LDS Question - How did the first church fail?

[ParkerD]

Yes, I said this.

No, this is you making stuff up again. Please don’t ascribe such nonsense to me again, for any reason.

Rebecca,
Sorry. Thanks for clarifying, since evidently I hadn’t made myself clear by not opening a new paragraph. Good point.

I certainly won’t bring it up again, at all. I have never liked trying to answer such questions, anyway. I think it’s a pointless question.

 

[ParkerD]

Ok. Although I partially addressed it in my last post I’ll just touch on a few basic notes.

The “seeing” God, not “seeing” God is not new to the faith as you can probably guess. I’d rather believe Christ when he says no one has seen the Father to mean it. Which must leave an alternate explaination as to whom did these folks see? As answered, it was Jesus. It is simple. The number one problem people have a timeline issue. They get all frustrated with how could Jesus appear to Abraham and not yet been born. Upon Christ’s resurrection, he was no longer burdened with our timeline. In a moments time, he can be anywhere on the timeline. But if he says, no one has seen the Father… I’d take him at his word.

Honestly, I keep expecting the standard Mormon response to change. I keep expecting the response, “Well when Jesus said this it was the truth, but to give Joseph the necessary weight and authority God presented himself.” That is a much harder position to fight against. (Well, not really harder to fight against but that argument would take into account the “seeing and not seeing” issed to be more in line to Christianity.)

Xavierlives,
I’m not frustrated at all in understanding that Jesus appeared to Abraham and to Moses (I agree), nor that Stephen saw both the Father and the Son although not hearing Them speak to him. Best wishes to you.

 

[distracted]

Parker or some other person who has read all or most of the posts here…

just wondering if you could summarize for those of us who have not and cannot read them… no time!

do the LDS believe the Church apostatized way back in the first century?

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavierlives,
I’m not frustrated at all in understanding that Jesus appeared to Abraham and to Moses (I agree), nor that Stephen saw both the Father and the Son although not hearing Them speak to him. Best wishes to you.

Yes… very close!

It says what though?

Acts 7:55-56
55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, “Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!”

I’m pretty sure Joseph Smith said, it was God and Jesus, in toto. That would make this appearance to be an untruth.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca,
Sorry. Thanks for clarifying, since evidently I hadn’t made myself clear by not opening a new paragraph. Good point.

OK.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker or some other person who has read all or most of the posts here…

just wondering if you could summarize for those of us who have not and cannot read them… no time!

do the LDS believe the Church apostatized way back in the first century?

Distracted,
I think if you read the first page of the thread, you’ll have a pretty good idea of a summarization. “Church apostatized” would not fit what happened. “Church members and many of the leaders drifted from the pure gospel” would fit better, and evidently happened by 100 AD based on what we read about the “second pope” and “third pope” when the Apostle John was still alive and had not departed into the wilderness.

 

[why_me]

Distracted,
I think if you read the first page of the thread, you’ll have a pretty good idea of a summarization. “Church apostatized” would not fit what happened. “Church members and many of the leaders drifted from the pure gospel” would fit better, and evidently happened by 100 AD based on what we read about the “second pope” and “third pope” when the Apostle John was still alive and had not departed into the wilderness.

This is what the LDS Gospel Principles manual states about it:

The Church of Jesus Christ Was Taken from the Earth

When Jesus lived on the earth, He established His Church, the only true Church. He organized His Church so the truths of the gospel could be taught to all people and the ordinances of the gospel could be administered correctly with authority. Through this organization, Christ could bring the blessings of salvation to mankind.

After the Savior ascended into heaven, men changed the ordinances and doctrines that He and His Apostles had established. Because of apostasy, there was no direct revelation from God. The true Church was no longer on the earth. Men organized different churches that claimed to be true but taught conflicting doctrines. There was much confusion and contention over religion. The Lord had foreseen these conditions of apostasy, saying there would be “a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. … They shall … seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it” (Amos 8:11–12).

The Lord Promised to Restore His True Church

The Savior promised to restore His Church in the latter days. He said, “I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder” (Isaiah 29:14).

