B
Bill_Pick
Guest
I Just Was Talking To Two Mormon That Said They Are The True Church Of Jesus Christ , What Do You Think About This Statement
- Status
D
dianaiad
Guest
Oh, let me chime in here with the obvious thread stopper:
Those of us who are Mormon will say 'yeah, of course…" and those of us who are not will say “no” in various ways, polite or indignant.
Arguments will ensue.
People will get insulting…or not…
And nobody will change their minds.
One last thing: I would HOPE that those who are Mormon would say yes, and that those who are not would say no–any other answer would be supremely hypocritical, and that, I believe, is a sin that Christ hates more than most.
So I guess that settles that.
G
Gene_Church
Guest
No.
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
WELL I LOOKED IT UP THE MONMON CHURCH WAS STARTED IN 1829 SO IT WAS NOT THE FIRST CHURCH AND I DON;T THINK JESUS WAS WAITING THAT LONG TO STARTE HE CHURCH
D
dianaiad
Guest
Your opinion is noted.
You are incorrect about when the 'church was started." It was officially organized on April 6, 1830. If the rest of the information you gleaned from wherever you looked this up is as sloppy about facts as that, you might want to go to a different source to find out about the church.
lds.org, for instance.
Up to you, of course.
As well, our claim isn’t that Jesus 'waited that long to start he church" (sic). It is that He organized HIs church while He was on the earth in mortal life; that there was an apostasy and the priesthood authority was lost, and He 'waited that long" to RESTORE IT.
Now you are quite welcome to your opinion about whether or not you think He would have ‘waited that long,’ but that’s irrelevant. He either did, or didn’t. I’m not going to dictate to Him what he should have done instead.
Diana
P
pismopal
Guest
" There was an apostasy…"
above post referred to the RCC…obviously
Before a man can commit heresy and start his own “flock” , with lots of perks and power…he first must detract from the authenticity of his competition. People will follow…always…it’s as old as time. A contentious poster and follower of the heretic will probably reply to this but that person cannot change the sad facts of life.
above post referred to the RCC…obviously
Before a man can commit heresy and start his own “flock” , with lots of perks and power…he first must detract from the authenticity of his competition. People will follow…always…it’s as old as time. A contentious poster and follower of the heretic will probably reply to this but that person cannot change the sad facts of life.
D
dianaiad
Guest
It referred to everybody. The RCC, the Eastern Orthodox,…the whole ball of wax, Protestants and all." There was an apostasy…"
above post referred to the RCC…obviously
Before a man can commit heresy and start his own “flock” , with lots of perks and power…he first must detract from the authenticity of his competition. People will follow…always…it’s as old as time. A contentious poster and follower of the heretic will probably reply to this but that person cannot change the sad facts of life.
…and I don’t have to 'detract from the authenticity of [my] competition." The fact that we don’t believe that you are correct is implicit in the fact that we don’t belong to your faith.
Other than that? No attacks from me, sir. I don’t have to attack your belief system to present mine, nor do you have to attack mine to present yours. I figure that we are both bright enough to do our own comparing and deciding.
P
pismopal
Guest
I did use the term contentious purposefully because you(yourself) personalize things that are written as if YOU were the object of everything said. Please…I respect you as a being but you are not the object of this thread…I hope. I used the word “reply” in my post not attack but I see defend or attack as the way you use the language so I will get out of your way. By the way I was referring to Joseph Smith…not you…I thought you might understand that. Also you are correct, I hope, that we are both bright but one of us is not very discerning.
S
SirKnight2007
Guest
I don’t believe it is. However, we should give the Mormons the courtesy and decency to believe what they will. When we are attacked for our faith, we don’t like it nor appreciate it. So why would they?
I just hope and pray that one day there is Christian Unity.
I just hope and pray that one day there is Christian Unity.
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
SO WHAT ,WAS I OFF 4 TO 6 MONTHS AND WHAT IS MY OPINION ’ THAT OUR LORD STARTED HIS CHURCH IN 33AD ALMOST 1800 YEARS B4
J
JRKH
Guest
I have a paphlet here given to my by a couple of your fellows called The Restoration. Are you familiar with it?
On page 7 it says this:
When Jesus established his Church, He recieved instructions from Heavenly Father. He then instructed His disciples. Jesus taught His followers that revalation from God was the rock on which He would build His Church. (underline added)
I would appreciate the Biblical Foundation for this.
It appears to be a complete and utter misquoting of Matthew 16:18-19
On page 8 it says this.
“…The Apostles were killed, and priesthood authority - including the keys to direct and recieve revelation for the Church - was taken from the earth. Because the Church was no longer led by priesthood authority, error crept into Church teachings”. Good people and much truth remained, but the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost."
This passsage raises a number of issues and questions.
Why was the priesthood withdrawn with the death of the apostles?
The pamphlet doesn’t say.
