to several temples. I got sealed in the temple. But it is not really sacred. If it were that sacred, you would not be able to find an almost word-for word version of it in the Masonic rituals. If it were that sacred it would not have changed so much over the last several years. Like, for example changing it from a Catholic Priest being the agent of Satan, or the female no longer have to pledge obedience to the male. Or the promising to commit horrible and painful deaths to yourself.
Could you please address the issues I raised regarding John?
T
theidler
Guest
C
couponfit
Guest
Hi, the LDS recruits using a very simple evangelism technique that relies heavily and charisma. Not talking in tongues charisma, but evangelical charisma. The basic tenets to understand with Mormon recruitment, or conversion, is to simply meeting at the persons request, typically in the persons home. The meeting is usually spontaneous and done through missionary efforts by Mormon youth in the US and internationally. Mormon missionaries spend some time preparing for their work, and attend classes as well as language and customs classes to maximize their ability to spread the word of God. During a period of time, usually a single meeting of a few hours or less, the person is asked to take the book of Moroni, and pray to God. The explicit explanation or implication is that a person who feels the holy spirit in their prayer that night.
As a result, we have the following situation, a christian, probably in crisis, and probably separated from church by a period of choice or indecision, now seeks Gods comfort and voice. They pray and they receive a strong feeling that God is real. Thus the Mormons suggest this is proof, through a personal experience by God, that the person should convert to Mormonism.
What the Mormons do not ask the person is to take the Bible and pray to God for the same signs, nor are they asked to pray whether they should go to see their denominational pastor or priest. In essence they attempt to recruit christians to christianity during a time of personal crisis.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
The temple ordinances seem patently silly to me, though I understand the underlying covenantal meanings. But out of respect for you, Janderich, and your sensibilities and your forthrightness, I will refrain from discussing them further.
Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
He also wrote “The Great Apostaay”, which is just plain and simply an anti-Catholic work of fiction.
J
Janderich
Guest
Thanks Paul. I appreciate that.
J
Janderich
Guest
Ok, kids are in bed. Let me answer the questions about the priesthood, the three Nephites who were to tarry on the earth, and John who was also to remain till the Savior comes again. In answering this question I am trying to present the LDS view. It is not meant as an attack on the Catholic faith.
I believe the main question is: How can the priesthood be lost if John or the three Nephites were still on the earth?
We believe a restoration was required because Christ’s Church was not on the earth. This does not necessarily mean that there was no person on the earth who held the priesthood. As has been discussed it is possible that John or the three Nephites were on the earth. But the point here is that even if they were here they did not have authority to establish the church or perform the ordinances. The authority from God is necessary to re-establish his church.
There was also a secondary question about what these translated beings were doing during the approximately 1500 - 1700 year span after Christ died.
Of course we don’t know specifically. But from the Book of Mormon we may have a clue. Mormon a Nephite prophet who live 400 years after Christ speaks of the three Nephites. He writes, “…who did tarry in the land until the wickedness of the people was so great that the Lord would not suffer them to remain with the people; and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth.” (Mormon 8:10). So the three Nephites did not stay with the people. This may have also been the case with John but we don’t kow. I think that is about the extent of what can be said.
I believe the main question is: How can the priesthood be lost if John or the three Nephites were still on the earth?
We believe a restoration was required because Christ’s Church was not on the earth. This does not necessarily mean that there was no person on the earth who held the priesthood. As has been discussed it is possible that John or the three Nephites were on the earth. But the point here is that even if they were here they did not have authority to establish the church or perform the ordinances. The authority from God is necessary to re-establish his church.
There was also a secondary question about what these translated beings were doing during the approximately 1500 - 1700 year span after Christ died.
Of course we don’t know specifically. But from the Book of Mormon we may have a clue. Mormon a Nephite prophet who live 400 years after Christ speaks of the three Nephites. He writes, “…who did tarry in the land until the wickedness of the people was so great that the Lord would not suffer them to remain with the people; and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth.” (Mormon 8:10). So the three Nephites did not stay with the people. This may have also been the case with John but we don’t kow. I think that is about the extent of what can be said.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
What about ancient Christian documents, artifacts…the martyrs, those who kept their faith and worshipped in the catecombs…?? The ancient liturgies…how could anyone define them as corrupt?
What happened to the Holy Spirit at Pentecost???
Why didn’t the Apostles have the same rights and zeal as the original leaders of Mormonism who were able to appoint successors when the Apostles, who witnessed Christ our Lord for 3.5 years, were not??? How come the Holy Spirit not work the same in the Apostles as He did with the Mormon founders?
What happened to the Holy Spirit at Pentecost???
Why didn’t the Apostles have the same rights and zeal as the original leaders of Mormonism who were able to appoint successors when the Apostles, who witnessed Christ our Lord for 3.5 years, were not??? How come the Holy Spirit not work the same in the Apostles as He did with the Mormon founders?
K
KathleenGee
Guest
How come Mormonism refuses to acknowledge the growth of the Church into the various regions, the writings of St. Justin the Martyr on how Christians worshipped in early Rome and the Christian world…150 AD?..or the history of its bishops, presbyters, the archaelogy of ancient churches, the expansion of faith into the various jurisdictions in the Eastern world whose founders were traced back to the Apostles themselves?
Why does Mormonism ignore faith history, the history and good works of the Church and its believers when we have so much documentation???
Where is it in Mormon beliefs that proves in Scripture or elsewhere that the Universal Catholic priesthood is corrupt…what are the practices that makes it corrupt???
Why does Mormonism ignore faith history, the history and good works of the Church and its believers when we have so much documentation???
Where is it in Mormon beliefs that proves in Scripture or elsewhere that the Universal Catholic priesthood is corrupt…what are the practices that makes it corrupt???
T
theidler
Guest
Is this for real? 
"1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting acovenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory." (D+C 132:1-4)
…
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified." (D+C 132:61-62)
"1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting acovenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory." (D+C 132:1-4)
…
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified." (D+C 132:61-62)
P
PaulDupre
Guest
It is interesting that, while many of Joseph’s wives were very young virgins (the youngest 14 years old), others were women who were already married to other men when Joseph “espoused” them. How can that possibly square with D&C 132?
Joseph also married two pair of sisters (forbidden under Mosaic law) as well as a mother and her daughter (also forbidden under Mosaic law and just really creepy). Both of these the Lord Jehovah declared to be abominations. And yet Joseph Smith gets a free pass from Mormons. I can’t imagine why.
Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
Joseph also married two pair of sisters (forbidden under Mosaic law) as well as a mother and her daughter (also forbidden under Mosaic law and just really creepy). Both of these the Lord Jehovah declared to be abominations. And yet Joseph Smith gets a free pass from Mormons. I can’t imagine why.
Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
T
theidler
Guest
What the…!!!:bigyikes:
Where did you find that out??
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
And he married the other men’s wives, so at one point not only men but women could have more than one spouse at a time.
- Status