M
mfbukowski
Guest
No ad hominen here. No siree. Just a nice charitable comment from a fellow christian.You seriously need better reading comprehension.
No ad hominen here. No siree. Just a nice charitable comment from a fellow christian.You seriously need better reading comprehension.
Charitable bukowski, in attributing the response I was responding to as a lack of comprehension. I could just say it was something other, ie, a purposeful attempt to make a person look as though they are persecuting Mormons.No ad hominen here. No siree. Just a nice charitable comment from a fellow christian.
This is a good question.What evidence other then this do the Mormon’s have that Joseph Smith is a true phophet? What evidence do the Mormon’s have to prove that Joseph Smith was given this priesthood?
How is Joseph Smith any different from all the others outside of Catholicism who have stood up and claimed they have been given the only sole truth? Why should I believe Joseph Smith?
First, I don’t think that you were talking to two mormons. Second, I think that you wanted to stir the pot with your statemtent. Third, I would say that the mormon church could be true. There is no reason to presume otherwise.I Just Was Talking To Two Mormon That Said They Are The True Church Of Jesus Christ , What Do You Think About This Statement
You can read this. It would seem that if JS were a fraudster, he would need many accomplices.What evidence other then this do the Mormon’s have that Joseph Smith is a true phophet? What evidence do the Mormon’s have to prove that Joseph Smith was given this priesthood?
How is Joseph Smith any different from all the others outside of Catholicism who have stood up and claimed they have been given the only sole truth? Why should I believe Joseph Smith?
I don’t like this “they’re both good options” business. Even with whom we are not in communion like the Eastern Orthodox will agree with the Catholic position that the Mormons are not Christian for any number of reasons. I think the best that we can honestly say about the LDS is that they’re nice folks most of the time. But their church does not lead to righteousness. No way./QUOTE
Dzheremi ~ Why Me is a Catholic/Mormon fence sitter. Why Me “goes both ways”, you might say.This is what you can expect from such a person.
There are many with this relativist view ~ anything is OK ~ let’s just all get along ~ whatever works for you is great ~ whatever works for me is great.
The only problem with that sort of thinking, of course, is that there is nothing definite. It becomes a religion of “ME” ~ what works for me and what I want ~ instead of a religion to worship God.
Before I was Catholic, a very well spoken knowledgeable Catholic from India that I worked with talked to me about this subject. Many people want a church that conforms to what they want to believe. This thinking is backwards, at least if you want to worship God.
You don’t re-make God, as many have sought to do, into something/someone convenient to you. Instead, you conform yourself to God. That’s often not as easy, but that is the right thing to do. There is only one way to do this.
I don’t think that I am a fence sitter but I do see good in both faiths and because of this I cannot be negative about these two faiths.Dzheremi ~ Why Me is a Catholic/Mormon fence sitter. Why Me “goes both ways”, you might say.This is what you can expect from such a person.
Why Me, I don’t have to believe that the Mormon Church might be “true” to enjoy the goodness of people. I do enjoy the goodness of people, and out in the world, I do as much as I can to contribute to that goodness.I don’t think that I am a fence sitter but I do see good in both faiths and because of this I cannot be negative about these two faiths.
I am rather active in my parish and at times I make good contributions to a Mormon sunday school or priesthood class. I just enjoy the goodness of people and if they are mormon or catholic doesn’t really matter.
You should try this approach. It certainly would bring a more peaceful section of the forum if more people would do it.
I myself have seen and participated in many healings after laying on of hands. There is no doubt that these keys have been restored. “It is a wicked and adulterous generation that seeks after signs”. We don’t talk about such things typically.This is a good question.
In the OT God led the Jews out of Egypt with many great signs and wonders.
He continued to show His power through His prophets.
In the NT Jesus also showed his power as through the many healings He performed - These we performed publically.
Jesus Apostles likewise showed remarkable powers.
If the Mormon view is correct, that the Apostolic Line is restored through Joseph Smith, shouldn’t we have evidence of this through healings and possbily even the raising of the dead? I would expect this especially from JS since “God Chose Him to Restore His Church” through him. After all, God established both the Old Covenant and the New Covenant with many great signs and wonders.
