B
Brad_Haas
Guest
I believe the ones I mentioned in post #10 in this thread.
- Status
I
IanS
Guest
amgid:
I’m going to try and start over fresh here. Like I told Mormon-fool, I didn’t want to get into just throwing a lot of scripture at each other. Most of what you’ve quoted has already been beaten to death. And again, says nothing about these being new prophets of the new covenant, or any hint of what they were prophesizing about or that it in anyway contradicted the teachings of Jesus Christ through His ministry. None of it either states even implicitly that another prophet is going to reveal a whole new book of truths that Jesus is somehow just not capable of revealing for another 1800 years or so. It also does not state that Jesus will make another covenant with someone else after the covenant he made for us in his blood.
Jesus chose the time of his death. Being perfect in all ways he would not have left his Church in err. He revealed the fullness of truth before his ascension. Pentecost did not reveal any facts to His apostles or his mother that they did not already know through His ministry. It gave them the courage and power to evangelize, even unto death.
I have never said that apostles are more important than prophets. We are all equal in dignity in the eyes of God. However, Jesus did appoint them to be the first Bishops of his Church and gave them total authority in carrying on his ministry, making Peter his first vicar. Remember, this was done by Jesus himself, and was not some kind of “angelic ministration”. Are you saying that angelic ministration holds authority over Jesus Christ himself? Are you sure as to what kind of angel did this?
Any legitimate visionaries, mystics, Saints and yes, “prophets” (I know there is a definition difference) in the Catholic Church have never revealed anything outside of the fullness of truth as given to us by Jesus. Anything else, and the person would have to be either delusional or listening to someone/something other than Jesus.
Otherwise, what stops anyone from saying anything and writing any book, and then call themselves “prophet”.
By the way, I don’t think you comments to CreosMary were very uncharitable. He was trying to be honest and transparent. When you resort to getting personal, it just makes you sound desperate.
I’m going to try and start over fresh here. Like I told Mormon-fool, I didn’t want to get into just throwing a lot of scripture at each other. Most of what you’ve quoted has already been beaten to death. And again, says nothing about these being new prophets of the new covenant, or any hint of what they were prophesizing about or that it in anyway contradicted the teachings of Jesus Christ through His ministry. None of it either states even implicitly that another prophet is going to reveal a whole new book of truths that Jesus is somehow just not capable of revealing for another 1800 years or so. It also does not state that Jesus will make another covenant with someone else after the covenant he made for us in his blood.
Jesus chose the time of his death. Being perfect in all ways he would not have left his Church in err. He revealed the fullness of truth before his ascension. Pentecost did not reveal any facts to His apostles or his mother that they did not already know through His ministry. It gave them the courage and power to evangelize, even unto death.
I have never said that apostles are more important than prophets. We are all equal in dignity in the eyes of God. However, Jesus did appoint them to be the first Bishops of his Church and gave them total authority in carrying on his ministry, making Peter his first vicar. Remember, this was done by Jesus himself, and was not some kind of “angelic ministration”. Are you saying that angelic ministration holds authority over Jesus Christ himself? Are you sure as to what kind of angel did this?
Any legitimate visionaries, mystics, Saints and yes, “prophets” (I know there is a definition difference) in the Catholic Church have never revealed anything outside of the fullness of truth as given to us by Jesus. Anything else, and the person would have to be either delusional or listening to someone/something other than Jesus.
Otherwise, what stops anyone from saying anything and writing any book, and then call themselves “prophet”.
By the way, I don’t think you comments to CreosMary were very uncharitable. He was trying to be honest and transparent. When you resort to getting personal, it just makes you sound desperate.
M
majick275
Guest
This tells no such thing. This tells us that those SPIRITUAL GIFTS are to continue. They certainly do in the RCC. This never establishes an OFFICE of prophet any more than the office of a miracle worker. Your continuance only goes to PROVE this. We see multiple prophets, and of special interest prophetesses! This certainly bears no resemblance to the LDS structure of 15 Apostles who are all prophets but only one of which is authorized to prophesy for the church.
