LDS: Please provide proof that the priesthood authority was taken from the earth

[Big_Dummy]

JAVL,

Before reading this answer, please read my post answering BD’s question about the “three Nephites” and John.

1. It was a congregation of believers in Christ, and it was among the Nephites and the Lamanites, but there was a general apostasy during the 300’s AD.
2. Yes.
3. Because of a general apostasy and the deaths of the last prophets among them, Mormon and Moroni.

Can you demonstrate beyond doubt that there was a radical change in Catholic doctrine from the 200s into the 300’s? What was that change. If you are going to say it is the doctrine of the Trinity, then you may want to read this bible study first.

The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity: An Outline Study
By Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
spotlightministries.org.uk/bowmanonthetrinity.htm

And, here is historical proof of belief in the Trinity before Nicene (325 AD)

St. Clement of Rome, Letter to the Corinthians (C. 98 A.D.):

“Do we not have one God, one Christ, and one Spirit of Grace poured out upon us? And is there not one calling in Christ?”

The Martyrdom of St. Polycarp (C. 155 - 157 A.D.):

“…In this way and for all things I do praise you, I do bless you, I do glorify you through the eternal and heavenly High Priest Jesus Christ, your beloved child: through whom be glory to you with Him and with the Holy Spirit, both now and through ages yet to come. Amen.”

St. Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus (181 A.D.):

“The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, His Word, and His Wisdom.”

St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies (C. 180 A.D.):

“If any one, therefore says to us, ‘How then was the Son produced by the Father?’ we reply to him, that no man understands that production, or generation, or calling, or revelation, or by whatever name one may describe His generation, which is in fact altogether indescribable. Neither Valentinus, nor Marcion, nor Saturninus, nor Basilides, nor angels, not archangels, nor principalities, nor powers (possess this knowledge), but the Father only who begat, and the Son who was begotten. Since therefore His generation is unspeakable, those who strive to set forth generations and productions cannot be in their right mind, inasmuch as they undertake to describe things that are indescribable.”

St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans (C. 110 A.D.):

“Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to the Church that has found mercy in the greatness of the Most High Father and in Jesus Christ, His only Son: to the Church beloved and enlightened after the love of Jesus Christ, our God, by the will of Him that has willed everything which is: to the Church also which holds the presidency in the place of the country of the Romans…To those who are united in flesh and in spirit by every commandment of His, who are filled with the grace of God without wavering, and who are filtered clear of every foreign stain, I wish an alloyed joy in Jesus Christ, our God.”

Tatian the Syrian, Address to the Greeks (C. 165 - 175 A.D.):

“We are not playing the fool, you Greeks, nor do we talk nonsense, when we report that God was born in the form of a man.”

St. Melito of Sardes, Fragment in Anastasius of Sinai (C. 177 A.D.):

“The activities of Christ after His Baptism, and especially His miracles, gave indication and assurance to the world of the Deity hidden in His flesh. Being God and likewise perfect man, He gave positive indications of His two natures: of His Deity, by the miracles during the three years following after His Baptism; of His humanity, in the thirty years which came before His Baptism, during which, by reason of His condition according to the flesh, he concealed the signs of His Deity, although He was the true God existing before the ages.”

The Didache (90 -110 AD)

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=name+of+the+Father%2C+and+of+the+Son+site:http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newadvent.org%2Ffathers%2F&btnG=Google+Search&rlz=1R2ADBF_en&aq=f&aqi=&aql=f&oq=&psj=1&fp=d154f5edca559ee3

 

[Stephen168]

Please show us where Christ stated that His church was not to be found on the earth and Joseph Smith was to restore it. Or was it Joseph Smith who said this about himself?
flyonthewall;7533244:

I have already given you documentation…D&C 20 addresses the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ.

Steve,
It appears you are right. The act of Joseph Smith writing down his own story makes it true to a Mormon.
Of course even that part of Smith’s story doesn’t support the subject of this thread.

 

[Javl]

“The Wacky World of Joseph Smith”…That is the title of the article you wish for me to take seriously?
You point to the section about Solomon Spaulding to read and understand.
I hate to break this to you but the Solomon Spaulding accusation is nothing new and has thouroughly been refuted to the point that it only serves as an illustration of extremely poor research on the subject.

