R
- Status
J
JMJ4
Guest
evenfaust - I have the pamphlet and spoke with the missionaries about this.
I do not agree with you - you ARE contradicting the LDS literature.
Pointing out where you are wrong or where the literature is wrong is not stirring things up. I can ask as many questions as I would like.
You remind me of the missionary that got very angry when I pointed out the mistake in the pamphlet stating all of the apostles were killed and I told him that John lived to be an old man. He did not like it all!
Again I will ask you, if the early Church fathers only had TRACES OF THE TRUTH, why are you quoting them?
R
ricko
Guest
False Beliefs of the Mormon church
The heads of the Gods appointed our God for us…you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves…the same as all Gods have done before you" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.370-372, 346).
Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt wrote “there are more gods than there are particles of matter” (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, p.345).
The Holy Bible says:
" I am the first, I am also the last and there is no God besides Me" (Is. 44:6, 48:12, 45:14,21-22).
“there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him” (1 Cor. 6:6).
“I am God and there is no other; I am God and there is no one like me” (Is. 46:9).
“…before me there was no God formed, and there will be none after me!” (Is. 43:10).
The heads of the Gods appointed our God for us…you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves…the same as all Gods have done before you" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.370-372, 346).
Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt wrote “there are more gods than there are particles of matter” (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, p.345).
The Holy Bible says:
" I am the first, I am also the last and there is no God besides Me" (Is. 44:6, 48:12, 45:14,21-22).
“there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him” (1 Cor. 6:6).
“I am God and there is no other; I am God and there is no one like me” (Is. 46:9).
“…before me there was no God formed, and there will be none after me!” (Is. 43:10).
E
evanfaust
Guest
JMJ4,
I am not angry and if you don’t agree with me…then let’s just agree to disagree! I already answered your question about traces of truth…I quoted the fathers because they agree with Mormons and they have some truths that the Catholic Church does not have today! There are traces of truth everywhere, even in the Catholic Church today! Am I making myself clear? ehehh.
S
sablouwho
Guest
Thanks Evan. I appreciate that you recognize my “moderate” position. It’s a potentially unpopular one on this rather conservative Catholic web site.
Thing is, the contradictions in the New Testament can be understood within the context of historical critical method of biblical criticism. This is quite different than how the LDS Church has rewritten the history of some of the key events in early church history. (That said, I don’t consider the Catholic Church to be totally honest in some of their early history either…)
When we tell people a story, we may focus on certain aspects of the story, but that does not mean that the story was invented later or altered.
E
evanfaust
Guest
X
Xavierlives
Guest
E
evanfaust
Guest
Sablouwho,
I am not sure I follow you. What do you mean by “context of historical critical method of biblical criticism.”
I am not sure at which event you refer about LDS re-writing history. As far as I know Mormons have preserved the records very accurately and have not tried to hide anything.
S
sablouwho
Guest
Historical-critical method refers to a whole collection of methodologies and strategies that scholars use for understanding the Bible. (It is in stark contrast to the literalist-fundamentalist approach to reading the Bible.)
The First Vision
E
evanfaust
Guest
J
JMJ4
Guest
S
sablouwho
Guest
JMJ, if I recall correctly, the LDS belief about John never dying comes from their scripture called the Doctrine and Covenants. I don’t remember what section it is in, but I remember reading this when I was an investigator. Evan isn’t making this up.
J
JMJ4
Guest
I guess you have not read prior posts.
According to the PAMPHLET GIVEN TO ME BY LDS MISSIONARIES entitled “The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ”, it states:
“The apostles were killed, and priesthood authority - including the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church-was taken from the earth.”
When I brought this to the attention of the visiting missionaries as incorrect, they told me I was wrong.
Evan can say what he wants, and you can be his friend, but the LITERATURE IS INCORRECT.
J
JMJ4
Guest
I guess you have not read prior posts.
According to the PAMPHLET GIVEN TO ME BY LDS MISSIONARIES entitled “The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ”, it states:
“The apostles were killed, and priesthood authority - including the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church-was taken from the earth.”