I also find it hard to swallow that on the one hand the LDS want to claim divine benefit of direct revelation leading their church through the prophet but when he is exposed as a teacher of false doctrine or just plain wrong (mistaken, whatever) or in the case of GBH he just doesn’t know… Then we get the “only a prophet when acting as such”, not infallible, etc. Either the revelations to the church as a whole come from God without error or they do not. The test of “when moved upon by the Holy Ghost” is subjective at best. The canonization of revelation into scripture isn’t even a good indicator as LDS scriptures have added and removed and edited whole sections of scripture as doctrines have changed.
I’m here to tell you the prophets “new clothes” are not what they seem and you DO need to pay attention to the man behind the curtain.
False prophets have led a manmade religion in all manner of blasphemies. It’s called the CoJCoLDS.
C
CreosMary
Guest
I was merely stating what I was taught, factual or otherwise, and actually at the time (1975) there were no mormon charities. I think because the LDS are continually changing and altering thier belief systems, doctrines and structures it’s hard to make sense of any of thier history.
God Bless
C
CreosMary
Guest
Thank you IanS,
As for following your discussion on prophets/esy I would think the concept of what a prophet is; that is the sticking point.
We all know the Church teaches that there is no more public revelation after the death of the Last Apostle of Christ’s time, that all is revealed in Christ, so no doctrine can be changed on faith and morals.
The Catholic Church has done this with the aid of the Paraclete, however prophecy can also mean to ‘renew and refresh’ to bring the faithful back to the source’ to remind the world of the truth of Christ and the Gospel. This our Popes have always done and especially John Paul II, the Great, and as is becoming to known…the great Apostle.
Warnings of false prophets refer to people who try to lead people astray with new and disgusting doctrines, those that declare themselves to be prophets outside of the Holy Catholic Church.
The question raised by ‘mormonfool’, Bless him, that the Catholic Church has had no prophets is a silliness. The Holiness of the saints creates a humility which would never allow themselves to be called prophets, the Church calls them Doctors of the Faith, Defenders of the Faith, Matyrs etc. They truly do serve in a prohetic way as do the Popes in revitalising the Church and giving encouragement to the faithful. if you read the Old Testament, this was the main job of a Prophet.
God Bless
As for following your discussion on prophets/esy I would think the concept of what a prophet is; that is the sticking point.
We all know the Church teaches that there is no more public revelation after the death of the Last Apostle of Christ’s time, that all is revealed in Christ, so no doctrine can be changed on faith and morals.
The Catholic Church has done this with the aid of the Paraclete, however prophecy can also mean to ‘renew and refresh’ to bring the faithful back to the source’ to remind the world of the truth of Christ and the Gospel. This our Popes have always done and especially John Paul II, the Great, and as is becoming to known…the great Apostle.
Warnings of false prophets refer to people who try to lead people astray with new and disgusting doctrines, those that declare themselves to be prophets outside of the Holy Catholic Church.
The question raised by ‘mormonfool’, Bless him, that the Catholic Church has had no prophets is a silliness. The Holiness of the saints creates a humility which would never allow themselves to be called prophets, the Church calls them Doctors of the Faith, Defenders of the Faith, Matyrs etc. They truly do serve in a prohetic way as do the Popes in revitalising the Church and giving encouragement to the faithful. if you read the Old Testament, this was the main job of a Prophet.
God Bless
M
mormon_fool
Guest
Creos,
I don’t mean to single you out, in fact I think your last post has some very good ideas in it, but sheesh :ehh: your entry post presents such a distorted view of mormonism! I won’t question whether you had some experiences being taught the things related to what you claim, but I would hope you update your understanding when factual information arises that presents a clearer picture.
I won’t even try to explain what my understanding of religious matters was when I was 13, because it would be embarrassing. It would say more about me than the church. I hope we can all realize the limitations of trying to recall teachings and conversations over 30 years after the fact. With all that said, I understand that you were giving a history of your inspiring personal journey and not necessarily trying to represent the teachings of the LDS church. I just don’t want other posters to get any wrong ideas where the church stands and has stood in the past.
I hope you will allow me to clarify:
The mormon church has always had charities since its beginning. I have a hard time thinking any sane LDS would teach otherwise. I will not belabor this point or get in a position to where I have to start boasting by posting links that can be easily googled. Chele has already addressed this and you responded, so I consider it a dead issue. Let me mention that I highly respect Catholic charities as well. Thanks for all the good that your church does.