Are you sure? Then why has the LDS been trying to supress the fact? Many LDS that I have spoken to ( apart from this forum ) know absolutely nothing about this. This includes also some ex-LDS. Much research has been done by reputable scholars to prove its accuracy. Why should they ruin their reputations by lying?

There are many attempts out there to discredit anything and everything LDS, but when they are countered with the truth, they fall like a house of cards.

We have yet to encounter LDS truth. Everything given that is anti-LDS has been proven with facts many times over. How can the LDS provide truth when even its theology changes with the wind? How can the LDS provide truth when it depends upon the writings of a man who copies word for word from a defective bible and then claims that it’s God’s word? How can the LDS claim as truth the inane and ridiculous stories not only in the BoM but in the D&C and PoGP? Only those who have been duped by the great deceiver will do so.

And I could say the same about you, and your faith… but I respect the faith of others.

Those that are not against Christ are for Him…even if we disagree.

My dear friend, I know that you have a love of and for Jesus Christ, but you are misplacing that love and not following Him as per His teachings. You are putting the erroneous teachings and so-called truths of a questionable man above His and are calling it His when they are not. We are not trying to convert you but only showing you that you are putting your salvation in danger by following the false teachings of a man before those of Christ. We are only trying to wake you up to that fact.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[rainman10]

Again, the LDS church has many miracles in its history and we do not need a “mystic” to know who performed the miracles.

Ok, Fly, you have now stated this a couple of times and have provided nothing to back it up. Please show us your list of the many public LDS miracles that have been performed and whose authenticity has been verified by someone other than Mormons. Also, seer stones and divining rods? How much more mystical can one get?

 

[ParkerD]

unless I am mistaken, the meaning of an apostle is simply “one who is sent out”. Paul recieved his apostleship directly from Jesus on the road in Acts. We know that Jesus holds the keys in

Revelation 1:18
I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

What is your take on Hebrews 7:11-28?

BD,

I disagree about Paul receiving his apostleship directly from Jesus on the road in Acts. Paul wasn’t described with the title “apostle” until quite a bit later than that event of his conversion.

I think Hebrews 7:11-28 is a great passage that shows Paul’s explanation about there being two priesthoods on the earth–the Levitical, which continued by “right of birth”, and the order of Melchizedec, which came by “an oath”, and which priesthood Jesus held and thus He was the Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedec. He is able to make intercession for all without needing to offer another sacrifice first in His own behalf, as we all know.

 

[KathleenGee]

Parker,

From what I see of Mormonism, there is a great emphasis on ‘burning in the bosom’, when people prefer to choose what they want to believe in without extenuating circumstances.

By that, as has been said over and over, is Mormonism denying the fullness of Salvation History lived out by Jews and Christians, and creating a new story. Mormonism is denying faith lived out by countless people. Verifiable history says alot and it isn’t cold facts…if you read the lives of the saints and the faith of people in their times.

The Book of Mormon is similiar to the Koran because it witnesses the teachings of Judaism and Christianity, but retells the events outside of these peoples’ traditions.

We are dealing with an 1,800 year gap and this position by Mormonism itself invalidating Judeo-Christian history.

The problem that Mormonism has claimed against a 5,600 year old history – including that of the Jewish people and their traditions of faith and peoples…is not just.

It is better for Mormons to just refer to the Book of Mormon. Base your religion on the Book of Mormon, but don’t connect it to the Bible or to Christianity. I believe there are Mormons within it that have faith in Jesus Christ.

The Road to Emmaus is reflecting how Jesus will come to us in ordinary life – our interaction with The Cause, Christ Who is the Word – through which the universe was made – Who in union with the Holy Spirit interprets the Word of God deep within our heart and soul, and Who completes His active presence by ministering to us His Eucharist…The Effect being emotional consolation, ‘the burning in the bosom’.

Our faith’s construct is Jesus Christ through His Apostles.

