C
chasjohn
Guest
If anyone is interested in the LDS position on the canon of scripture, you can read it at:
tinyurl.com/5tgj8j
tinyurl.com/5tgj8j
- Status
D
dosdog
Guest
Like this quote from the article
One Protestant scholar has inquired tellingly into the erroneous doctrine of a closed canon. He writes: “On what biblical or historical grounds has the inspiration of God been limited to the written documents that the church now calls its Bible?
message 33 of 46 in Discussion
From:Shalom
While Torah is silent on the details it is loud on telling Israel that they should judge for itself how to implement the commandments. Moses delegated, there was a time we had Judges, Sannhedrin etc.
Here You Go Beffers - How to keep Shabbat is Man-Made
As if that is a novel concept? Of course the way Jews observe Shabbat is a product of the people. That’s exactly how it was intended to be.
Why on earth do you care how Beefers chooses to do what he does?
Shalom
And Where is it recorded in the TORAH - Moses delegated his authority to the Sannhedrin ? Nowhere I know
While Bible is silent on the details it is loud on telling Catholics that they should judge for itself how to implement the Christs Teaching. Jesus delegated, there was a time we had Apostles, Churches etc.
Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Many Catholics have heard that “kepha” is used in both places in this verse ("You are Peter [kepha] and on this rock [kepha] I will build my Church . . . "), but few have seen it with their own eyes.
So here 'tis:
jimmyakin.org/2005/04/while_were_at_i.html
D
dosdog
Guest
And for you More-mans before you get your panties in a knot
Public revelation is binding on all Christians, but private revelation is binding only on those who receive it. The Catholic Church teaches that public revelation was completed, and therefore was concluded, with the death of the last apostle (Vatican II, Dei Verbum 4), but private revelation has continued.
catholic.com/library/private_revelation.asp
"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.
When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them. Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by
Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says:
“It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)” (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).
Since the Church herself has no providential protection in the area of private revelations, the bishop could be in error. We are not obliged to believe him, or even the Pope himself in such a case.
catholic-pages.com/bvm/private_revelations.asp
catholicculture.org/docs/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=162
catholicplanet.com/apparitions/discernment.htm
What kind of Spirit is at work when someone receives a vision, a revelation, or a more routine favor? To determine this is called the discernment of spirits. It is of great importance to find the right answer. It is evident that there can be three sources: good spirit, evil spirit, auto-suggestion
catholic-pages.com/bvm/private_revelations.asp
Public revelation is binding on all Christians, but private revelation is binding only on those who receive it. The Catholic Church teaches that public revelation was completed, and therefore was concluded, with the death of the last apostle (Vatican II, Dei Verbum 4), but private revelation has continued.
catholic.com/library/private_revelation.asp
"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.
When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them. Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by
Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says:
“It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)” (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).
Since the Church herself has no providential protection in the area of private revelations, the bishop could be in error. We are not obliged to believe him, or even the Pope himself in such a case.
catholic-pages.com/bvm/private_revelations.asp
catholicculture.org/docs/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=162
catholicplanet.com/apparitions/discernment.htm
What kind of Spirit is at work when someone receives a vision, a revelation, or a more routine favor? To determine this is called the discernment of spirits. It is of great importance to find the right answer. It is evident that there can be three sources: good spirit, evil spirit, auto-suggestion
catholic-pages.com/bvm/private_revelations.asp
Z
zerinus
Guest
Thank you. Last Conference elder Holland spoke on the Trinity, and I posted a link to it here, which resulted in some discussion. He has decided to continue the same theme in this conference. I wonder if he will follow that up in the next conference as well. If he wanted to, he has an awful lot that he can talk about. In any case, here are video links to the same conference talk, for Windows Media Player or Apple Quick Time, for those who want to watch it.
PS. If the videos are too slow to play directly, it might be easier to download and save them on to your computer first, and then play it from your computer.
zerinus
Z
zerinus
Guest
P
Prince_Hal
Guest
Brother Holland is a clever man, though deceiving, as I have found many of the LDS leaders. The article is well worth reading by Catholic members of this forum as well as others.
He mentions that he is the first of the Brethren to speak - a higher being than the rest of us. Mormonism is so full of this petty upmanship. Anyway, that is just my personal gripe.
Holland sets up false arguments and gives out subliminals to be picked up by the LDS membership who perform excellent impressions of real 4 legged sheep ! Apologies, but I am angry at this. He makes it sound to the membership that it is scripturally proven - it is not and certainly not with this type of arguments. When I gather my thoughts and calm down, I will write further.