An LDS thinking that the church stores money in some underground vault is ludicrous :whacky:. After reading the David O. McKay’s (an LDS prophet) biography that covered most of the 50’s and 60’s, I understand that it it is all the church can to do to stay out of debt and maintain the need for new buildings due to rapid growth, its welfare program, its humanitarian aid, its education program, etc., etc.
I have only seen the Catholic church being referred to as being “of the devil” in print once and that book was censored by David
O. McKay, who apologized to the SLC Catholic bishop at the time. I can’t say how common this folk teaching may have been, but perhaps some memory augmentation is taking place as the aforementioned book is frequently cited by catholic apologists?
There is only one sin that is unpardonable in the LDS church, and it is not the one you mention. It is inconceivable that any LDS would teach otherwise. Admit it, you exagerated that for shock value
Nevertheless that particular sin is strongly discouraged in the LDS church, and I can imagine how it can be a difficult struggle for a young man.
If you would have waited 3 years, you would have rejoiced with the rest of LDS church, when the priesthood ban was lifted via revelation to the prophet. You may be interested in an article I helped write for FAIR that puts it in perspective.
later,
fool
I don’t mean to single you out, in fact I think your last post has some very good ideas in it, but sheesh :ehh: your entry post presents such a distorted view of mormonism! I won’t question whether you had some experiences being taught the things related to what you claim, but I would hope you update your understanding when factual information arises that presents a clearer picture.
I won’t even try to explain what my understanding of religious matters was when I was 13, because it would be embarrassing. It would say more about me than the church. I hope we can all realize the limitations of trying to recall teachings and conversations over 30 years after the fact. With all that said, I understand that you were giving a history of your inspiring personal journey and not necessarily trying to represent the teachings of the LDS church. I just don’t want other posters to get any wrong ideas where the church stands and has stood in the past.
I hope you will allow me to clarify:
The mormon church has always had charities since its beginning. I have a hard time thinking any sane LDS would teach otherwise. I will not belabor this point or get in a position to where I have to start boasting by posting links that can be easily googled. Chele has already addressed this and you responded, so I consider it a dead issue. Let me mention that I highly respect Catholic charities as well. Thanks for all the good that your church does.
An LDS thinking that the church stores money in some underground vault is ludicrous :whacky:. After reading the David O. McKay’s (an LDS prophet) biography that covered most of the 50’s and 60’s, I understand that it it is all the church can to do to stay out of debt and maintain the need for new buildings due to rapid growth, its welfare program, its humanitarian aid, its education program, etc., etc.
I have only seen the Catholic church being referred to as being “of the devil” in print once and that book was censored by David
O. McKay, who apologized to the SLC Catholic bishop at the time. I can’t say how common this folk teaching may have been, but perhaps some memory augmentation is taking place as the aforementioned book is frequently cited by catholic apologists?
There is only one sin that is unpardonable in the LDS church, and it is not the one you mention. It is inconceivable that any LDS would teach otherwise. Admit it, you exagerated that for shock value
Nevertheless that particular sin is strongly discouraged in the LDS church, and I can imagine how it can be a difficult struggle for a young man.If you would have waited 3 years, you would have rejoiced with the rest of LDS church, when the priesthood ban was lifted via revelation to the prophet. You may be interested in an article I helped write for FAIR that puts it in perspective.
later,
fool
C
CreosMary
Guest
Dear ‘mormonfool’
Thank you for your updates, but I can only reiterate the very words that were taught me in the one year I was with the mormons. I can remember them from 30 years ago as they had such a profound impact on me that I left behind any belief in any religion, and as I said, chose the dark path until 1998.
I also told my mother who can attest to my comments as accurate. I am not saying that that is what lds teaches but it is what I was taught and the other youngsters with me, of whom all, by the way, left as well.
I am comfortable at home In the RCC, all my questions have been answered and continue to be answered, we were bought up athiest, my mother too has since converted to a non-denominational christianity.
The Holy Catholic Church feeds me, nurtures me and urges me to holiness, although I have a long way to go with that.