When I brought this to the attention of the visiting missionaries as incorrect, they told me I was wrong.
Either Evan or the literature is INCORRECT.
S
sablouwho
Guest
I have read the prior posts…but it sounds like I must have missed something since you’ve mentioned this. Sorry 'bout that!
I was actually trying to be helpful to you in referencing the D&C–attempting to answer your question. Certainly wasn’t trying to annoy you!
Yeah, that sounds pretty much like what the missies taught me as well.
Right. IIRC you’ve stated this previously. (See, I was reading!
) Didn’t Parker chime in on this?This statement sounds like you are making a dig towards me. If so, I’m really unsure as to why.
In my prior post to you I was just trying to help answer your question, so it’s a shame to see that you seem frustrated with me.Well, yeah, the statement from the pamphlet you mention certainly does contradict the D&C, doesn’t it? Frankly I’m surprised that the Lds Church Correlation committee let that one slip through the cracks.
Sounds like one of those instances where they want to teach the basics first, even at the risk of glossing over some details, and then get into those details much later.
But yeah, it does definitely seem as if you’ve found a contradiction! Who knows what they were thinking when they put this stuff together!?
J
JMJ4
Guest
Sablouwho - I apologize for the uncharitable comment (I deleted it but it went through anyway, sorry). I was a little annoyed, then I decided I was being stupid and re-posted without the “friend” comment.I have read the prior posts…but it sounds like I must have missed something since you’ve mentioned this. Sorry 'bout that!
I was actually trying to be helpful to you in referencing the D&C–attempting to answer your question. Certainly wasn’t trying to annoy you!
Yeah, that sounds pretty much like what the missies taught me as well.
Right. IIRC you’ve stated this previously. (See, I was reading!
This statement sounds like you are making a dig towards me. If so, I’m really unsure as to why.
Well, yeah, the statement from the pamphlet you mention certainly does contradict the D&C, doesn’t it? Frankly I’m surprised that the Lds Church Correlation committee let that one slip through the cracks.
Sounds like one of those instances where they want to teach the basics first, even at the risk of glossing over some details, and then get into those details much later.
But yeah, it does definitely seem as if you’ve found a contradiction! Who knows what they were thinking when they put this stuff together!?
You write excellent posts and I appreciate your insight.
Please understand, I am not so easy-going when it comes to the missionaries handing out this stuff. Some people take it at face value. Not everyone is able to check the facts.
S
sablouwho
Guest
Thanks JMJ, I sure appreciate that. I tried to remove where I quotedyou but unfortunately it is past the time limit, so I cannot do it now. Sorry!Sablouwho - I apologize for the uncharitable comment (I deleted it but it went through anyway, sorry). I was a little annoyed, then I decided I was being stupid and re-posted without the “friend” comment.
What a kind thing to say, thank you! (What can I say–I try!)
I can see that it is a concern for you and that it is bothering you. I hope my final comments in the last post didn’t seem to dismiss your concerns, I didn’t mean it that way.
Honestly, I think it was quite a “catch” on your part to notice this particular contradiction. IIRC, ParkerD thought so too and was surprised by the contradiction.
I think that this particular instance that you have found info in the pamphlet that contradicts the D&C could be looked at in at least two ways. One–that the statement about all the apostles dying is a “general” statement whose purpose is to inform about the Great Apostasy, and not to specifically teach about their belief about the apostle John never having died. The second way I can see it being interpreted is that they are doing that “milk before meat” thing, where more “controversial” or “unusual” beliefs are not taught at first. (And there are certainly those in the LDS Church who advocate doing this–Robert Millet’s presentation to the missies comes to mind here.) Whether this second option is intentional deception or not seems to be in the eyes of the beholder. LDS seem to think not, anti-LDS seem to think so. As for me, I find myself somewhere in the middle of these two views.
