Could smith have been a true prophet from god?

[ricko]

The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the Bible. To make sure that the apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.

 

[Religio71]

as to apostolic succession, Latter-day Saints believe that the actual offices and name of Apostle and Prophet must be part of the Church. So a distinction between the two churches is that the Catholic Church believes that the authority of the Apostles has been passed on through the ages to the bishops, while the LDS Church believes that there must be people called Apostles that will hold this authority, as they believe the Bible shows the necessity of 12 Apostles.

 

[MelanieAnne]

I never said I speak for all mormons. I speak of and about my own experience. Others here speak to theirs and amazingly, we are saying we have the same experience. You seem to have a need to invalidate our experiences. Why is that?

The term “Mormon Troll” comes to mind…

 

[MelanieAnne]

Looking back at what Primox actually wrote, he didn’t say that we should all hug. What he did say was that we should love one another. He was using the group hug as a symbol of loving one another. I can’t think of better counsel to receive and to accept than the counsel of the Master:

“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:34-35).

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Loving someone doesn’t mean that you confirm them in their error. Indeed, loving someone dictates that you do just the opposite. When they are living in darkness, you try to shine some light. That’s a common thread within the postings of the Catholics on this topic.

Since Love includes leading those in error into Truth, it is obvious that the Catholics posting to this topic love you and all the other Mormons posting. Coming to grips with Truth is not always pretty, nice, or easy, but it’s always worthwhile.

On the other hand, group hugs and “playing nice” by telling people what they want to hear may be comfortable for some, but it can also be dishonest and unproductive. That’s not love at all.

 

[Primox]

On the other hand, group hugs and “playing nice” by telling people what they want to hear may be comfortable for some, but it can also be dishonest and unproductive. That’s not love at all.

You missed the point of the group hug, MelanieAnne. It wasn’t in lue of disagreement about Truth. Go back and read the thread, carefully.

 

[pipper]

Primox,

Thanks for your comment here. Thanks also to Jerusha for pointing out my misspelled word. (I should have looked it up.)

Prophets in the Old Testament were primarily teachers, often of truths already known because they were already written down. One of the things abundantly clear in the Old Testament is that the Jewish teachers were often admonished by the prophets to go back to the basic teachings and promises and covenants of their faith. Christ followed that same pattern as He taught the Jewish people and leaders/teachers among them. Paul also followed that same pattern, as did Peter. It is a clear pattern in the Bible.

Exactly, people here, esp the Mormons seem to define a prophet as a fortune teller-predictor, and prophecies as prognostications about the future, this is very prominent amoung Seventh Day Adventist, and JWs.

 

[Finrock]

Good evening pipper. Not sure if we’ve interacted before, but nice to meet you!

Exactly, people here, esp the Mormons seem to define a prophet as a fortune teller-predictor, and prophecies as prognostications about the future, this is very prominent amoung Seventh Day Adventist, and JWs.

ParkerD is a Mormon and was giving a Mormon view of what a prophet is. We don’t view prophets as fortune teller-predictors, although we do believe foretelling future events is a part of what prophets do sometimes. The LDS Guide to the Scriptures offers this definition of a prophet:

“A person who has been called by and speaks for God. As a messenger of God, a prophet receives commandments, prophecies, and revelations from God. His responsibility is to make known God’s will and true character to mankind and to show the meaning of his dealings with them. A prophet denounces sin and foretells its consequences. He is a preacher of righteousness. On occasion, prophets may be inspired to foretell the future for the benefit of mankind. His primary responsibility, however, is to bear witness of Christ” (lds.org).

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Here’s a link regarding a statement a well known Catholic Apologist has made about Joseph Smith and the theory of The Great Apostasy.

IN SEARCH OF “THE GREAT APOSTASY”
Patrick Madrid

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MORMON2.htm

In closing, if God is truely what He claims to be, "The same yesterday, today and forever, then there’s no possible way that The Great Apostasy happened because He NEVER CHANGES so God wouldn’t have abandoned one group of people for another.