God Bless
Thank you for your updates, but I can only reiterate the very words that were taught me in the one year I was with the mormons. I can remember them from 30 years ago as they had such a profound impact on me that I left behind any belief in any religion, and as I said, chose the dark path until 1998.
I also told my mother who can attest to my comments as accurate. I am not saying that that is what lds teaches but it is what I was taught and the other youngsters with me, of whom all, by the way, left as well.
I am comfortable at home In the RCC, all my questions have been answered and continue to be answered, we were bought up athiest, my mother too has since converted to a non-denominational christianity.
The Holy Catholic Church feeds me, nurtures me and urges me to holiness, although I have a long way to go with that.
God Bless
M
mormon_fool
Guest
Ian,
Thanks for your responses that exhibit a good mix of charity, humor, and intelligence.
IanS:
Thanks for your patience when we cover some of the same ground.
66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
Thanks for the documentation you provide. Where is it from?
–fool
Thanks for your responses that exhibit a good mix of charity, humor, and intelligence.
What I thought Amgid was rescuing me! We like to play Good Cop, Bad Cop. Just kidding
Thanks for your patience when we cover some of the same ground.In addition to Brad’s link, another Catholic named Sean Hadley, (If I remember right, he was a firefighter, too) pointed the following out to me a number of years ago:
66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
Code:
**[67](http://javascript%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/redface.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Embarrassment%22%20smilieid=%222%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3EpenWindow%28%27cr/67.htm%27%29;)** Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the *sensus fidelium* knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".Well we (meaning mormons) like see the LDS church as a restoration of Christ’s covenant. But even if it is termed another covenant we wouldn’t put Joseph Smith above Christ, since we (meaning mormons) feel that Smith was acting under the direction of Christ. I can see where the success or failure of an organization Christ set up might be viewed as a reflection of Christ’s capabilities, but then again what seem like short term setbacks can ultimately be overcome.
I don’t claim any authority, in fact earlier in the thread I wrote that I do not speak for the LDS church. In the case you cite, the “us” was only inclusive of those LDS members who would agree with what I wrote (although everyone else is welcome to agree). I will try to be more careful with pronouns in the future.
Thanks for the documentation you provide. Where is it from?
Your source affirms some of what Amgid and I have said with an important difference (more on this later). First the gift of apostlehip gets “pride of place” and includes the others. As we (Amgid and I) have noted this makes apostles also prophets as well as gives them priority over those contemporary prophets who are not apostles in the NT church. Now an important difference is that the commentary is focused on the gifts rather than what the persons properly administering these gifts were called. Seen this way, the transition from the original apostles to the bishops is more seemless, if bishops can assume prophetic and apostolic perogatives and gifts. However this is seen as usurption to LDS (not that this makes it so)!
–fool
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
Just got back from our Penance service, just read through some of these posts. I can’t help but think about what I just went through with my oldest son. He was behind me waiting as well to see Christ, to be with Christ, to be forgiven once again for the baggage of many months. As I stood in our Chapel waiting to go in a friend who was in front of me quietly showed me a crucifix and a small cross. His son died about a year ago under tragic circumstances, he was not Christian but he had a father who became one about 2 short years ago here in Northern Utah. As his son was dying at 22 years of age he talked about Christ with him, but he seemed not to be interested. His father would ask us to pray for his son each Thursday at our weekly Bible study. The Crucifix and cross that he showed me some how found its way to his sons neck and wall. His father found these on the night that his son passed away. His son apparently got it and he let his father know. My son who just came out of the air force is also 22 years old. All I can say is tonight was a night to behold. To prepare for the coming of Christ, to be in the Church of Christ with His healing power in every corner of our Parish. Advent is here and Christ-Mas is coming. We must always remember what we have been given, again on this night, with my witness to Christ Jesus, with him and His forgiveness and love wants me only to pass on this message so that maybe you can all think about what you are doing and why you are doing it. I myself have found myself very close to my Savior, His love for me is un ending. He loved me before I found Him, He loved me before I went to confession tonight, He will love me tomorrow. I found this Jesus, this Love in the Catholic Church, but I knew it even before. Our Church is for the fallen, for the sinner who acknowledge this sin and ask to be healed from it until death, where we will be free from it forever. Not by anything we do, only because of what Christ has done, is doing for us. When you can find the Ocean you will leave the pond behind, this is not pride speaking here, this is from the heart of a fairly new Catholic. Place Christ above all things, mostly yourself, you will never become a God, but in Christ you will find God, only when you allow Him to be who he is will you find your maker.