Mormonism’s construct is first, all of Christianity is an abomination – the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, our priesthood is corrupt, and second, its teachings come from an unknown angel – Moroni – outside of Sacred Scripture.

You know my story. I came to an LDS book store to find out more about Mormonism with a good and open heart…to seek dialogue and common ground. But when I read the beginning entries by Joseph Smith and the condemnation of Christianity as an abomination…

I saw another book, ‘The Pearl of Great Price’…and saw here through others, the author most likely Orson Pratt, 1852, the edited book considered ‘splendid’…“the great Roman Church…vile language…and her **** daughters,…the Protestants.”

I was profoundly shocked and saw the spirit of darkness in these writings and could not believe how anyone could believe in such things. I was shaking and left.

That is not the language of true religion.

And to cover up all these sorts of sites revealing all the different beliefs of Mormonism, leading people into Mormonism to think it is something…then after they are baptized, they then hear a new theology and different and unusual beliefs…the Mormons think they are being charitable…letting people know the truth gradually rather than all at once.

We call it bait and switch. Dishonest.

So I see at work a different sort of ethics.

In our Catholic RCIA – the Rite of Christian Initiation – people can ask --any-- question they want and it will be answered honestly. We want people to know the whole truth of our church. People have brought up past things in the Church that were wrong. It is admitted in class, but then also, it is shown in class what reforms took place.

But when it comes to our worship and our creed, the understanding of Scripture…this is the work of Christ Himself, through His apostles and they given the proper right to appoint successors.

I cannot fathom why the Apostles would not want to have any desire or motivation to insure the true teachings of Jesus were passed on. But some how the Mormons do not think the apostles were wanting to or capable of choosing successors from all the peoples coming into the faith.

God always provides laborers.

 

[KathleenGee]

Big Dummy…starting to see where you are coming from…

 

[KathleenGee]

About my son…that was years ago…and he was mistakenly given the Eucharist…and not much instruction except that we were receiving Christ in the Eucharist…

And it was not mentioned for awhile…so when he received the Host, he was profoundly effected.

There is a book out written by a Jewish cousin of my client. She was a Murrano…Jew inside, Catholic outside. She never really believed in Catholicism. But when she went up to receive the Eucharist…without trying to believe anything, she would immediately experience the goodness of God, and she was filled with joy.

About baptism…my younger daughter almost died after she was born. I had her baptized 5 days after her birth. When the priest lay hands on her forehead, and then began baptizing her with holy water, her arms stretched out and it was like she swooned in the Lord’s embrace…we were all taken by it. At school she was called St. Therese.

The sacraments are concrete…no arbitration. You either believe or you don’t.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Z,

I’m glad for these comments–thanks.

The word “if” is not making an implication. If my daughters were married yet and had children younger than eighteen or so, then I would unhesitatingly encourage them to not spend a lot of time on the internet when they ought to be spending direct time with their children. So what if I think that’s important enough that I mentioned it? Kathleen can defend herself, explain herself, and be just fine.

You have children under 18 or so at home do you not? And the word “if” doesn’t negate the implication.

 

[SteveVH]

I have already given you documentation…D&C 20 addresses the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ.
lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/20.1?lang=eng#0
Do you accept this as authorative? I do.

No. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I have my opinions about the stigmata, which I will keep to myself.

I was only trying to give you a glimpse as to the true meaning of Christian mysticism. They weren’t Tarrow Card readers or magicians. It would be interesting to know what your opinion of the stigmata is based upon, but this would be off-topic for this thread.

 

[lax16]

Hi, Lax16,

“Yes” is the answer to your second question. I had tried to convey that the apostles were proceeding based on the guidance of the Holy Spirit, so that was the basis of whether they did or didn’t ordain a new apostle at any point in time. I didn’t mean that they didn’t understand the need for new apostles, if the Lord directed such, but they would be acting under the Lord’s guidance and direction.

Hi Parker and sorry for the delay in responding to your post.
Are you saying that the Lord did not direct the apostles to ordain new ones? How do you know this?