For many years people lived in spiritual darkness. About 1,700 years after Christ, people were becoming more and more interested in knowing the truth about God and religion. Some of them could see that the gospel Jesus taught was no longer on the earth. Some recognized that there was no revelation and no true authority and that the Church that Christ organized did not exist on the earth. The time had arrived for the Church of Jesus Christ to be restored to the earth.

New Revelation from God

In the spring of 1820, one of the most important events in the history of the world occurred. The time had come for the marvelous work and wonder of which the Lord had spoken. As a young boy, Joseph Smith wanted to know which of all the churches was the true Church of Jesus Christ. He went into the woods near his home and prayed humbly and intently to his Heavenly Father, asking which church he should join. On that morning a miraculous thing happened. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith. The Savior told him not to join any church because the true Church was not on the earth. He also said that the creeds of present churches were “an abomination in his sight” (Joseph Smith—History 1:19; see also verses 7–18, 20). Beginning with this event, there was again direct revelation from the heavens. The Lord had chosen a new prophet. Since that time the heavens have not been closed. Revelation continues to this day through each of His chosen prophets. Joseph was to be the one to help restore the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Authority from God Was Restored

In restoring the gospel, God again gave the priesthood to men. John the Baptist came in 1829 to confer the Aaronic Priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (see D&C 13; 27:8). Then Peter, James, and John, the presidency of the Church in ancient times, came and gave Joseph and Oliver the Melchizedek Priesthood and the keys of the kingdom of God (see D&C 27:12–13). Later, additional keys of the priesthood were restored by heavenly messengers such as Moses, Elias, and Elijah (see D&C 110:11–16). Through the Restoration, the priesthood was returned to the earth. Those who hold this priesthood today have the authority to perform ordinances such as baptism. They also have the authority to direct the Lord’s kingdom on earth

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=79f21f7962d43210VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=5158f4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD

The Gospel Principles manual is currently being studied in lds priesthood and relief society meetings twice a month on Sundays.

 

[why_me]

Here is more from the same chapter:

Christ’s Church Was Organized Again

On April 6, 1830, the Savior again directed the organizing of His Church on the earth (see D&C 20:1). His Church is called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (see D&C 115:4). Christ is the head of His Church today, just as He was in ancient times. The Lord has said that it is “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased” (D&C 1:30).

Joseph Smith was sustained as prophet and “first elder” of the Church (see D&C 20:2–4). Later the First Presidency was organized, and he was sustained as President. When the Church was first organized, only the framework was set up. The organization would develop as the Church continued to grow.

The Church was organized with the same offices as were in the ancient Church. That organization included apostles, prophets, seventies, evangelists (patriarchs), pastors (presiding officers), high priests, elders, bishops, priests, teachers, and deacons. These same offices are in His Church today (see Articles of Faith 1:6).

A prophet, acting under the direction of the Lord, leads the Church. This prophet is also the President of the Church. He holds all the authority necessary to direct the Lord’s work on earth (see D&C 107:65, 91). Two counselors assist the President. Twelve Apostles, who are special witnesses of the name of Jesus Christ, teach the gospel and regulate the affairs of the Church in all parts of the world. Other general officers of the Church with special assignments, including the Presiding Bishopric and the Quorums of the Seventy, serve under the direction of the First Presidency and the Twelve.

The offices of the priesthood include apostles, seventies, patriarchs, high priests, bishops, elders, priests, teachers, and deacons. These are the same offices that existed in the original Church.

The Church has grown much larger than it was in the days of Jesus. As it has grown, the Lord has revealed additional units of organization within the Church. When the Church is fully organized in an area, it has local divisions called stakes. A stake president and his two counselors preside over each stake. The stake has 12 high councilors who help do the Lord’s work in the stake. Melchizedek Priesthood quorums are organized in the stake under the direction of the stake president (see chapter 14 in this book). Each stake is divided into smaller areas called wards. A bishop and his two counselors preside over each ward.

In areas of the world where the Church is developing, there are districts, which are like stakes. Districts are divided into smaller units called branches, which are like wards.

