Joseph Smith and the Need for the Restoration

  • Thread starter Thread starter thecourt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
twopekinguys said:
I have heard it said in a similar way.

Basically that the Church went into apostacy after the death of the last apostle. I am taking that to mean that there wasn’t anyone to lead the church, so it fell into apostacy.

Using that reasoning, then the mormon church has had their own apostacy.

Several times in the early years of their church, they were without a leader.

I found this site (pro-mormon site) that shows a couple of gaps in their leadership.

moroni10.com/apostles-chronology.html

Check it out.
Click to expand...
To be fair, the dogma is that upon the death of the “prophet” all authority (“keys of the priesthood”) goes back to the Qurom of the 12. They all hold it equally. So no, there really isnt a gap

I do know Mormonism, at least what it was from the 80’s into the 90’s. I lived, breathed it. Studied deeply.

The changes since, those I would be less familiar with
 
I am a staunch Catholic however I am not one to condemn something without properly researching it first. I own a copy of the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine and Covenants and have read them all cover to cover. Here is my take.

Let’s say that the angel Moroni really did come and give Joseph Smith the location of the Seer Stones and the plates. So he translated them and brought the Book of Mormon to the world. The angel Moroni told Joseph that after translating the Book of Mormon he would have no further revelations. But somehow here comes the Pearl of Great Price with its silly translations of Egyptian Papyrus (I study Egyptology too by the way). The actual pictures of it depict an Egyptian funeral service not Abraham being sacrificed to some made up god named Elknah. The Egyptians never practiced human sacrifice in a religious sense. Then of course the DOC which were personal revelations from God to Joseph Smith and other Prophets of the LDS church.

So even if the BOM was a true testament to Jesus Christ. Then Joseph Smith did a grave injustice to God because Moroni told him this would be the only revelations he would ever get was in the translating of the BOM. It’s right in Joseph Smith history. So what it boils down too is these 4 options.

A. Joseph Smith was a con artist heretic plain and simple

B.The Book of Mormon is true but the true message was lost due to Joseph Smiths New translations and revelations that he was never supposed to get in the first place thus contradicting his own history.

C. Joseph Smith was a psychotic who really believed all this happened

D. Its all true. LDS are the light of the world and are leading us to salvation.

I am leaning heavily towards A or C. Maybe even B a tiny bit, but D not at all. That should sum it up for all those interested.
 
thecourt said:
When Joseph Smith was seeking which church to join, if the true church existed at the time, there would have not been a need for a restoration. In 1820, he went into the grove of trees in upstate New York to pray asking which church he should join. I emphasize, it was not his intent to restore Christ’s church – he was seeking a answer to his place.

God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him, telling him that he should not join any of the churches that existed — Protestant and Catholic churches. Eventually the restoration of the priesthood took place and the true church of Jesus Christ was organized, restoring the true church of Jesus Christ.

Now I ask again, if Catholicism’s profession of being the true church were accurate, why would God the Father and Jesus Christ tell Joseph Smith not to join any church?
Click to expand...
I suppose there is corruption in every church denomination though, so it could be said for everyone that at some point we all kind of think “Which church is right?”
 
Marie5890 said:
To be fair, the dogma is that upon the death of the “prophet” all authority (“keys of the priesthood”) goes back to the Qurom of the 12. They all hold it equally. So no, there really isnt a gap

I do know Mormonism, at least what it was from the 80’s into the 90’s. I lived, breathed it. Studied deeply.

The changes since, those I would be less familiar with
Click to expand...
That’s interesting. I didn’t know that. Did they have the Quorum of the 12 back in the beginning?

But, following that reasoning, the same thing happens when the Pope dies. There is still the magesterium guiding the Church, until the successor is found.
 
benidict said:
good morning lambofgodgirly. could you plz give us a source for this claim. not saying you are wrong. i just have never heard this before. but ive been wrong before with the sda. i thought they were prolife too. and apparently they are not. thank you. God bless you and yours.🙂
Click to expand...
Hey Benidict! … click additional information after you click the link below, and read along…very surprising!! this came directly from their official website.
God Bless, Alisha
lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.js…004d82620aRCRD

from the link above:
Church leaders have said that some **exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, **such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer.:eek:
Click to expand...
 