God Bless
Have a great Christmas
Go to Mass on Christmas, it is Christmas, it’s not Christmas with out the Mass
God Bless
Have a great Christmas
Go to Mass on Christmas, it is Christmas, it’s not Christmas with out the Mass
M
mormon_fool
Guest
This is precisely my intent when I preface something with “I think”. I don’t want to come across as dictating ultimate truth because I know we all approach things with different assumptions. I do try to provide reasoning for my thinking in attempt to be persuasive, I don’t like making unsupported assertions.
You are absolutely right that Jesus warned about Joseph Smith and gave a test for detecting true and false prophets ('by their fruits ye shall know them"). A logical implementation of Jesus’s warning is that we can’t just dismiss prophets in the “last days” merely because they claim to be so. I understand though that it would take a lot of time hunting down every self-proclaimed prophet and applying Jesus’s methodology. So if someone doesn’t feel spiritually prompted to thoroughly investigate a prophet’s fruits, I suppose they are off the hook.
Thanks for sharing your inspirational journey, I admire anyone who can take a position of faith after heavy exposure to athiesm. I am happy to see you have put much intellectual and prayerful effort into your search. May God continue to direct your path as you grow in the faith. I am glad to help.
Don’t say that :bowdown:. I think I am learning a lot about Catholicism on the thread. I do have some interest in how apocolyptic literature treats the description of prophets in Rev. 11 as well as Catholic commentary. Please hook me up if you can.
–fool
M
mormon_fool
Guest
mormon fool:
.
–fool
Whoops, upon further review I have not remembered correctly. Mr. Hadley wasn’t a firefighter. I might have a problem with this memory augmentation thingie
.–fool
A
amgid
Guest
It is scripture that defines Christian doctrine. You can’t seriously discuss Christian doctrine by sidestepping scripture. If you feel uncomfortable about using scripture to define or discuss Christian doctrine, then you are heading down the wrong track.
I am not aware that it has been, and what you have said doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
I think it does say that there will be prophets in the new covenant, and it also gives some clues as to what kinds of things they were prophesying about.
I am sure they didn’t contradict the teachings of Jesus. Who said they did?
Jesus was capable of revealing it. That is where it came from. The revelation came from Him. As for the timing of it, that remains with the Lord. He chooses His own time to do things, not us.
He hasn’t made “another covenant with someone else”. It is a restoration and renewal of the original covenant.
He didn’t “leave his church in error”. His church apostatized form His truths.
His church later apostatized from His truths.
I do! All men are equal in the sight of God; but the office of an Apostle is a higher office in the Church than that of a prophet.
You are jumping into an entirely different ball game now. Peter and the other Apostles were never appointed bishops of anything, and there is no evidence in scripture or in secular history that they ever were.
Joseph Smith had to be ordained by somebody, and the Lord appointed His angels to ordain him.
Yes, they were Peter, James and John who came and ordained him.
As I said before, the early Christian church apostatized, therefore the gospel, with its priesthood and ordinances, had to be resorted again to the earth…
That is just a cheap escape rout for rejecting the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.
You tell me! You can bring that objection against any prophet (including Jesus) who has ever lived.
Well, I don’t have anything against him personally, and I respect his decision to choose for himself whatever religion he wishes. My comment related to his ludicrous statements about the LDS Church, not to himself or his religion.
amgid
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
I
IanS
Guest
Thanks for getting back to me. The reference I used above comes from The New American Bible. It’s the footnotes regarding that passage on the same page as the passage.
I know I got after amgid a bit. But I don’t want you to think I automatically believe any rumor I hear about another faith (even if I do have a little fun with it). God knows there have been plenty about Catholics in the past 2000 years. In fact, there was a rumor started by the Romans about early Christians not sacrificing simple gifts of bread and wine on the altar, but babies, and then they would drink his or her blood. Many thousands of Christians were put to death because of this lie.