Important Truths Were Restored

The Church today teaches the same principles and performs the same ordinances as were performed in the days of Jesus. The first principles and ordinances of the gospel are faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism by immersion, and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost (see Articles of Faith 1:4). These precious truths were returned in their fulness when the Church was restored.

Through the gift and power of God, Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, which contains the plain and precious truths of the gospel. Many other revelations followed and have been recorded as scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price (see chapter 10 in this book).

Other important truths that the Lord restored include the following:

1. Our Heavenly Father is a real being with a tangible, perfected body of flesh and bones, and so is Jesus Christ. The Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit.
2. We existed in premortal life as spirit children of God.
3. The priesthood is necessary to administer the ordinances of the gospel.
4. We will be punished for our own sins and not for Adam’s transgression.
5. Children do not need to be baptized until they are accountable (eight years old).
6. There are three kingdoms of glory in the heavens, and through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, people will be rewarded according to their actions on earth and according to the desires of their hearts.
7. Family relationships can be eternal through the sealing power of the priesthood.
8. Ordinances and covenants are required for salvation and are available for both the living and the dead.

The Church of Jesus Christ Will Never Be Destroyed

Since its restoration in 1830, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has grown rapidly in membership. There are members in nearly every country in the world. The Church will continue to grow. As Christ said, “This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world, for a witness unto all nations” (Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:31). The Church will never again be taken from the earth. Its mission is to take the truth to every person. Thousands of years ago, the Lord said He would “set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, … and it shall stand for ever” (Daniel 2:44).

Additional Scriptures
• Acts 3:19–21; Revelation 14:6; Daniel 2:44–45; Isaiah 2:2–4; 2 Nephi 3:6–15 (Restoration foretold)

• D&C 110; 128:19–21; 133:36–39, 57–58 (Restoration of the gospel)

• Ephesians 2:20 (Jesus Christ the cornerstone of the Church)

• D&C 20:38–67 (duties of officers of the Church)

• Matthew 24:14

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=79f21f7962d43210VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=5158f4b13819d110VgnVCM1000003a94610aRCRD

 

[SnakeMauler]

Sure I mean I guess it sounds pretty logical for a guy to think that the “church fell” (I am a practicing Catholic and I’m only saying this because it seems to go along with some other reformist groups or whatever), but why make up a load of balogna about god living on another planet, Jesus coming to America, and all sorts of other things that have already been disproven by history? I think if Joseph Smith didn’t come up with all that ridiculous stuff, he might have a few more members now.

If you think about it, it’s not actually reforming “Christ’s church” because he made up a bunch of stuff about it himself. I mean, before the church supposedly “Fell”, there wasn’t a bunch of stuff about Jesus coming to America, god living on another planet, etc.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,

Thank you for taking the time to answer. This weekend was busy for me: the kids had basketball games, I had to bake some cookies for some Mormon visitors, I had to do some work. On that note, I’ll also say, I am getting ready to head into a 7 week job that will restrict much responses beyond the next few days.

Topic B – Joint Heirs

When I read the scriptures for joint-heirs, it is a little different interpretation. First I believe we are joint heirs to the suffering inflicted by this world. We will never be free from the shackles of this life until it ends. There is no way I can read Romans 8 and interpret it as: You live in sin. Jesus redeemed you. The Spirit is in you. You are dead to this world. You are equal to Jesus in heaven. Your suffering here gives glory to God.

That interpretation is, well, out of place. It is more likely joint-heirs to Christ is an equal position of being hated, equal position to persecuted, equal position to being protected, equal position as being under His watch-care.

As to the tree analogy. I do love the analogy but it falls amazingly short. So short, I am surprised you use it. Yes, trees bare trees. God created the trees. God did not create little gods. Sure we can use John 10:34, or Psalms 82. We can call ourselves children of God and we will one day be among the heavenly hosts but the “gods” of John 10 and Psalms 82 do no equal a Godhead. There is but one. We have our limitations. We cannot exceed those limitations.

Moreover, by thinking that you will be a god, you endanger yourself. Arrogance seeps in, “One day, I’ll be a god!” I say, “One say, I’ll be with God.” I don’t care about titles. I don’t care about position. I can be in charge of sweeping the street after God’s daily ticker-tape parade and I’ll be thrilled because I’ll be there with him.