The Jewish understanding of God is developed primarily from the time of Moses onward. The children of Israel weren’t ready for more than basic knowledge about God, so that is the amount of knowledge they received. When Jesus announced that He was both the Messiah and was Jehovah, many Jews rejected that because of their teachings, so it wouldn’t be such a great idea to think they had correct concepts in their traditions about the promised Messiah.

Yes, and it is very clear in Jewish teaching that God has no body.
Isn’t Christianity a fulfillment of Judaism?
Don’t LDS claim to be Christian?
Obviously many Jews rejected Jesus. However, that does not change the promise of a Messiah and the fulfillment by Jesus. Jesus was a practicing Jew and never changed the teaching of God as the Jews knew it. Catholics do not change the Jewish teaching of God.

As far as cross references, you could think about “all the sons of God shouted for joy” and note that “sons of God” means “covenant people”. (Job 38:7) You could also think about the “war in heaven” which showed that there were events that preceded the populating of the earth, and could think about God having a plan beyond just one day deciding to create the earth and Adam and Eve, with no fore-planning involved. What if He actually had a plan for all these important things? What if there are purposes in His plan that included allowing free will and choice even before this earth was created, thus being consistent with how He has done on this earth?

This reminds of what a former JW told me that “JW’s will flip around the bible choosing scripture to support their beliefs.” How about keeping it in context?
The scripture you are referencing out of context means Jesus was a failure and His Promise didn’t remain.

No, I assume most everyone did their best with the knowledge they had. But it’s pretty plain that there was a disconnect about apostles having presiding authority, when your history bypasses John even though acknowledging he was the last living apostle.

Jesus left the apostles with everything they needed to pass on the church at Pentecost, did He not?
How does John as the last living apostle prove the point?
From the book, The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary: “Clement of Alexandria tells us that the old man (John) traveled extensively through his territories, organizing new churches, appointing bishops, and ordaining men who were pointed out by the Spirit. Several future leaders of the Church, including Papias and Polycarp, studied under John during the waning years of the first century.”

The Bible is plain about these promises, and context is certainly important to understand those promises.

Then how can Mormonism explain a change in God and call itself a Christian religion, a fulfillment of Judaism?
Why do Mormons ignore early Church history?

Yes–the entire book of Revelation, and several of the Savior’s parables and teachings.

What about the words of Jesus Christ and His Promise?

Yes, and as I had noted John saw this in vision and so stated in Revelation 12:14 and Revelation 13:7. But those verses won’t make the same sense to you that they do to me, and part of the reason is that God will always and forever preserve free will agency and not force beliefs onto anyone. That is one of the reasons Jesus taught in parables, and one of the reasons many scriptures contain veiled knowledge.

You read them in light of the world needing a new prophet.

The time frame for the culmination of God’s success story, wherein Christ prevails against all evil and all opposing influences, is completed during the Millenium. For any one person, “the end” could be today or tomorrow since they could die, but the real “end of the world” is going to be during the Millenium when the earth is changed.

So are you saying Christ’s Death on the Cross and His Resurrection were not Him prevailing against all evil?

Thanks!

 

[flyonthewall]

.Okay, what is inaccurate? Show it and prove it. You always make statements like this, and do not provide incorruptible, definitive proof.

Again, you want me to prove things of your faith wrong with incorruptalbe definitive proof. If that were possible, it would not be faith.

If there was something inaccurate for the last 2000 years, there should be treasure trove of documents, studies, independent scholarly work, that should be readily available and that you should be able to cite. Where is it?

Ah yes, you have a treasure trove of all you mention above don’t you. Any of it non-Catholic? Or is it Catholic writings verifying Catholic faith?
Independent scholarly work…independent as in non-Catholic? if so, what does it verify? That you have taught something? Doesn’t verify if it was correct or not, only that it has been repeated and handed down.

Yeah, what are these miracles? Have these been investigated by independent scientists, doctors, and other people not connected to the LDS?

I see…God cannot perform a miracle unless there is an independent study set up to verify it was from God…are you really serious?

The miracle of the sun at Fatima in 1917 was witnessed by about 50K people, and the miraculous cures at that event were investigated and verified. Does the LDS have something similar to claim?