Peace
James
You could have said a lot of things, that is true.Charitable bukowski, in attributing the response I was responding to as a lack of comprehension. I could just say it was something other, ie, a purposeful attempt to make a person look as though they are persecuting Mormons.
I understand it is possible that the persecution angle is preferable to you.
dzheremi;4753727:
I agree.. Many people want a church that conforms to what they want to believe. This thinking is backwards, at least if you want to worship God.
We should all join churches we disagree with. That is the true path to salvation.
Dang. I guess I better join Catholicism. I really disagree with that one.
The only problem is that this means you should be a Mormon!
Actually it’s for pronunciation. My name is Mike, but a very good friend gave me the Nick Name megus a long time ago.I find your name instructive because the capitalized letters spell ME
It would seem that you have embraced a faith that is all about YOU and becoming a GOD. How very interesting.![]()
Some around here will pick on anything they can find. I guess she couldn’t find a flaw with your posts, so she went for the name.Actually it’s for pronunciation. My name is Mike, but a very good friend gave me the Nick Name megus a long time ago.
Most people who only read the name pronounce it meg us
The pronunciation is me like ME then gus. That is why I spell it that way. Nothing more, nothing less.
MEgus
OK James, I can buy that argument, but tell me, in Aramaic, just how would Christ have distinguished the difference between an actual rock and the Rock that is spoken of when talking of God?The Greek argument simply doesn’t hold up.
Since Jesus spoke Aramaic, and there is no distinction in Aramaic between large ans small Rock it is safe to assume that Jesus used the word Kepha in both places. The Greek uses the two different words for grammatical reasons if undertand correctly.
But Jesus spoke Aramaic, therefore Rock means Rock and the grammatical issues from the Greek do not come into play.
Jesus named Simon “Rock” - Kepha or Cephas as it is rendered elswhere in the Bible.
Don’t feel bad though because this is a common error.
Also:
Thanks for your prayers.
She is home now and we’re doing OK. - So far
Peace
James
MelanieAnne;4754152:
disagree with that one.I agree.
We should all join churches we disagree with. That is the true path to salvation.
Dang. I guess I better join Catholicism. I really
The only problem is that this means you should be a Mormon!
You don’t get it Bukowski.
But then, you’re a Mormon, so I guess you just CAN’T?
No Bukowski, it’s just instructive because Mormonism is all about making religion all about what you want it to be. The ME religion?Some around here will pick on anything they can find. I guess she couldn’t find a flaw with your posts, so she went for the name.![]()
This may have been answered already, but I’d like to point out that first you have to distinguish what you mean by “Church.”Now Bill, lets look at this. Did the Lord start his Church in 33 AD?
Or did he restore his Church that was started with Adam?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believe that the Lord’s Church was started with Adam. That through the years it fell into apostasy many times and was restored again and again by Prophets after the people went astray.
We believe that at the time of Moses things had gone so far wrong that Moses was only able to restore the lessor portion of the Church that was to point to Christ and his restoration of the Church to the fullness when he came.
So, I ask you again, Did the Lord start his Church in 33 AD, or with Adam?
MEgus
Maybe a better thought would be, why are we here? Do you think that the purpose of man was different before Christ came into the world than after he came?This may have been answered already, but I’d like to point out that first you have to distinguish what you mean by “Church.”
Mormons seem to believe that the full Christian church was established with Adam, and this is what was apostatized from. Mormons need to first prove this premise.
A quick question along those lines for Mormons: was there anything at all significant about Jesus coming in a particular point in time? Did he change anything with his Incarnation, death, and Resurrection? Was there any difference at all before he came and after he came?
If there was any difference, then it seems to me that the premise that the church was founded with Adam needs to at least be qualified–for something changed when Christ came. If there is no difference, then Mormons have an even more difficult case to argue for in order to demonstrate this premise, for it essentially claims that Christ’s Life meant or did nothing.