(I think I saw your Topic A response somewhere, I’ll read that and respond as well).

Xavierlives,
(If you happen to come back to this thread)

I have a niece and her husband and family in San Antonio, who love it there and appreciate the kindnesses they have received from many wonderful people there.

As to the question of “arrogance” or the question of becoming a “street sweeper” (which obviously was a bit tongue-in-cheek), I hope if you have felt that you have lived the covenant gospel to the best of your ability during your life, that you will feel that Christ made a covenant promise through the parable of the talents, and that when Christ said–

Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. (Matthew 25:21)

–that you will be confident enough in your having kept the covenant and confident enough in His promises (which means you have faith that He meant what He said–and having faith was part of the covenant anyway), that you will have the expectation of being some kind of “ruler” rather than some kind of “street sweeper”. I think the New Testament conveys very clearly and unmistakeably that one such as yourself is expected to have that kind of confidence, and it is not arrogance since it means you will have become a servant just as Christ is the servant of all, and that it does not mean you are better than someone else–only that you chose to accept His promises with all of your heart and soul.

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavierlives,
(If you happen to come back to this thread)

I have a niece and her husband and family in San Antonio, who love it there and appreciate the kindnesses they have received from many wonderful people there.

As to the question of “arrogance” or the question of becoming a “street sweeper” (which obviously was a bit tongue-in-cheek), I hope if you have felt that you have lived the covenant gospel to the best of your ability during your life, that you will feel that Christ made a covenant promise through the parable of the talents, and that when Christ said–

Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. (Matthew 25:21)

–that you will be confident enough in your having kept the covenant and confident enough in His promises (which means you have faith that He meant what He said–and having faith was part of the covenant anyway), that you will have the expectation of being some kind of “ruler” rather than some kind of “street sweeper”. I think the New Testament conveys very clearly and unmistakeably that one such as yourself is expected to have that kind of confidence, and it is not arrogance since it means you will have become a servant just as Christ is the servant of all, and that it does not mean you are better than someone else–only that you chose to accept His promises with all of your heart and soul.

San Antonio is a wonderful city. I grew up here and only returned to live after 17 years of being away.

As for the “ruler” stuff. You know, I really could care less. Yes, you are right, he will look at my work in the end. I already know it is deficient. I deserve to have the job of cleaning gum off the shoes of the man who is sweeping the streets. But I will accept whatever is required of me and will be happy. I expect nothing. Everything I have is his and everything I get will be his. So If I am sweeping streets I will be content because he gave it to me.

 

[kikkichan]

Parker,

Thanks for your thoughtful and very quick responses, and sorry for my rather leisurely responses!

You highlight two rather significant differences between our beliefs.

(1) after death (assuming we’re not in hell or outer darkness, that is!)
+ you believe (I think) that we continue to progress in a way somewhat similar to what we do in mortal life. This means to me that there’s a continued need to grow, e.g. a need to still overcome bad habits This implies a continuance of time. I’m thinking that what you believe in is forever.
+ I believe that we no longer grow (or need to grow) in a way maybe similar to here on earth. e.g. we will be beyond bad habits, and we will be outside of time. Which I think of as eternity

Hmmm, Up until this very moment, I considered forever and eternity as meaning the same thing!

(2) creation
+ you believe (I think) that creation is more of a formation or re-formation of something (or someone *) that already existed. (I can’t get my mind around how it got there, though.)
+ I believe creation involves bringing something (or someone) into existence, where there was nothing that already existed. Now, in all honesty, I can’t get my mind around how God got there! But existing without “being brought into existence” is what i think of as “God stuff”.

Thanks again and keep thinking, and keep praying.
-kc
+±+*

 

[Xavierlives]

Parker,

Thanks for your thoughtful and very quick responses, and sorry for my rather leisurely responses!

You highlight two rather significant differences between our beliefs.