Not all independent studies are on the same page as the Catholic church about Fatima.
Even Professor Auguste Meessen of the Institute of Physics, Catholic University of Leuven, suggests possible psychological or neurological explanations for the apparitions he notes, “It is impossible to provide any direct evidence for or against the supernatural origin of apparitions”. (from wikipedia)
So even Catholic miracles have to be taken with a heaping helping of faith.

It’s sad, really, to think that investigations and independent studies are required for you to recognize the hand of God.

How do you know this? So you know better than God on what to do? You are above God then?

Now you are just being silly.

 

[flyonthewall]

Are you sure? Then why has the LDS been trying to supress the fact? Many LDS that I have spoken to ( apart from this forum ) know absolutely nothing about this. This includes also some ex-LDS. Much research has been done by reputable scholars to prove its accuracy. Why should they ruin their reputations by lying?

Trying to supress the fact? That is like saying the Catholic church has been trying to supress the fact that they have apostasized.
I wouldn’t know why “reputable” scholars would put their “reputations” on the line for the sake of trying to discredit a religion. Why would the Jewish leadership risk their “reputations” trying to discredit Jesus?

We have yet to encounter LDS truth. Everything given that is anti-LDS has been proven with facts many times over. How can the LDS provide truth when even its theology changes with the wind? How can the LDS provide truth when it depends upon the writings of a man who copies word for word from a defective bible and then claims that it’s God’s word? How can the LDS claim as truth the inane and ridiculous stories not only in the BoM but in the D&C and PoGP? Only those who have been duped by the great deceiver will do so.

Then there is a very poor standard used to prove anit-LDS correct. I have seen no anit-LDS claims proven correct, but easily refuted. There is absolutely nothing that attempts to discredit my faith that has stood up under scrutiny.

LDS provide truth from Jesus Christ, not from anything you describe.

My dear friend, I know that you have a love of and for Jesus Christ, but you are misplacing that love and not following Him as per His teachings. You are putting the erroneous teachings and so-called truths of a questionable man above His and are calling it His when they are not. We are not trying to convert you but only showing you that you are putting your salvation in danger by following the false teachings of a man before those of Christ. We are only trying to wake you up to that fact.

Thank you for your concern, however I know where I have placed my trust.

 

[flyonthewall]

No. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I didn’t think you would, and likewise Catholic studies and investigations are going to confirm and verify Catholic truths.

I was only trying to give you a glimpse as to the true meaning of Christian mysticism. They weren’t Tarrow Card readers or magicians. It would be interesting to know what your opinion of the stigmata is based upon, but this would be off-topic for this thread.

I thank you for your effort as I was uneducated on your use of the term.
I am afraid a dialogue about the stigmata may not be wise as I do not hold it in the same regard as you.

 

[SteveVH]

I didn’t think you would, and likewise Catholic studies and investigations are going to confirm and verify Catholic truths.

Your attempt to equate the legitimacy of Mormon claims with Catholic claims won’t fly (no pun intended). The history of the world confirms the claims of the Catholic Church and its foundation. It has outlived every government established by man. It’s history has been documented by historian after historian, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, for the last 2000+ years. It can actually prove its unbroken chain of succession back to Peter and therefore to Christ himself. It is a matter of history, not just found in Catholic books.

Then we have a man who showed up 1830 years later with nothing more than a claim, preaching another gospel with himself at the center, who then helped author documents that supported his claim. How is that not self-fulfilling?

Sorry, not even close.

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker and sorry for the delay in responding to your post.
Are you saying that the Lord did not direct the apostles to ordain new ones? How do you know this?

Lax16,

The Lord really did still direct the apostles after His ascension. They knew this–that is evident in their writings and their example. We know by what they did–they ordained some, such as Paul, after some had died, such as James the brother of John. Later, John was told that the church was being taken into the wilderness, so he was being told that this was the reason they were not getting the inspiration to ordain new apostles at that later point in time.

Yes, and it is very clear in Jewish teaching that God has no body.

Actually, it’s not, since there are verses that use language that sounds like a body is being seen by people like Moses–but it was Jehovah they were seeing, and indeed He had a spirit body at that point in time. The Jews were basically most familiar with Jehovah as God, so they would be familiar with God as having a spirit body.