J
JMJ4
Guest
(I’m probably repeating myself). When the missionaries were at my house (and they came many times) I spent a lot of time reading to them out of my books on the lives of the Apostles. After receiving the pamphlet and before they came for their first meeting, I gathered up several books on the subject and had Bible references at my fingertips.
They did not want to talk about it at all. They had many opportunities to speak about John - believe me, I was open to discussion!
I was all about the “meat” and they didn’t seem to know anything but the “milk.” I understand why they would want to do the milk before meat approach, but honestly I don’t think these guys knew the answers.
I am sure this is not true with all missionaries, but this was our family’s experience.
They did not want to talk about it at all. They had many opportunities to speak about John - believe me, I was open to discussion!
I was all about the “meat” and they didn’t seem to know anything but the “milk.” I understand why they would want to do the milk before meat approach, but honestly I don’t think these guys knew the answers.
I am sure this is not true with all missionaries, but this was our family’s experience.
X
Xavierlives
Guest
Well I am not saying I agree with Evan, but there is a way his literature and he can be saying the same thing. It is more defeatism than anything though.
The pamphlet says he is alive. Evan says John was translated. The Bible says Enoch and Elijiah didn’t die. So whether he didn’t die, no matter. Personally, I think the stance by most is verse 23 means basically, “Peter, you worry about things of Peter, not the things of John.” I also accept it as, “Peter, you are going to die an unnatural death, while John will live out his life as an old man.” My reasoning does more for the Mormon church though than their own. The Mormons absolutely destroy their whole claim for apostacy through one of two ways:
- We know John was the last man standing (of the apostles). And the Mormons say that the loss of authority occurred when there were no more apostles. So if God took John (and translated him) then God was the reason for the Apostacy. We know that isn’t the truth (just was we know there wasn’t an apostacy or a failure of the early church). We know from the Mormon doctrine that God does not want his people to live in apostacy so God would not cause the apostacy. It would have to happen through the course of man, not the course of God.
- If the Mormon’s would have just had John die a natural death, then their claim for apostacy and a failure of the church would be bolstered by the actual loss. But with their belief that John still is alive and well, destroys any claim that they have that the authority is gone. Lets say he is still on the planet, alive and kicking and drinking from the Last Supper cup. The authority is still here and John holds it all. No apostacy. No failure of the first church. No Mormon church.
E
evanfaust
Guest
JMJ4,
The booklet you are quoting from is just the “mik” as you stated before. Missionaries just want to talk about the basics and help you and your family receive a testimony through the Holly Ghost. Missionaries are advised not to engage in arguments. They are there to testify of the Restoration and helpt people feel the spirit and a testimony. That is their main goal. Of course they are allowed to show scritpures up to a point, but if the “investigator” seems to be combative and not really trying to understand, then they may even stop seeing you depending on the circumstances. The true conversion is through the spirit and not mainly by “argumentation”. It is a different setting than the one we have here.
If you go to lds.org or momon.com, you will see good explanantions, but it will not address each point in an exhaustive and profound way. It makes sense to give “milk” first and then “meat” like the apostle said. We have evidence from the fathers stating this point…“that the apostles knew everything, but did not teach all they knew in public.”
During my conversion I was ready for “meat” and did the investigation on my own by using other books.
But the point of the “apostles being killed” does not invalidate the Mormon claim, because the apostasy did not accur only because the apostles got killed. In reality, the Apostle being killed is a consequence of the apostasy…the apostle could have ordained other apostle an always replace the one that got killed, but that was not the Lord’s purpose. The gospel was already preached to every creature on the earth and that was the end of the dispensation of the Meridian of Times. John being alive and keeping the keys does not invalidade the claim of apostasy at all. John did not pass the key on to anyone until 1829 to Joseph Smith along with Peter and James.
The Mormon Church does not want to state in a basic literature that John never died because that is unecessary at that point and would cause more unecessary questions. John’s mission was no longer to be part of the Church…he was removed from it. His mission was something else.
Remember that Satan was given power to defeat and overcome all Saints. The Lord and the apostles knew about the apostasy well in advance.
- Status