Anyway. This is another bump to go alongside Zerinus’.
God bless,
Hal.
He mentions that he is the first of the Brethren to speak - a higher being than the rest of us. Mormonism is so full of this petty upmanship. Anyway, that is just my personal gripe.
Holland sets up false arguments and gives out subliminals to be picked up by the LDS membership who perform excellent impressions of real 4 legged sheep ! Apologies, but I am angry at this. He makes it sound to the membership that it is scripturally proven - it is not and certainly not with this type of arguments. When I gather my thoughts and calm down, I will write further.
Anyway. This is another bump to go alongside Zerinus’.
God bless,
Hal.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
I just think it shows how the Mormon leadership misleads people. There is a general illiteracy among Mormons regarding Christian history. An illiteracy that is enforced by the mormon heirarchy by the very fact that Christian history is never taught. In this case, Holland is just plain and simply making history up! Clearly, he doesn’t understand how or why the Bible came to be, let alone how to interpret it.
And as dosdog pointed out, he is using the false information that permeates Mormonism, that is that we don’t believe in revelation. Which, he has to espouse because otherwise there was no great apostasy which renders Mormonism completely irrelevant. And Holland just CAN’T have that!
It is all rather pathetic.
And as dosdog pointed out, he is using the false information that permeates Mormonism, that is that we don’t believe in revelation. Which, he has to espouse because otherwise there was no great apostasy which renders Mormonism completely irrelevant. And Holland just CAN’T have that!
It is all rather pathetic.
C
chasjohn
Guest
When you “gather your thoughts and calm down”. why don’t you take the talk [it’s not very long], precept by precept, and refute it.
P
Prince_Hal
Guest
Most certainly, it will be my pleasure. Give me a couple of days to do so. My anger is that this is clear deceit from someone whom the LDS population trust - and he does it in the name of Christ.
But you are right. Let me refue it line by line, precept by precept. His words truly are the doctrines and teachings of men mingled with scripture.
Hal.
P
PapaSquash
Guest
I think what Mr Smith was saying was that it would have been better for Christendom if Jesus had designated some office to be in authority over his flock. A vicar, so to speak…
Oh, wait, no that can’t be it
B
Bishopite
Guest
Joseph Smith isn’t a “prophet” and has been shown not to have been one. Thomas S. Monson nor any other LDS leader is not a successor of St. Peter, ergo has no authority from the “keys of the kingdom” where Jesus exclusively gives Peter (Kepha) the “keys.” Jude 3 says that the gospel has been given once for all the saints and the Catholic Church was the Church of the bible and the post Apostolic Church as ecclessial history attests. Nowhere is there the theology of Mormonism, save Arianism’s denial of the Trinity.
Mormonism has absolutely no credibility in authoritatively recognizing the canon of scripture. The first citation the the 27 books of the New Testament were given at the council of Rome under Pope Damusus; subsequent councils at Hippo and Carthage affirmed this in 393/397 AD. Many books were used in many areas in the liturgy of early ecclessial history, some were accepted books, some rejected and others disputed. These “disputed” books of the NT are the books which the Catholic Church authoritatively recognized as being inspired as God allowed His Church He established to authoritatively see the inspired books and which NO other group Christian nor non Christian can lay claim to. Mormonism is and early 19th century creation, this is historical fact.
P
Prince_Hal
Guest
Brother Holland states that there are two principal reasons why the LDS church is accused of not being Christian, the first being their view of the Godhead, the second - which he addreses now - is: “the bold assertion that God continues to speak His word and reveal His truth, revelations which mandate an open canon of scripture”.
This is a technique so often used by LDS leaders, namely setting up a false argument and then answering it. LDS may be seen to be non-Christian by some because of their erroneous understanding of the Trinity, but I have not heard the claim that they are not Christian because they believe in continuing revelation. I suppose some people will attempt to use this argument, but I am not certain it is the principal reason LDS are called non-Christian. But more than this his talk now has the overall tenure of (my words):
“If you believe in on-going revelation, then you are not Christian”. Does he say this ? The implication is very strong. It is as if he is saying: “Brothers and Sisters we are being accused of not being Christian because we believe in on-going revelation. But look here the Bible shows us there is on-going revelation. The corrupted churches of the world do not even know their Bible. But we in the light of truth and under the guidance of a prophet believe differently, and how obvious it is when you are not blinkered by prejudice”
Anyway, Brother Holland has now got the majority of people reading or listening to his talk into persecution mode and he appeals to the Dunkirk spirit - our backs are against the sea, our basic belief is being challenged - we are not Christian.