Since Jesus knew that His second coming would not be within the lifetime of the Apostles, why are the Apostles successors not granted the same rights as the original Apostles to teach and govern the Church under the protection of Jesus Christ as He promised?
On Page 12 it says this:
In 1829, Joseph Smith recieved the same priesthood authority that Jesus Christ had given to His Apostles…Peter James and John (Three of Jesus Christ’s original Apostles) Later appeared to Joseph Smith and conferred on him the Melchizedek Priesthood, or higher priesthood.
Accompanying this page is a nice painting showing the three Apostles Laying hands upon" a kneeling Joseph Smith.
So, by Mormon Doctrine, Joseph Smith recieved Apostolic Priesthood by the laying on of hands by the original Apostles, and then through him other “apostles” were called.
So, Mormon Doctrine permits the Apostles to appoint a “successor” in 1829 AD while denying them this authority in 0050 AD.
Furthermore, Joseph Smith called Apostles to himself, that makes the succession Jesus to Peter, to Smith to …Down to today.
So Why does the LDS accept Apostolic succession Through St Peter to JS and deny that same authority when Peter walked the earth?
Peace
James
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Do mormons think of smith as a martyr
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
was that b4 he was put in jail
J
JRKH
Guest
Something else that strikes me as interesting about the Mormon take is that,
God the Father maintained the Old Covenent for 2000 years. No Great Apostacy needing to “Restore” and rewrite the Law etc because it had become corrupted.
God delivered on His promise to Abraham
God Brought the Jews out of Egypt
Led them through Priests, Prophets, Kings for 1500 years
Brought them back from Babylonian Exile
Delivered to them His Son
God did All of this and never was there an “Apostacy” Never did God abandon The Jewish People for a Day Let alone 1800 years.
Yet, According to the Mormons, God was unable to maintain and protect His new Covenent for even 2 generations.
Peace
James
God the Father maintained the Old Covenent for 2000 years. No Great Apostacy needing to “Restore” and rewrite the Law etc because it had become corrupted.
God delivered on His promise to Abraham
God Brought the Jews out of Egypt
Led them through Priests, Prophets, Kings for 1500 years
Brought them back from Babylonian Exile
Delivered to them His Son
God did All of this and never was there an “Apostacy” Never did God abandon The Jewish People for a Day Let alone 1800 years.
Yet, According to the Mormons, God was unable to maintain and protect His new Covenent for even 2 generations.
Peace
James
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Questions for Mormons Concerning the Great Apostasy
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints claims to be the true, restored Church established by God after all other Christian churches had fallen into total apostasy. In a 1992 article for This Rock magazine, author Patrick Madrid provided a compelling argument that this Mormon claim is the lynchpin of LDS theology:
“The late Bruce McConkie, a Mormon apostle and, during his life, perhaps Mormonism’s leading theologian, explained the concept of the Great Apostasy this way: “This universal apostasy began in the days of the ancient apostles themselves; and it was known to and foretold by them. . . . With the loss of the Gospel, the nations of the earth went into a moral eclipse called the Dark Ages. Apostasy was universal. . . . [T]his darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the restored Gospel.”(Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966 ed.), 43-44.
“Mormonism’s claim to be the “restored” church hangs upon there having been a complete apostasy. The late James E. Talmadge, prolific Mormon writer and member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, wrote:
‘The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims the restoration of the Gospel, and re-establishment of the Church as of old, in this, the dispensation of the fullness of times. Such restoration and re-establishment, with the modern bestowal of the holy priesthood, would be unnecessary and indeed impossible had the Church of Christ continued among men with unbroken succession of priesthood and power, since the meridian of time [the time of Christ].
‘The restored Church affirms that a general apostasy developed during and after the apostolic period, and that the primitive Church lost its power, authority, and graces as a divine institution, and degenerated into an earthly organization only. The significance and importance of the great apostasy, as a condition precedent to the re-establishment of the Church in modern times, is obvious. If the alleged apostasy of the primitive Church was not a reality, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not the divine institution its name proclaims’(James E. Talmadge, The Great Apostasy (Salt Lake City: Deseret Books, 1968 ed.), iii. For a discussion of apostolic succession see Warren H. Carroll, The Founding of Christendom and The Building of Christendom (Front Royal: Christendom College Press, 1985, 1987).) (emphasis added).
“TALMADGE is correct in evaluating the consequences, of course: if no apostasy, no restoration, and if no restoration, no Mormonism.”
The issue to be examined, therefore, is whether total apostasy of the Christian Church was possible. The following verses suggest that apostasy was not possible, and questions are submitted to our Mormon friends.
Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Q: If Jesus promised to build his own church and that Church fell into total apostasy, does this mean that a) Jesus was a liar, b) Jesus did not have the power to protect his own church, or c) Jesus was incompetent as a church builder?
Matthew 28:20
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.