 

[Finrock]

Good evening MelanieAnne! By-the-way, do you like ice hockey?

Loving someone doesn’t mean that you confirm them in their error. Indeed, loving someone dictates that you do just the opposite. When they are living in darkness, you try to shine some light. That’s a common thread within the postings of the Catholics on this topic.

I agree, loving someone doesn’t mean that you confirm them in their error.

Since Love includes leading those in error into Truth, it is obvious that the Catholics posting to this topic love you and all the other Mormons posting.

If I may be forthright, this isn’t always so obvious to me, but I appreciate the sentiment.

Coming to grips with Truth is not always pretty, nice, or easy, but it’s always worthwhile.

This is true.

On the other hand, group hugs and “playing nice” by telling people what they want to hear may be comfortable for some, but it can also be dishonest and unproductive. That’s not love at all.

Hey, group hugs can be nice, especially when they are sincere! I agree, telling people what they want to hear can be dishonest and unproductive, although sometimes people play nice and tell little “white lies” so that they don’t hurt the feelings of the one’s they love. I guess that could be love or at least motivated by love. But, I think what you’re saying is that if someone is just flat-out being dishonest for selfish reasons while playing nice and telling people what they want to hear, then I agree that wouldn’t be love at all.

There is a beautiful scripture in Doctrine and Covenants that I use (unfortunately not always successfully) as my guiding principles in my interactions with other people. Although this scripture is speaking specifically to the use of priesthood, I think the principles are valid in any relationship capacity:

“41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; 42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile— 43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy; 44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death. 45 Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven” (D&C 121).

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[MelanieAnne]

Here’s a link regarding a statement a well known Catholic Apologist has made about Joseph Smith and the theory of The Great Apostasy.

IN SEARCH OF “THE GREAT APOSTASY”
Patrick Madrid

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MORMON2.htm

In closing, if God is truely what He claims to be, "The same yesterday, today and forever, then there’s no possible way that The Great Apostasy happened because He NEVER CHANGES so God wouldn’t have abandoned one group of people for another.

That’s right Kathy. If the so-called “Great Apostasy” had occurred, it would mean that Jesus lied when He promised the Church would endure. He didn’t lie, the Church is still here.

Why would a faith that claims to follow Jesus impugn Him in order to establish their sect? Yet that is precisely the effect of asserting the existence of some “Great Apostasy”.

Claims of some “Great Apostasy” are not only utterly deficient factually, they are an insult to God.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Good evening MelanieAnne! By-the-way, do you like ice hockey?

Kind Regards,
Finrock

My opinion ~ Ice Hockey = Soccer on skates. It’s like watching paint dry.

 

[pipper]

Good evening pipper. Not sure if we’ve interacted before, but nice to meet you!

ParkerD is a Mormon and was giving a Mormon view of what a prophet is. We don’t view prophets as fortune teller-predictors, although we do believe foretelling future events is a part of what prophets do sometimes. The LDS Guide to the Scriptures offers this definition of a prophet:

“A person who has been called by and speaks for God. As a messenger of God, a prophet receives commandments, prophecies, and revelations from God. His responsibility is to make known God’s will and true character to mankind and to show the meaning of his dealings with them. A prophet denounces sin and foretells its consequences. He is a preacher of righteousness. On occasion, prophets may be inspired to foretell the future for the benefit of mankind. His primary responsibility,
however, is to bear witness of Christ” (lds.org).

Kind Regards,
Finrock

I agreed with Parker’s short statement, but not with the def in the Mormon Guide to the Scriptures.

So don’t get excited, I am not about to convert to Mormonism and “become a 'god”

 

[Finrock]

Good evening Irish Kathy. It’s very nice to meet you!

Here’s a link regarding a statement a well known Catholic Apologist has made about Joseph Smith and the theory of The Great Apostasy.

