Could smith have been a true prophet from god?

[rinnie]

I am a real Prophet I happen to hold that title properly recorded with my church so I don’t get the big issue at the debate here, can any of you Prove the Prophet Smith was not directed by God to start the Mormon faith?

Its not as far fetched as the stories of the other faiths in the Bible like Moses talking to God alone as a burning bush.

Okay then tell me this. First of all where do you get your authority. The Apostles got their authorty from God and it can be traced from the day Jesus gave this authority. Now where does the bible say that we are to leave the teachings of the Apostles and early Church Fathers and move on over to the morman faith? Show me that and we can talk. Or does the Apostolic teachings tell us the opposite.

 

[pipper]

No problem. I wouldn’t have even asked or thought anything of it, except you’ve used Finfrock several times when you are seemingly addressing me.

But, no need to be sorry.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Awww Finrock, a nice frock might look fetching on you. By just your name we can have no idea which sex you belong to after all

 

[dianaiad]

FYI:

The need for prophets, prophecy, and revelation, all ended with the birth of Jesus Christ, for He IS the Messiah and has fulfilled prophecy. Anything after Him may be considered private only.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem: gopray:

That viewpoint causes a problem–for if there were no prophets, prophecy or revelation after the birth of Jesus Christ, then how come we know about HIm?

I mean, we’d have to throw out anything written about Him, and certainly Paul’s adventure on the road to Damascus is trashed, as is the book of…what is that title again…Oh, yeah…“Revelation.”

 

[CJ_Nick]

as is the book of…what is that title again…Oh, yeah…“Revelation.”

LOL!!! LOL!!!

Seriously laughed out loud!!!

Not bad dianaiad, not bad at all

Peace,
CJ

 

[KingAlfred]

“Could smith have been a true prophet from god?”

Nope. Smith was worried about what he perceived to be the corruptive influence of 18th Century maternalism in the Calvinist tradition. The role of the mother in the emotional wellbeing of the average northeastern American family was growing in a distinct, American religious culture, which Smith rejected. Smith wanted a resurrection of 16th and 17th Century Calvinism, that which expressed itself in strong paternalism within American family life.

 

[Finrock]

Hey pipper! I hope you’ve been well today.

Awww Finrock, a nice frock might look fetching on you. By just your name we can have no idea which sex you belong to after all

Well, yes, I wondered about that. I wasn’t sure what the deal was, if he was trying to insinuate that I’m some sort of priest or something (well, technically in my church I am a priest).

But, a frock might be cool, I admit. And, I am a man, FYI. In case you are interested, my forum name is actually composed of the names of my two sons. My oldest is Fin and my youngest son is Kivi, which means “rock” in Finnish. Hence, Finrock.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[pipper]

Hey pipper! I hope you’ve been well today.

Well, yes, I wondered about that. I wasn’t sure what the deal was, if he was trying to insinuate that I’m some sort of priest or something (well, technically in my church I am a priest).

But, a frock might be cool, I admit. And, I am a man, FYI. In case you are interested, my forum name is actually composed of the names of my two sons. My oldest is Fin and my youngest son is Kivi, which means “rock” in Finnish. Hence, Finrock.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

I bet you are not a priest, but an elder, right, you could even be a bishop, which would make you a high priest.

I bet your people have been here a long time, so many Mormons came from Scandawhoovia in the old days.

I think my people came from scandanavia myself, out of all the family I’m the only one of the cousins who isn’t blond or red headed.

 

[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.

Hi All, I’m going to quote myself here because I think this particular link is an especially good one (not my words, but those of Patrick Madrid). I would also still highly suggest that all people who are LDS should check out Dr. Scott Hahn’s book A Father Who Keeps His Promises because Dr. Hahn’s book gives you a really excellent big picture of how God’s Covenant with mankind fits into Salvation History, among other things.

Lastly, I would also suggest you check out the following link as well transporter.com/. It may also help you to get a perspective of someone who became Catholic after being born and raised LDS.

Kathy

 

[Finrock]

I bet you are not a priest, but an elder, right, you could even be a bishop, which would make you a high priest.

Yes, I have the Melchizedek priesthood and I am an elder, but before that I received the Aaronic priesthood. Being ordained an elder doesn’t take away the Aaronic priesthood. I can still officate in all the duties of a deacon, a teacher, and a priest (all are Aaronic priesthood offices). Of course, elder assumes all the lower offices, so that is why I said “technically” I am a priest. I am not a high priest, however.

I bet your people have been here a long time, so many Mormons came from Scandawhoovia in the old days.

I think my people came from scandanavia myself, out of all the family I’m the only one of the cousins who isn’t blond or red headed.

That is true, there were many Mormon Finns that came over during the migration to the Utah in the 1800’s, however, as far as I know none of them were related to me. I am only half Finnish, from my Mom’s side. I do have blonde hair (with some grey cropping up here and there ) and actually a red beard.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[Finrock]

Good evening Kathy!