I also remember when I was in high school, there was a LDS girl in my class. She was one of the nicest and prettiest girls in the whole school. None of the boys would ever ask her out because the was a vicious rumor going around that since she was Mormon, her parents had a bar surgically implanted in her vagina to keep her from having sex until she was out of school and married. I never believed it, and it used to make me very angry that people would say things like that about her. However, I never did asker her out. Not because of the rumor, but I just couldn’t imagine her bringing home an atheistic, Marlboro smoking, little party animal punk like me to her parents.
mormon fool:
In the case of a prophet, the same would apply. If the all the prophets claims come true he would be a “good” prophet and would fulfill his intended purpose. Otherwise, he would be something less than good or even false. Just a bit of scripture here:
Deuteronomy, chapter 18:21-22
And if you say in your heart, `How may we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ – when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him.
I have to admit I still know very little about the LDS compared to you, but what prophecies of Joseph Smith have come true, which ones have not?
I know I got after amgid a bit. But I don’t want you to think I automatically believe any rumor I hear about another faith (even if I do have a little fun with it). God knows there have been plenty about Catholics in the past 2000 years. In fact, there was a rumor started by the Romans about early Christians not sacrificing simple gifts of bread and wine on the altar, but babies, and then they would drink his or her blood. Many thousands of Christians were put to death because of this lie.
I also remember when I was in high school, there was a LDS girl in my class. She was one of the nicest and prettiest girls in the whole school. None of the boys would ever ask her out because the was a vicious rumor going around that since she was Mormon, her parents had a bar surgically implanted in her vagina to keep her from having sex until she was out of school and married. I never believed it, and it used to make me very angry that people would say things like that about her. However, I never did asker her out. Not because of the rumor, but I just couldn’t imagine her bringing home an atheistic, Marlboro smoking, little party animal punk like me to her parents.
mormon fool:
Interesting that you quote Matthew 7:15-20 and Luke 6:43-4. I’ve seen this also used to refute Joseph Smith. I guess it depends on what the LDS considers to be “good fruit”. It’s a pretty broad test. Let’s consider the definition of good. Something is only considered “good” if it is able to fully fulfill the purpose for which it is intended, even in the secular world. If I am selling a car and I say it has a “good” transmission, the buyer would assume it fully fulfills its intended purpose; which is to transfer the power of the motor to wheels with all gears working and shifting perfectly. If it only worked in reverse, I doubt the buyer would agree with my “good transmission” claim, even if it does still transfer power.
In the case of a prophet, the same would apply. If the all the prophets claims come true he would be a “good” prophet and would fulfill his intended purpose. Otherwise, he would be something less than good or even false. Just a bit of scripture here:
Deuteronomy, chapter 18:21-22
And if you say in your heart, `How may we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ – when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him.
I have to admit I still know very little about the LDS compared to you, but what prophecies of Joseph Smith have come true, which ones have not?
I
IanS
Guest
mormon fool:
*Every prophecy, therefore, which my Father has pronounced
concerning the sons of men, must be fulfilled in every particular. But with reference to Enoch and Elias, and how they remain alive to this day, keeping the same bodies with which they were born; and as to what concerns my father Joseph, who has not been allowed as well as they to remain in the body: indeed, though a man live in the world many myriads of years, nevertheless at some time or other he is compelled to exchange life for death. And I say to you, O my brethren, that they also, Enoch and Elias,(1) must towards the end of time return into the world and die–in the day, namely, of commotion, of terror, of perplexity, and affliction. For the Antichrist will slay four bodies, and will pour out their blood like water, because of the reproach to which they shall expose him, and the ignominy with which they, in their lifetime, shall brand him when they reveal his
impiety.
