A Mormon- Catholic debate

  • Thread starter Thread starter truthseeker32
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
RebeccaJ said:
You haven’t reasoned out a Great Apostasy. You site passages that show the struggles of a fledgling church. Mormonism has the same in it’s short history. I don’t think you would agree with me pointing out Smith’s arguments and many excommunications of early Mormon leaders would point to a total apostasy of the Mormon church.
Click to expand...
I am trying to follow your reasoning at this juncture here:

Start quote:
Mark 9:38

38And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

Rebbecca states:

Look, I appreciate that you’ve glued two passage together, but you’ve taken them out of context.

Mormons see everything in the Bible, OT and NT, as an indicator of apostasy, apostasy, apostasy. We see everything as Salvation history. God’s endless Mercy, in spite of human failing.

We see Revelations a conveying a message of hope. Mormons see it as conveying failure.

Second half of verse:

Quote: 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a amiracle in my bname, that can lightly speak evil of me.
End quote

1.) When you say I’ve glued two passages together what exactly are you referencing.

2.) Isn’t this precisely the point I am making about the debate format. I have given you a specific reference. You do not rebut with any thing more than a ambiguous subjective response as if rehearsing your dogma somehow absolves you of any requirement to examine the contents of the verse and speak to those points made therein. That is the precise style of Steven’s response that initiated my first post.

3.) My effort here is to only touch upon the Apostasy as it relates to the OP’s ambition of discussing the debate contents. My expansions are to illustrate the nature of sidestepping various angles that could speak to an apostasy if they were objectively considered at face value. In this aspect I feel that in some way we are emulating the natures of the two people involved in the debate discussion, I present a couple of specifics and you ignore the implications and then obfuscate with confusing rhetoric. That is my point…

If we would like to discuss the Apostasy in earnest as the point of a thread, if you start I will contribute in that forum according to your wishes.
 
?

I think you have sited more than one passage from the Bible. No? If you turn to discussing just one, without reference to the other, then you are confusing me. Since you did state that you bring in more passages than one. Now you’re saying, it’s just the one.

I need you to put your thinking out in typed sentences as I can’t read your mind! What does Jesus saying casting out devils in his name is OK, have anything to do with all the other Bible passages you’ve been referencing?

As for threads on the Mormon apostasy belief. I think we might have had a dozen of those already.
 
Stephen168 said:
Steve addressed each of these points and showed how Barry failed to prove any point except the bolded part.
Click to expand...
If you are willing to concede that Barry proved his point that an Apostasy was predicted then upon what form of reasoning do you dismiss that prediction as having failed. If he proves the prediction is correct then, if the scriptures are true, the prediction is obligated to be a true prophecy of a future event which must occur to preserve the integrity of the scriptural record. .

If the apostasy occurs then the scriptures retain their efficacy as the word of God, If he has proved it is stated and then it failed you have now just dismissed even the scriptures as a worthy source of truth. A greater loss by far…
 
RebeccaJ said:
?

I think you have sited more than one passage from the Bible. No? If you turn to discussing just one, without reference to the other, then you are confusing me. Since you did state that you bring in more passages than one. Now you’re saying, it’s just the one.

I need you to put your thinking out in typed sentences as I can’t read your mind! What does Jesus saying casting out devils in his name is OK, have anything to do with all the other Bible passages you’ve been referencing?

As for threads on the Mormon apostasy belief. I think we might have had a dozen of those already.
Click to expand...
When you split the two verses up it appeared that somehow you might be saying those two verses did not relate…hence I couldn’t follow

As for how they relate to the other verses of our discussion, I have pretty well explained that but I’ll try to put it back together for you tomorrow in a little different way and see if I can make it more readily discerned. I’ve got to finish this up for tonight.
 
RebeccaJ said:
I live in Utah. There is no vote here that is for Obama. I predict 80% of the vote will go to Romney. I could vote for Mickey Mouse. Wouldn’t matter. But I’m not voting for Obama or Romney.
Click to expand...
You live in the USA. In the grand totals, a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama. Not saying you should vote for Romney, but fact is fact. In a close race, a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama.
 
EllieH said:
If you are willing to concede that Barry proved his point that an Apostasy was predicted then upon what form of reasoning do you dismiss that prediction as having failed. If he proves the prediction is correct then, if the scriptures are true, the prediction is obligated to be a true prophecy of a future event which must occur to preserve the integrity of the scriptural record. .