Hi All, I’m going to quote myself here because I think this particular link is an especially good one (not my words, but those of Patrick Madrid). I would also still highly suggest that all people who are LDS should check out Dr. Scott Hahn’s book A Father Who Keeps His Promises because Dr. Hahn’s book gives you a really excellent big picture of how God’s Covenant with mankind fits into Salvation History, among other things.

Lastly, I would also suggest you check out the following link as well transporter.com/. It may also help you to get a perspective of someone who became Catholic after being born and raised LDS.

Kathy

Thank you for your suggestions, I can feel that they are well intended. I’ll check the links and share with you my thoughts on it.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[ParkerD]

Well it is the words of God and it is in the bible. Rather you reject or accept them is up to you. But thats what the bible tells us to do. I am also sorry for you also that you do not accept what the word of God tells us.

Rinnie,
I accept the Bible 100%.

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Good evening Kathy!

Thank you for your suggestions, I can feel that they are well intended. I’ll check the links and share with you my thoughts on it.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

Hi Finrock If nothing else, you’ll get a Catholic understanding of things. I can tell you’re someone who is considerate of other people’s viewpoint.

I’m going to say goodnight for now, until tomorrow.

 

[ParkerD]

You have been told that Catholics believe in joint heirship and you continue to imply we don’t.

Zaffiroborant,
If I have understood correctly (including all the belittling about becoming a “god”), then we define the words so differently that they are very different beliefs. To inherit means to me to receive an inheritance. To inherit what the Son inherits means to me that even though the Son is the rightful heir to a throne at the side of His Father, He brings to us the gift of also having a place at His side as a joint throne-holder. The throne is exactly what the word means–a position of rule, in complete righteousness but with complete power because those who inherit that power are trusted with it.

But you may define the words as you like, and say you believe in joint heirship. If you want me to create a different phrase for my belief, I’m not going to do it. I take the phrase from the Bible, and what the words mean from the Bible.

 

[ParkerD]

I answered part of this above, but who gave us the correct text? Which is the right one? How can one know? Did Christ just leave us to blindly grasp at a vague and ambiguous picture of early Christianity? No, he gave us the Church so that we could trust that we would receive the True Gospel. Without the Church, Christ would have been effectively abandoning his Apostles and disciples. Christianity would have succumbed like a newborn babe left out in the snow.

God was instrumental in inspiring the text of the Bible, I believe. I think the King James is translated sufficiently well to be considered the “right one” as far as English. One can know by the Spirit of revelation. If everyone who received the gospel had kept the Spirit of revelation, they would not have been “blindly grasping at a vague and ambiguous picture of early Christianity.” One of the major points of the writings of the apostles is to get the Spirit of revelation and keep it.

Christ taught that He would send the Holy Ghost to be with and guide the members of His church. The apostles totally understood this. I don’t think they felt abandoned at all.

I think the apostasy was allowed to happen for a good ultimate purpose, but it was also allowed to happen because the people then living allowed it to happen. It was a gradual falling away, not a sudden event. Christ does not override agency, ever.

 

[ParkerD]

Quote:
Pickguard1: Third, there is no marriage in heaven - that IS in the Bible. Mark 12:25 "25 For when they shall rise again from the dead, they shall neither marry, nor be married, but are as the angels in heaven. " It’s not the way WE want it to be, it is the way CHRIST SAID IT WOULD BE.

Parker D: OK with me for you to believe that. Adam and Eve were married, were they not, by God?

What do Adam and Eve have to do with this? They weren’t in heaven! How do you convolute this scripture to mean that there IS marriage in heaven, for heaven’s sake?!

Christ said “what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder,” and He was clearly referring to Adam and Eve. If it’s good enough for Him to cite them as an example, I think it’s good enough for me. Rebekah was told, “Be thou the mother of thousands of millions.”

 

[ParkerD]

Quote:
Pickguard1: Fifth as for the “pre-mortal” life - there is none. The reference in the Jeremiah 1:5 " Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations." refers directly to Jeremiah himself. God knows ALL things, and knows about all creation even before he creates it. It doesn’t follow that because He knew any individual before he formed him in the womb that he formed him outisde the womb before hand. There is nothing in scripture or any Christian teaching that supports this idea. The soul is created and infused at the moment of conception - not before.

Parker D: I am supposing that you are aware of the argument about religious belief related to the existence of evil yet God having created all things. Mormonism refutes that argument. But I am fine that you don’t believe you existed before this life.

Yes the One (and only one) God did create all things.The existence of evil is not a creation of God but a product of the resistance of God’s created creatures (both supernatural (angels) and natural (men) to His Will, through the use of our free will. God created all things, but he did not “create” my thoughts - they are a product of my free will to think. There is still nothing in your answer that provides evidence that human souls exist before conception.