IN SEARCH OF “THE GREAT APOSTASY”
Patrick Madrid

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/MORMON2.htm

In closing, if God is truely what He claims to be, "The same yesterday, today and forever, then there’s no possible way that The Great Apostasy happened because He NEVER CHANGES so God wouldn’t have abandoned one group of people for another.

Mormons don’t think that God changes, but rather that people change. Any apostasy is always due to people abandoning God, instead of God abandoning the people.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[MelanieAnne]

I agreed with Parker’s short statement, but not with the def in the Mormon Guide to the Scriptures.

So don’t get excited, I am not about to convert to Mormonism and “become a 'god”

Pipper, from the posts of many Mormons to this forum lately, it would appear that the whole “becoming a God” thing is passing out of Mormonism.

Not that I’m suggesting that you convert now that Mormonism has evolved into its present form! Just thought you’d like to know.

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Good evening Irish Kathy. It’s very nice to meet you!

Mormons don’t think that God changes, but rather that people change. Any apostasy is always due to people abandoning God, instead of God abandoning the people.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Hi Finrock It’s nice to make your aquaintance too. You’re right about saying that we’re the ones that change and abandon God. But at the same time, God is ever faithful to us, so he would be ever faithful to His Church even if the people in His Church are not faithful to Him. It’s happened over and over again throughout Salvation History. A book I might recommend you read is called A Father Who Keeps His Promises by Dr. Scott Hahn. At one point, he was very, very anti-Catholic, now he and his wife Kimberly are Catholic. Any of his books are very interesting reading.

 

[pipper]

Pipper, from the posts of many Mormons to this forum lately, it would appear that the whole “becoming a God” thing is passing out of Mormonism.

Not that I’m suggesting that you convert now that Mormonism has evolved into its present form! Just thought you’d like to know.

I don’t think that becomeing a “god” is passing out from mormonism at all, it’s just one of the things they like to conceal from potential converts (that’s us to mormons).

It’s one of the “milk before meat” things, like Mrs. “gods” or the top secret temple endowment where they take blood oaths.

But never worry I am very strong in my Catholic faith.

 

[Finrock]

So don’t get excited, I am not about to convert to Mormonism and “become a 'god”

Trust me, this was furthest from my thoughts. Although your statement struck me as funny and I could just see this dialoge:

Bob: “I’m sick of my job, I think I’m going to become a god.”
Johnny: “What are you talking about? Get back to work.”
Bob: "No, seriously, I saw it on the Discovery channel…This guy joins the Mormon church and, BAM!, he turns in to a god. It was crazy!"



Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[MelanieAnne]

I don’t think that becomeing a “god” is passing out from mormonism at all, it’s just one of the things they like to conceal from potential converts (that’s us to mormons).

It’s one of the “milk before meat” things, like Mrs. “gods” or the top secret temple endowment where they take blood oaths.

But never worry I am very strong in my Catholic faith.

The blood oaths in the Temple are gone too. It’s likely that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young would barely recognize the faith they were so instrumental in founding and spreading. I’ve heard that there are even some Mormons that wear crosses now, or at least do not shrink from that symbol.

But I agree that much is concealed. Which is why the origins of the Book of Mormon are glossed over. Delving too deeply into the facts is too risky. No prospective member in their right mind is going to fall for a story about translating scripture using magic rocks held in the bottom of a hat and doing so in secret, hiding from the scribe.

 

[Finrock]

My opinion ~ Ice Hockey = Soccer on skates. It’s like watching paint dry.

Ah, that’s unfortunate. I only asked cause I’m rather fond of Ice Hockey and just got done watching my team win tonight in the Stanley Cup finals and I was curious to know if you liked hockey.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[MelanieAnne]

Ah, that’s unfortunate. I only asked cause I’m rather fond of Ice Hockey and just got done watching my team win tonight in the Stanley Cup finals and I was curious to know if you liked hockey.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Football, Baseball & Basketball ~ YES
Soccer & any kind of Hockey ~ NO!

But Congrats on your team. Maybe my Lakers will win in the finals too.