Q: If the Church fell into totally apostasy for nearly 1700 years, did Jesus remain with the Church “always”?
John 14:15-16
"If you love me, you will obey what I command. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever—
Q: If the Church fell into apostasy, did Jesus not give the Counselor or did the Counselor simply fail to remain with the Church “forever”?
John 14:18
I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.
Q: If the Church fell into total apostasy, did Jesus actually leave us as “orphans” during all that time?
John 14:26
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
Q: Despite this promise, did the Holy Spirit fail to teach the Church “all things” or to remind the Church of the things that Jesus had said to the Apostles?
John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
Q: Did the Holy Spirit fail to guide the Church into all truth?
(cont.)
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Now, consider the following three verses:
1 John 4:4
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.
1 Timothy 3:13
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Mark 3:27
27In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.
Q: Is Satan stronger than Jesus, is the Church the household of God, and can Satan rob the Church of the deposit of truth by “binding” Jesus in any way?
In light of the above, is it possible that the Church fell into total apostasy? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history. Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”
Madrid also reported that “in a written exchange (*This Rock, *(July 1991), 18.), Mormon apologist Robert Starling, attempting to prove the divine origin of the Mormon Church, cited the Rabbi Gamaliel’s prediction regarding the New Testament Church: "f this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God" (Acts 5:38-39). Starling unwittingly undercut his own claim of a great apostasy. Gamaliel was right. The Church Jesus built could not be destroyed.”
1 John 4:4
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.
1 Timothy 3:13
15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Mark 3:27
27In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.
Q: Is Satan stronger than Jesus, is the Church the household of God, and can Satan rob the Church of the deposit of truth by “binding” Jesus in any way?
In light of the above, is it possible that the Church fell into total apostasy? Taken individually, each of these verses creates a problem for those that assert that the Church “went off the rails” at some point in history. Taken as a whole, they portray Christ’s own involvement in building, nurturing and protecting His Church until the end of time. The Catholic Church remains strong and vibrant – not by her own efforts or innate qualities – but because God Himself is leading and guiding her to ensure that “the gates of hell will not overcome it.”
Madrid also reported that “in a written exchange (*This Rock, *(July 1991), 18.), Mormon apologist Robert Starling, attempting to prove the divine origin of the Mormon Church, cited the Rabbi Gamaliel’s prediction regarding the New Testament Church: "f this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God" (Acts 5:38-39). Starling unwittingly undercut his own claim of a great apostasy. Gamaliel was right. The Church Jesus built could not be destroyed.”
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Mormonism’s founder Joseph Smith, claimed that when he was a boy, God appeared to him in a vision and told him all existing churches were corrupt and he was not to join them, that he would lead a movement to restore God’s true Church.
But historical records show that Smith did join an inquirer’s class at an established Protestant church after his supposed vision from God. It was only in later years that Smith came up with his version of the “true messenger” doctrine, and this causes much of embarrassment for the Mormon church.
After all, why did young Joey go to study among the apostates if God had already told him that all of them were corrupt?
But historical records show that Smith did join an inquirer’s class at an established Protestant church after his supposed vision from God. It was only in later years that Smith came up with his version of the “true messenger” doctrine, and this causes much of embarrassment for the Mormon church.
After all, why did young Joey go to study among the apostates if God had already told him that all of them were corrupt?
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
BINGO
E
Eucharisted
Guest
Let’s see: A Chuch must be Christian. A Christian is a baptized individual who believes in the Incarnation of God and in the Holy Trinity. Mormons aren’t baptized according to the correct forumla, nor do they believe in the Incarnation or the Trinity. Therefore, Mormonism isn’t Christian, and hence, it is not a Church.
The reason most Mormons say they’re Christian is because they believe in Christ and because the assembly they belong to is called the Church of Latter-Day Saints. However, belief in Christ and belonging to a church dose not make one a Christian - rather, it is being a member of the Church - that is, being baptized - and believing what the Church believes that makes one a Christians. Jesus Himself said this when He told His Apostles to make disciples of all nations, teaching them all He had commanded and baptizing them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Despite the name, the “Church of Latter-Days Saints” is not a church but a religious organization, just like the Church of Scientiology is not a church but a pseudo-religious organization. Adding “church” to an organization’s name dose not make an organization a church, just as adding the word “turtle” to your name dose not make you a turtle. It is reality that is real, not names that are real. This is why the Catholic Church professes that she dosen’t believe in forumals, but in the realities they express.
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
Soon after the death of the last Apostle, John, the true church Jesus founded in Palestine is supposed to have fallen away from His doctrines, the members having apostasized.
The gods took it off this earth. Some 1,500 years later it was restored here through Smith. Joseph, then, is not the founder of Mormonism, but only an instrument used by the gods to reinstate the church once more among mankind. LDS refer to this falling away of the members of the original church as the “Great or Total Apostasy.”
- Status