Isn’t Christianity a fulfillment of Judaism?

I wouldn’t describe it in that way, or all the Jews would have followed Christ because they would have been prepared by their leaders and understood He was their Messiah and the Fulfiller of their law.

Don’t LDS claim to be Christian?
Obviously many Jews rejected Jesus. However, that does not change the promise of a Messiah and the fulfillment by Jesus. Jesus was a practicing Jew and never changed the teaching of God as the Jews knew it. Catholics do not change the Jewish teaching of God.

Yes, the LDS view themselves as Christians since we believe in Christ and His teachings and example, and seek to follow Him.

I don’t view the teachings of Jesus as including “the teaching of God as the Jews knew it”, since He said He was Jehovah and generally they had not the slightest inkling that He could possibly really be Jehovah. It was totally out of their expectation. He was teaching them something different about God than they had any idea of.

The scripture you are referencing out of context means Jesus was a failure and His Promise didn’t remain.

Your frame of reference is completely different than my frame of reference for viewing how Jesus has been, is, and will be completely successful in all His promises being fulfilled. With different frames of reference, you have completely different expectations than I do about His work and its completion.

Jesus left the apostles with everything they needed to pass on the church at Pentecost, did He not?

Yes, He did, and promised that He would still be with them.

How does John as the last living apostle prove the point?

Because he had authority that meant he was the last living apostle when he had the vision that he wrote about as the Apocalypse, which means if the authority of apostleship was going to be delivered to another person before he left the premises, he was the one to do it. And because being the last living apostle meant he had more authority than a bishop in Rome.

From the book, The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary: “Clement of Alexandria tells us that the old man (John) traveled extensively through his territories, organizing new churches, appointing bishops, and ordaining men who were pointed out by the Spirit. Several future leaders of the Church, including Papias and Polycarp, studied under John during the waning years of the first century.”

Those events don’t imply one way or the other about the apostleship authority itself being taken from among men when John had departed. He would be out and about ordaining bishops, yes, who were pointed out by the Spirit, yes, and be teaching them and teaching the followers of Christ, yes. He would not vary from doing his absolute best (he did it superbly) in teaching them how to be followers of Christ in word and deed.

I already answered the question about “fulfillment of Judaism”. When I read “early church history” beyond the New Testament, I read about changes in doctrinal understanding along the way that come out in how things are expressed, but I doubt you’re going to see such kinds of changes. An example was the quote you gave above, that I re-quoted. It says specifically that John appointed bishops, and ordained men who were pointed out by the Spirit. That means the Spirit was doing the inspiring of what was to be done.

You read them in light of the world needing a new prophet.

The New Testament doesn’t say prophets aren’t needed in the world. It implies clearly that prophets are needed in the world.

So are you saying Christ’s Death on the Cross and His Resurrection were not Him prevailing against all evil?

I guess I’ll answer this question with a question, which has an obvious answer:

Do you view all evil as having been prevailed against in this world, and therefore having stopped existing in this world?

Have a good day.

 

[rainman10]

Originally Posted by flyonthewall View Post
Again, the LDS church has many miracles in its history and we do not need a “mystic” to know who performed the miracles.

I WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE A REPLY FROM FLY ON MY COMMENTS BELOW. My guess is you will come back with some “smart” comment and avoid answering, if you respond at all.
Ok, Fly, you have now stated this a couple of times and have provided nothing to back it up. Please show us your list of the many public LDS miracles that have been performed and whose authenticity has been verified by someone other than Mormons. Also, seer stones and divining rods? How much more mystical can one get?

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Your attempt to equate the legitimacy of Mormon claims with Catholic claims won’t fly (no pun intended). The history of the world confirms the claims of the Catholic Church and its foundation. It has outlived every government established by man. It’s history has been documented by historian after historian, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, for the last 2000+ years. It can actually prove its unbroken chain of succession back to Peter and therefore to Christ himself. It is a matter of history, not just found in Catholic books.