(1) after death (assuming we’re not in hell or outer darkness, that is!)
+ you believe (I think) that we continue to progress in a way somewhat similar to what we do in mortal life. This means to me that there’s a continued need to grow, e.g. a need to still overcome bad habits This implies a continuance of time. I’m thinking that what you believe in is forever.
+ I believe that we no longer grow (or need to grow) in a way maybe similar to here on earth. e.g. we will be beyond bad habits, and we will be outside of time. Which I think of as eternity

Hmmm, Up until this very moment, I considered forever and eternity as meaning the same thing!

(2) creation
+ you believe (I think) that creation is more of a formation or re-formation of something (or someone *) that already existed. (I can’t get my mind around how it got there, though.)
+ I believe creation involves bringing something (or someone) into existence, where there was nothing that already existed. Now, in all honesty, I can’t get my mind around how God got there! But existing without “being brought into existence” is what i think of as “God stuff”.

Thanks again and keep thinking, and keep praying.
-kc
+±+*

They want to answer the mysteries that can’t be answered.
I am fine finding out when I am told by God.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,

Thanks for your thoughtful and very quick responses, and sorry for my rather leisurely responses!

You highlight two rather significant differences between our beliefs.

(1) after death (assuming we’re not in hell or outer darkness, that is!)
+ you believe (I think) that we continue to progress in a way somewhat similar to what we do in mortal life. This means to me that there’s a continued need to grow, e.g. a need to still overcome bad habits This implies a continuance of time. I’m thinking that what you believe in is forever.
+ I believe that we no longer grow (or need to grow) in a way maybe similar to here on earth. e.g. we will be beyond bad habits, and we will be outside of time. Which I think of as eternity

Hmmm, Up until this very moment, I considered forever and eternity as meaning the same thing!

(2) creation
+ you believe (I think) that creation is more of a formation or re-formation of something (or someone *) that already existed. (I can’t get my mind around how it got there, though.)
+ I believe creation involves bringing something (or someone) into existence, where there was nothing that already existed. Now, in all honesty, I can’t get my mind around how God got there! But existing without “being brought into existence” is what i think of as “God stuff”.

Thanks again and keep thinking, and keep praying.
-kc
+±+*

Kikkichan,
I had missed that you had responded on this thread. You are probably aware of the verses where Peter declares that Christ preached to the dead (1 Peter 3:19 and 1 Peter 4:6). To me it makes a lot more sense to be able to understand a cataclysmic natural disaster such as recently happened in Haiti, when one realizes that the spirit world really is a continuation of a process where lives are lived with loved ones and the gospel is preached and there is still learning going on with a purpose of gaining understanding. As a person gains understanding, they change their lives. If that means overcoming “bad habits” or “incorrect understanding” or “incorrect thinking that led to incorrect conclusions”, then I think that is a rescue that I am grateful to know Christ offers even to the dead.

Have a wonderful year, Kikkichan.

 

[Xavierlives]

Kikkichan,
I had missed that you had responded on this thread. You are probably aware of the verses where Peter declares that Christ preached to the dead (1 Peter 3:19 and 1 Peter 4:6). To me it makes a lot more sense to be able to understand a cataclysmic natural disaster such as recently happened in Haiti, when one realizes that the spirit world really is a continuation of a process where lives are lived with loved ones and the gospel is preached and there is still learning going on with a purpose of gaining understanding. As a person gains understanding, they change their lives. If that means overcoming “bad habits” or “incorrect understanding” or “incorrect thinking that led to incorrect conclusions”, then I think that is a rescue that I am grateful to know Christ offers even to the dead.

Have a wonderful year, Kikkichan.

If a person rejects something in life, I’m pretty sure that will be respected in death. I’m thinking Hitler made his choices in his life and to now baptize him not only debases baptism but changes the plan of salvation.

 

[ParkerD]

If a person rejects something in life, I’m pretty sure that will be respected in death. I’m thinking Hitler made his choices in his life and to now baptize him not only debases baptism but changes the plan of salvation.

Xavierlives,
I personally draw the conclusion that he will never be rescued by the atonement, although he will be resurrected and then consigned to a state of never-ending torment and misery.

We can think about the good people in the world who never heard of Christ or His saving, redeeming mission, or we can think about the horrible people who heard of Him and had no idea what His message was, or ignored it and followed their basest carnal will. I think there are many, many wonderful people for whom the message of Christ’s redemption will be welcome news, whenever they receive it, even if in the next life.