You would need to believe in the Book of Abraham (Pearl of Great Price) and understand the phrase “when all the sons of God shouted for joy” to believe in a pre-mortal life, I suppose. But I think it makes more sense that God didn’t “create” out of nothing, the spirits who rebelled including those who have rebelled on this earth–that He organized them from an existing intelligence that was all their own, so they are fully responsible for the choices of that intelligence.

 

[pipper]

God was instrumental in inspiring the text of the Bible, I believe. I think the King James is translated sufficiently well to be considered the “right one” as far as English. One can know by the Spirit of revelation. If everyone who received the gospel had kept the Spirit of revelation, they would not have been “blindly grasping at a vague and ambiguous picture of early Christianity.” One of the major points of the writings of the apostles is to get the Spirit of revelation and keep it.

Christ taught that He would send the Holy Ghost to be with and guide the members of His church. The apostles totally understood this. I don’t think they felt abandoned at all.

I think the apostasy was allowed to happen for a good ultimate purpose, but it was also allowed to happen because the people then living allowed it to happen. It was a gradual falling away, not a sudden event. Christ does not override agency, ever.

I think Joseph Smith used the incomplete KJV becuase it was the main if not only English Protestant bible in use at the time. When he was writting the BOM and the other Mormon “scriptures” he even used (bad) KJV style English.

But, verily and forsooth I canst understandeth a word not of it. But Honestly I cant understand a word of the Doay (SP?) Challoner Catholic version either, for verily it is written in KJV style English as well.

It’s all greek to me.

 

[ParkerD]

Quote:
Quote:
Picklguard1: As to God’s plan for those who did not hear His Word in this life - it is just that: God’s plan. Christ didn’t instruct anyone to do anything regarding those who did not have the ability to receive the Gospel. We must leave them to the infinite mercy, justice and love of God - for we know that He always does what is merciful, just and loving

Parker D: I like the simplicity of that belief you expressed here.

Really, all Christianity is simple, when one has faith.

I think God has created humankind and given stewardships that only those are aware of who have those stewardships. Others simply won’t understand because they don’t have the stewardship.

Stewardships of what?

Temple work, temple ordinances, the work in behalf of those who have died, needed based on 1 Peter 3:19 and 1 Peter 4:6 and Isaiah 61:1-3 and John 5:25 and John 3:5.

 

[ParkerD]

I think Joseph Smith used the incomplete KJV becuase it was the main if not only English Protestant bible in use at the time. When he was writting the BOM and the other Mormon scriptures he even used (bad) KJV style English.

But, verily and forsooth I canst understandeth a word of it. But Honestly I cant understand a word of the Doay (SP?) Challoner Catholic version either, for verily it is written in KJV style English as well.

I love King James Bible English. I also love Shakespearean English. I love the play Pygmalion by George Bernard Shaw, and the delightful way that it illustrates how important proper language is in elevating humankind.

 

[Finrock]

Kathy,

I’ve read the link from ewtn.com. I don’t intend to address the article point for point, because that just would be too arduous to do, but I will share with you a few of the most prominent things that I noticed. A disclamer before I continue. My intent is only to share my opinions on the article you provided and to share some information about how Mormons understand and support the claim of a universal apostasy. I am not trying to prove that I am right and you are wrong. Anyways, here are my thoughts:

Let me just briefly mention that there were some errors in detail with regards to some Mormon doctrine and beliefs.

The following I say this without any smugness or disrespect, but rather as an honest observation, but Patrick Madrid’s article is pretty typical. This doesn’t invalidate his arguments, of course, but I am very familiar with his arguments against the LDS view of a universal Apostasy. Protestants and Catholics alike, for the most part, use the same arguments to support their positions.

One thing that Patrick seemed to stress was that Mormons have no evidence for a universal apostasy, outside of, “…an interior feeling or testimony…”

Also, he quotes several scriptures and gives the “only” four possible choices in relation to the scriptures he quotes. In reality, we aren’t limited to just those four choices, instead there is at least a fifth possible options, which is that it is possible that the scriptures in question are being misinterpreted.

There is also a misrepresentation of what Mormons actually believe in regards to God’s relationship to His children during the apostasy.

Now, there were some other points that weren’t completely representative of the Mormon view on this subject, but I’ll stop here. As far as answering those issues I’ve pointed out, here is my list:

1. Mormons do have biblical and historical evidence in support of a universal apostasy that is outside of and in addition to personal revelation and testimony.
2. The Catholic interpretation of the scriptures Patrick quoted are not a settled question. Mormon interpretation of the same scriptures, although different, are at least as reasonable and plausible as Catholic interpretation.
3. Mormon’s do not think God left His children alone for 1700 years. God was and will continue to be active in peoples lives.

If you are interested, you can read some articles which provide both historical and biblical support for a universal apostasy from the following links. The first one I would consider a direct refutation to Partick Madrid’s article:

• Apostasy
• Biblical Evidences
• Church Fathers and Apostasy

Kind Regards,
Finrock