Perhaps you may be interested in the book “From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church” by Francis A. Sullivan S.J. (Paulist Press). I’ve read it, and his historical and doctrinal treatise shows that your above statements are not accurate.

Then we have a man who showed up 1830 years later with nothing more than a claim, preaching another gospel

No, the same Gospel.

with himself at the center,

No, with Jesus Christ at the center.

who then helped author documents that supported his claim. How is that not self-fulfilling?

Which reminds me of atheists that claim that the New Testament books were written to fulfill certain prophecies found in the Old Testament.

 

[SteveVH]

Perhaps you may be interested in the book “From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church” by Francis A. Sullivan S.J. (Paulist Press). I’ve read it, and his historical and doctrinal treatise shows that your above statements are not accurate.

Originally Posted by SteveVH
Your attempt to equate the legitimacy of Mormon claims with Catholic claims won’t fly (no pun intended). The history of the world confirms the claims of the Catholic Church and its foundation. It has outlived every government established by man. It’s history has been documented by historian after historian, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, for the last 2000+ years. It can actually prove its unbroken chain of succession back to Peter and therefore to Christ himself. It is a matter of history, not just found in Catholic books.

Well, I made several statements. Which ones are not accurate and why don’t you explain why they are not accurate?

Thanks.

 

[lax16]

Lax16,

The Lord really did still direct the apostles after His ascension. They knew this–that is evident in their writings and their example. We know by what they did–they ordained some, such as Paul, after some had died, such as James the brother of John. Later, John was told that the church was being taken into the wilderness, so he was being told that this was the reason they were not getting the inspiration to ordain new apostles at that later point in time.

Parker, I hate to sound like a broken record, but Jesus promised His Church would last forever. Doesn’t that take precedence over the writings/feelings of men?

Actually, it’s not, since there are verses that use language that sounds like a body is being seen by people like Moses–but it was Jehovah they were seeing, and indeed He had a spirit body at that point in time. The Jews were basically most familiar with Jehovah as God, so they would be familiar with God as having a spirit body.

I’ll let the Jews tell us if they believe God has ever had a body or if He had a beginning:

God in Judaism
Jewish Beliefs about God
From Lisa Katz, former About.com Guide
(edited)
The basis of the Jewish concept of God can be derived from Rambam’s thirteen principles of faith.

God is incorporeal.
In Judaism, God has no body, God is non-physical. Any mention of God’s body is considered to be metaphorical. Any physical representation of God, such as the Golden Calf, is considered to be idolatry. As God has no body, He has no gender. While God is referred to in masculine terms and the Shechinah (Divine presence that fills the universe) is referred to in feminine terms, God is actually neither male nor female.

God is eternal.
God has no beginning and no end. He transcends time.

I wouldn’t describe it in that way, or all the Jews would have followed Christ because they would have been prepared by their leaders and understood He was their Messiah and the Fulfiller of their law.

Christianity is not the fulfillment of Judaism with the promised Messiah?
Why would all of the Jews have to follow Jesus to make it so?
The first apostles were Jewish, as were Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
Did you know that?

Yes, the LDS view themselves as Christians since we believe in Christ and His teachings and example, and seek to follow Him.

That is your definition of Christianity, however it was defined long before you or I came along.

I don’t view the teachings of Jesus as including “the teaching of God as the Jews knew it”, since He said He was Jehovah and generally they had not the slightest inkling that He could possibly really be Jehovah. It was totally out of their expectation. He was teaching them something different about God than they had any idea of.

Did Jesus teach them that God had a body and used to be a man who had relations with an earthly woman?
Jesus was a practicing Jew who went to temple to teach and discuss his Father with the rabbis. If He claimed God to be something other than what they already believed, it would have been written in the bible, don’t you think?
They would have probably killed Him for it.

Your frame of reference is completely different than my frame of reference for viewing how Jesus has been, is, and will be completely successful in all His promises being fulfilled. With different frames of reference, you have completely different expectations than I do about His work and its completion.

But your frame of reference comes from Joseph Smith not Jesus Christ. Tell me how the words of Jesus have led you to believe in Mormonism.

I will answer the rest of your post when I get a few minutes!