The apocryphal writing I was referring to is, “ The History of Joseph the Carpenter”. Although this was not canonized by the Catholic Church, does not mean there is no truth contained in it. It was most likely not canonized because its more about Joseph that the ministry of Jesus, just like the Gospel of Mary. They also do not fall outside of the teachings of Jesus. However, you need to be careful when reading apocryphal writings. There are some about the childhood of Jesus that were originally written in Hebrew. They were fist discovered and translated into Latin by the Gnostics who grossly mistranslated them to meet their own theology. The false translations are pretty obvious. In any case this is what “ The History of Joseph the Carpenter” has to say about Enoch and Elias:
*Every prophecy, therefore, which my Father has pronounced
concerning the sons of men, must be fulfilled in every particular. But with reference to Enoch and Elias, and how they remain alive to this day, keeping the same bodies with which they were born; and as to what concerns my father Joseph, who has not been allowed as well as they to remain in the body: indeed, though a man live in the world many myriads of years, nevertheless at some time or other he is compelled to exchange life for death. And I say to you, O my brethren, that they also, Enoch and Elias,(1) must towards the end of time return into the world and die–in the day, namely, of commotion, of terror, of perplexity, and affliction. For the Antichrist will slay four bodies, and will pour out their blood like water, because of the reproach to which they shall expose him, and the ignominy with which they, in their lifetime, shall brand him when they reveal his
impiety.
32. And we (apostles) said: O our Lord, our God and Savoir, who are those four whom Thou hast said Antichrist will cut off from the reproach they bring upon him? The Lord answered: They are Enoch, Elias, Schila, and Tabitha.(2) When we heard this from our Savior, we rejoiced and exulted; and we offered all glory and thanksgiving to the Lord God, and our Savior Jesus Christ. He it is to whom is due glory, honor, dignity, dominion, power, and praise, as well as to the good Father with Him, and to the Holy Spirit that giveth life, henceforth and in all time for evermore. Amen.*
I
IanS
Guest
I’ll deal with you later, but now I have to get some work done.
By the way, good job on the whole “bad cop” thing.
However, you are coming off as a little frustrated. I don’t want things to get nasty here.
I
IanS
Guest
You totally don’t understand me here. I am in no way am uncomfortable with using scripture in dialogue as I think I’ve already proven. I just want to have intelligent dialogue. It’s clear that the LDS has taken the liberty to intemperate scripture in contrast to what the Magisterium of the Catholic Church has taught for 2000 years. I can’t help that.
What clues? Again, this is just what you think. Which unfortunately holds about as much water as a colander with me.
I’m glad you agree
Again, no evidence of this in Sacred Scripture, Sacred Traditions, early Christians, historical documents, archeological findings or anything.
Is His church not the body of his believers? In order to support your claim you would need a complete apostasy. That is, to have **every ** Christian turn away from the truth and give up their faith. What evidence is there of this happening? Again, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Traditions, early Christians, historical documents Church Fathers, archeological/scientific findings or anything. If there is one faithul member of that body left on Earth His Church cannot apostatize.
Wow! I can’t believe you walked into that one. There is tons of scripture to support that. Along with volume after volume of the early church fathers.
As you told me, there is no evidence in scripture or in secular history that any of this happening. I’ll even throw in witnesses and archeological/scientific evidence. So let me get this straight, when we die are we gods or angels?
See above.
I’m sorry, I guess I didn’t realize that Sacred Scripture, Sacred Traditions, early Christians, historical documents, early church fathers and the Magisterium for the last 2000 years was a “cheap escape route”. I’ll be more careful.
Funny you should say that. I used that exact same approach when I was an atheist.
A
amgid
Guest
You mean to tell me that you are surprised about that? How strange. I would have thought the reason for that was obvious enough. Since the early Christian church apostatized, and God has now restored His true church on earth, it is to be expected that the scriptural interpretations of the two are not always going to agree.
There are lots of clues. Unfortunately you don’t know your own scriptures, and you try to run away from them. Here are some scriptural clues as to what the NT prophets prophesied about:
Acts 11:
27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Cæsar.
Notice first that it says “prophets . . .” In other words, there were many of prophets, not just one or two. One of these by the name of Agabus made this prophecy that there would be a famine in the country, which came to pass in the days of Claudius Cæsar. Later on, this same Agabus prophesied to Paul that if he went to Jerusalem, he would be bound by the Jews and delivered to the Gentiles, which also happened as he had prophesied. If this is not a “clue” as to what kinds of things they prophesied about, I don’t know what else is.