If the apostasy occurs then the scriptures retain their efficacy as the word of God, If he has proved it is stated and then it failed you have now just dismissed even the scriptures as a worthy source of truth. A greater loss by far…
Click to expand...
The problem is, Mormons take the “predicted” apostacy out of context. Nowhere in the Scriptures does it say anything about a Total Apostacy. This is supported by the continued evidence of God’s presence and authority through time. And Matthw is very clear…especially if taken in the original Aramaic “you are now Rock and on this Rock I will build my Church”.

For the LDs to be true, Jesus has to be dishonest, weak and/or cruel. I cannot accept that.
 
EllieH said:
If you are willing to concede that Barry proved his point that an Apostasy was predicted then upon what form of reasoning do you dismiss that prediction as having failed.
Click to expand...
Barry did not prove it has come yet or even that it was predicted to come yet. Also, an apostasy does not mean a total apostasy. Joseph Smith turning his back on the trinity and taking millions of people with him was a Great Apostasy yet the Catholic Church is still here teaching what Christ and the Apostles taught.
 
TexanKnight said:
You live in the USA. In the grand totals, a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama. Not saying you should vote for Romney, but fact is fact. In a close race, a vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama.
Click to expand...
Who is elected is based on the number of electoral college votes they receive. The electoral votes in Utah have gone to the Republican candidate as long as I’ve been old enough to vote. The prediction for the same result is not surprising for this coming election.

So I can vote for anyone, a, b, c, d, e, even write in my dog. The 6 electoral votes from Utah are going to the Republican party.
 
I hope you are right. People thinking like you is how we got Clinton…twice…
 
I can;t vote for Gary Johnson.

“Governor Johnson states that he supports the right of a woman to choose up to viability of the fetus.”

Since he can;t win, and since he supports abortion, I will stick with Romney.
 
RebeccaJ said:
I voted for Clinton, twice. The Utah electoral votes still went to the Republican. 😃
Click to expand...
I am a bit shocked that a Catholic would vote for Clinton based on his abortion stance and sex crimes. But…

and again, perhaps you are correct. But a lot of folks took your stance and voted third party and got Clinton elected twice.

He never won with over 50% of popular vote.
 
TexanKnight said:
I am a bit shocked that a Catholic would vote for Clinton based on his abortion stance and sex crimes. But…

and again, perhaps you are correct. But a lot of folks took your stance and voted third party and got Clinton elected twice.

He never won with over 50% of popular vote.
Click to expand...
I was baptized in 2008.
 
Here’s some definitions of “Apostasy”. I scratch me head and wonder how anyone could find “apostasy” in the early church. It simply does not exist. Is there another definition that I do not understand? :confused:

Catholic Catechism: “apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith”

The Free Dictionary: “Abandonment or renunciation of one’s religion or morals”

Merriam-Webster.com: "1: renunciation of a religious faith; 2: abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection
 
Porknpie said:
Here’s some definitions of “Apostasy”. I scratch me head and wonder how anyone could find “apostasy” in the early church. It simply does not exist. Is there another definition that I do not understand? :confused:

Catholic Catechism: “apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith”

The Free Dictionary: “Abandonment or renunciation of one’s religion or morals”

Merriam-Webster.com: "1: renunciation of a religious faith; 2: abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection
Click to expand...
Mormon: Total disappearing of God despite the Bible’s promises until a man known as a con-artist and treasure hunter has 9 versions of a vision then takes gold plates from a Spaniard…no, an angel…that nobody ever sees except thru spiritual eyes written in a language no one before or since has heard about a people for which no evidence exist who lived ina place no one can find.
 
TexanKnight said:
but even before that, I knew abortion was wrong and so was adultry…Just sayin…
Click to expand...
My stance before my conversion was, I was against abortion personally, as in would never had had one, but I didn’t hold a view that my view had to be imposed on others. When it came to voting, I viewed it as a non-issue.

My conversion was a radical change of my life, in many areas.
 
RebeccaJ said:
My stance before my conversion was, I was against abortion personally, as in would never had had one, but I didn’t hold a view that my view had to be imposed on others. When it came to voting, I viewed it as a non-issue.

My conversion was a radical change of my life, in many areas.
Click to expand...
I am glad. My conversion to anti-abortion was when I heard my son;s heartbeat at 2 or 3 weeks. I realized then it was a living being and no one had the right to kill a living being.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top