Peace to all.

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavierlives,
I personally draw the conclusion that he will never be rescued by the atonement, although he will be resurrected and then consigned to a state of never-ending torment and misery.

We can think about the good people in the world who never heard of Christ or His saving, redeeming mission, or we can think about the horrible people who heard of Him and had no idea what His message was, or ignored it and followed their basest carnal will. I think there are many, many wonderful people for whom the message of Christ’s redemption will be welcome news, whenever they receive it, even if in the next life.

Peace to all.

And so why does the work of man need to advance the plan already in place? If Jesus was sent to preach, and he does so without limitations of time or space. Then man’s meddling does not advance anything other than keeping us busy doing something other than assisting in his preaching. If I am busy trying to figure out if I am related to King Arthur, I can’t share his word with my neighbor.

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavierlives,
I personally draw the conclusion that he will never be rescued by the atonement, although he will be resurrected and then consigned to a state of never-ending torment and misery.

We can think about the good people in the world who never heard of Christ or His saving, redeeming mission, or we can think about the horrible people who heard of Him and had no idea what His message was, or ignored it and followed their basest carnal will. I think there are many, many wonderful people for whom the message of Christ’s redemption will be welcome news, whenever they receive it, even if in the next life.

Peace to all.

Well whether it was Hilter or Luther, I’m sure both would oppose inclusion in the practice.

But it does raise an interesting question. If Catholic priests don’t marry, then how would their “lineage” track them down to baptize them? Does this happen for aunts and uncles and whatnot?

 

[kikkichan]

Parker,

Thanks, I see that you took some time off. Be sure to keep that up from time to time.

I agree that a possibility of “rescue” extended to those who are dead is very comforting. I hope that,“the way it works” is such that we won’t “need” it. I don’t see an issue with the belief of a continuation of a process where lives are lived with loved ones per se, but it is clearly different.

Also, the idea of “rescue” makes me think of proxy baptism for the dead, and a couple of responses to your comment seems to me to be references to that. Especially when Hitler was brought up. Incidentally, the Catholic church, as far as I know, has never claimed that any particular person is in hell. And the reason for this is that no one knows what happens actually when death comes. This “not knowing” is consistent with the hope that there could be at least one more chance of “rescue”. (and those who legitimately never had a chance, will get at least one!) I suspect the notion of this “last chance” is typically thought of as being for abortion or earthquake victims and nor for mass murderers. Additionally, this “last chance” is not different from the chances in life in that an individual choice is still required. This, of course is my understanding.

Thanks again for your thoughts.
-kc

Kikkichan,
I had missed that you had responded on this thread. You are probably aware of the verses where Peter declares that Christ preached to the dead (1 Peter 3:19 and 1 Peter 4:6). To me it makes a lot more sense to be able to understand a cataclysmic natural disaster such as recently happened in Haiti, when one realizes that the spirit world really is a continuation of a process where lives are lived with loved ones and the gospel is preached and there is still learning going on with a purpose of gaining understanding. As a person gains understanding, they change their lives. If that means overcoming “bad habits” or “incorrect understanding” or “incorrect thinking that led to incorrect conclusions”, then I think that is a rescue that I am grateful to know Christ offers even to the dead.

Have a wonderful year, Kikkichan.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Well whether it was Hilter or Luther, I’m sure both would oppose inclusion in the practice.

But it does raise an interesting question. If Catholic priests don’t marry, then how would their “lineage” track them down to baptize them? Does this happen for aunts and uncles and whatnot?

Happens however they like. My nephew was sealed (in this life) to his step-father, not his biological father. His biological father is his legal parent. All legal records would never show anyone that he didn’t want to spend eternity sealed to his biological father. (My nephew made this choice as an adult.)

So, LDS do whatever they like for their ancestors, including making leaps to lines that aren’t theirs. Take a look an ancestry.com sometime. Mine has me hooked up to every royal line that ever existed in Europe, POPES included. Yet, I can trace it only so far back with real evidence, then all of the sudden, jump to a line that has royal lineage. It is like mormonism, all made up!