PaulDupre said:
Wow, why me, eight posts in a row (202-209)! That must be a record!
Click to expand...
I am just a geezer who doesn’t know how to use the quotation button well. I still haven’t figured it out yet. I am not very computer savvy. But yea, I think that it must be a catholic answer record. 🙂

At the moment, I may be catching swine flu but hopefully it is just the regular flu. Say a prayer for why me. My area is gripped by swine flu.
 
djkane01220 said:
I am leaning heavily towards A or C. Maybe even B a tiny bit, but D not at all. That should sum it up for all those interested.
Click to expand...
If it were only Joseph Smith, you would have a better case. But we also must include the other 11 witnesses to the book of mormon who never denied their testimony of what they saw or felt with their hands. And then of course we have Emma who always claimed that her husband Joseph could not have wrote the book of mormon without her knowing it. I tend to believe her. Even after her husband was murdered by the mob, she still taught her children from the book of mormon.

And then if we include that someone else wrote it, for example, sidney rigdon, that would make another accomplice who on his deathbed claimed that he did not write it. So we have at least 13 people who would have needed to be in on the con. And that is quite a lot of people who never denied what they claimed or testified.

It is not that simple of Joseph acting alone, if he were a fraudster or con artist.
 
why_me said:
If it were only Joseph Smith, you would have a better case. But we also must include the other 11 witnesses to the book of mormon who never denied their testimony of what they saw or felt with their hands. And then of course we have Emma who always claimed that her husband Joseph could not have wrote the book of mormon without her knowing it. I tend to believe her. Even after her husband was murdered by the mob, she still taught her children from the book of mormon.

And then if we include that someone else wrote it, for example, sidney rigdon, that would make another accomplice who on his deathbed claimed that he did not write it. So we have at least 13 people who would have needed to be in on the con. And that is quite a lot of people who never denied what they claimed or testified.

It is not that simple of Joseph acting alone, if he were a fraudster or con artist.
Click to expand...
There you go again.

We have in the past given you plenty of evidence that individual witnesses denied their testimonies of the Book of Mormon or claimed they only saw it with their “spiritual eyes”, etc. The only people I believe were in on the con were Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdrey, Sidney Rigdon and possibly Emma Smith. There is plenty of evidence that Oliver Cowdrey denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon as we have previously exhibited. Your denial of that evidence doesn’t change the reality.
 
jakasaki said:
Bump for an answer please.

What was Smith’s religion before this vision.
Click to expand...
There is no evidence he formally affiliated with any church though he did try to become a Methodist and was rejected.
 
twopekinguys said:
That’s interesting. I didn’t know that. Did they have the Quorum of the 12 back in the beginning?

But, following that reasoning, the same thing happens when the Pope dies. There is still the magesterium guiding the Church, until the successor is found.
Click to expand...
Yes they did, that is why the first split happened after Smith was killed. Young felt as the senior apostle that the he was next in line to become the prophet. Smith son, Smith 3rd, believed he was next in line…

Hence the birth of the RLDS headed by Smith 3rd, known knowns as the Church of Christ (or something like that)
 
Marie5890 said:
Yes they did, that is why the first split happened after Smith was killed. Young felt as the senior apostle that the he was next in line to become the prophet. Smith son, Smith 3rd, believed he was next in line…

Hence the birth of the RLDS headed by Smith 3rd, known knowns as the Church of Christ (or something like that)
Click to expand...
Isn’t that also where the Strangeites came from also? I think they were in Wisconsin.
 
Catholic20064 said:
There you go again.

We have in the past given you plenty of evidence that individual witnesses denied their testimonies of the Book of Mormon or claimed they only saw it with their “spiritual eyes”, etc. The only people I believe were in on the con were Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdrey, Sidney Rigdon and possibly Emma Smith. There is plenty of evidence that Oliver Cowdrey denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon as we have previously exhibited. Your denial of that evidence doesn’t change the reality.
Click to expand...
Im guessing Why Me hasnt studied that part of Mormon history. Or choses to ignore it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top