There are other clues of course. A prophet is not just somebody who foretells future events. A prophet is ultimately someone who has the gift or ability to communicate the word and will of God to man, usually by exhorting them to repent and keep the commandments of God; and the OT and NT prophets have been mostly engaged in this activity. This is also what modern LDS prophets are engaged in most of the time.
The gift of prophecy also enables someone who possesses it to comprehend the mysteries of God, and obtain knowledge by revelation (1 Cor. 13:2); it enables him to speak to the edification, comfort, and exhortation of the church (1 Cor. 14:3-5); it enables him to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart (1 Cor. 14:24, 25); it enables him to teach, instruct, and comfort the Church (1 Cor. 14:31); and ultimately, it enables him to gain a spiritual witness that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Rev. 19:10).
People may possess this gift in varying degrees. Some have it to a higher degree than others, depending on how diligent they are in seeking it and living for it. Most LDS who tell you that they know that the Church is true, do so by virtue of this gift. That is what enables them to know that the Church is true. It also enables them to comprehend the scriptures correctly, and reason out of them to the convincing of others. But they don’t always enjoy it to such a high degree as they should, if they lived more worthily of it.
And so?
The evidence is in the testimony of the Spirit, the same Spirit that Paul wrote about:
Romans 8:
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
It is the same Spirit that bears witness to us that that which we have received in modern revelation is the word of God.
(Continued in the next post…)
amgid
A
amgid
Guest
(Continued from the previous post…)
amgid
That is not what we mean by the Apostasy. What we mean is the loss of priesthood authority to lead and direct the Church by revelation, and to act by divine authority in the Church of God. I am sure there were many good and faithful Christians in the world then, as there are today. But you can hardly expect an apostate tradition to affirm its own apostasy, thus making itself redundant.
You are kidding me of course, right? I didn’t laugh though. Not a very good joke.
Religion is a matter of faith. There are many things that you have to accept on faith, without having direct evidence for them. How do you know that the miracles of Moses ever happened? How do you know that the miracles of Jesus ever happened? How do you know that it is not all a fabricated story, a nice work of fiction? The answer is that you don’t. You accept it on faith. The same here.
Some become angels, some become gods.
No, that is not what I meant, and I think you know that. If you can’t be honest in your debating tactics, then I am afraid there is very little for us to discuss.
An absurd comment. Very absurd.
amgid
M
majick275
Guest
no more absurd than the claims JS made to unsuspecting girls that God wanted them to be his “wives”.
You just can’t seem to accept the truth that no global Apostasy ever occured. You even admit that there were still faithful Christians when it allegedly occured. Why would God then take away “priesthood authority”? This certainly goes against his past actions and doesn’t make sense.
We know from historically verified traditions that Apostles presided over areas as bishops and that they called others to be bishops that took over those sees later. They ordained others and so and so on to the present. We can see from the writings that they have consistently taught the original Christian doctrines.
Without Apsotasy there can be no “restoration”. We can also see that present day Mormonism isn’t a restoration of anything. It is a completely new “gospel” just like we were warned about in the Bible.
Do you really believe that the only way to stand in the presence of God the Father is to pass angelic sentinels by giving them signs, keywords and tokens?
The Bible tells us otherwise. You need to worship the One God in three persons. The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are ONE GOD. They have sent Jesus down in the flesh and he gave us EVERYTHING we need to dwell forever in the presence of GOD.
You just can’t seem to accept the truth that no global Apostasy ever occured. You even admit that there were still faithful Christians when it allegedly occured. Why would God then take away “priesthood authority”? This certainly goes against his past actions and doesn’t make sense.
We know from historically verified traditions that Apostles presided over areas as bishops and that they called others to be bishops that took over those sees later. They ordained others and so and so on to the present. We can see from the writings that they have consistently taught the original Christian doctrines.
Without Apsotasy there can be no “restoration”. We can also see that present day Mormonism isn’t a restoration of anything. It is a completely new “gospel” just like we were warned about in the Bible.
Do you really believe that the only way to stand in the presence of God the Father is to pass angelic sentinels by giving them signs, keywords and tokens?
The Bible tells us otherwise. You need to worship the One God in three persons. The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are ONE GOD. They have sent Jesus down in the flesh and he gave us EVERYTHING we need to dwell forever in the presence of GOD.
- Status