He talks of the book of mormon and the doctrine & covenants and the pearl of great price. All these he says are proof that the heavens are open and there is revelation. But let me ask you a question: where exactly is LDS modern revelation ? The book of mormon was written between 2000BC and 400AD it is claimed. Not modern. The pearl of great price was way back in Abraham’s time. The doctrine & covenants - mostly in the time of Joseph Smith so in the 1840’s. The most recent additions are Joseph F Smiths vision of heaven in the early 1900’s. Then there are two "Official Declarations’, one regarding polygamy (1880’s I think) and then the declaration that the negro people can have the mormon priesthood (1970’s). But these last two are not even given the status of “sections” in the so-called scripture that is called the doctrine & covenants.
So where is modern mormon revelation that shows that the canon of scripture is not closed and that God still speaks. It appears to me that God has been silent even to His chosen “Brethren” since the death of Joseph Smith - excepting the section by Joseph F. Smith, oh and one by Brigham Young. Has God gone on a journey ? Or perhaps He sleeps ?
Our LDS friends will say that God speaks through the prophets and apostles at the LDS General Conferences and that His words can be found in the Ensign magazine and on the internet. Brother Holland’s talk is one of these. Here is modern scripture, here is modern revelation. [A side point: God appears to be fixated on road safety if general conference is anything to go by, because it is mentioned more often than most other things. Or in the prophet Monson’s final talk for the April 2008 conference, the most important thing to know is that an 80 year prophet should not use a microwave when his wife is in hospital. Anyway, that’s a sidebar].
So, we have revelation from the LDS church, but the rest of Christendom is silent. God does not speak to them. Pick up a copy of ‘Deus Caritas Est’, or ‘Spe Salvi’. Look at ‘Lumen Gentium’ or the countless other Papal Encyclicals. These are letters and treatise akin to the writings of Paul and John and Peter when they spoke to individual groups of Christians or to the world in general. Read these works from the largest non-LDS Christian denomination and tell me that there is no revelation. And if you will compare them to some LDS conference talks. If Brother Holland and LDS members tell us that the LDS general conference addresses are modern scripture and are revelation, then I call for these great encyclicals and treatise to be allowed in as evidence that god speaks to us today. And yet Brother Hollands talk strongly suggests that the only people receiving revelation are the mormons.
[Continued in next post - this one was too long]
This is a technique so often used by LDS leaders, namely setting up a false argument and then answering it. LDS may be seen to be non-Christian by some because of their erroneous understanding of the Trinity, but I have not heard the claim that they are not Christian because they believe in continuing revelation. I suppose some people will attempt to use this argument, but I am not certain it is the principal reason LDS are called non-Christian. But more than this his talk now has the overall tenure of (my words):
“If you believe in on-going revelation, then you are not Christian”. Does he say this ? The implication is very strong. It is as if he is saying: “Brothers and Sisters we are being accused of not being Christian because we believe in on-going revelation. But look here the Bible shows us there is on-going revelation. The corrupted churches of the world do not even know their Bible. But we in the light of truth and under the guidance of a prophet believe differently, and how obvious it is when you are not blinkered by prejudice”
Anyway, Brother Holland has now got the majority of people reading or listening to his talk into persecution mode and he appeals to the Dunkirk spirit - our backs are against the sea, our basic belief is being challenged - we are not Christian.
He talks of the book of mormon and the doctrine & covenants and the pearl of great price. All these he says are proof that the heavens are open and there is revelation. But let me ask you a question: where exactly is LDS modern revelation ? The book of mormon was written between 2000BC and 400AD it is claimed. Not modern. The pearl of great price was way back in Abraham’s time. The doctrine & covenants - mostly in the time of Joseph Smith so in the 1840’s. The most recent additions are Joseph F Smiths vision of heaven in the early 1900’s. Then there are two "Official Declarations’, one regarding polygamy (1880’s I think) and then the declaration that the negro people can have the mormon priesthood (1970’s). But these last two are not even given the status of “sections” in the so-called scripture that is called the doctrine & covenants.
So where is modern mormon revelation that shows that the canon of scripture is not closed and that God still speaks. It appears to me that God has been silent even to His chosen “Brethren” since the death of Joseph Smith - excepting the section by Joseph F. Smith, oh and one by Brigham Young. Has God gone on a journey ? Or perhaps He sleeps ?
Our LDS friends will say that God speaks through the prophets and apostles at the LDS General Conferences and that His words can be found in the Ensign magazine and on the internet. Brother Holland’s talk is one of these. Here is modern scripture, here is modern revelation. [A side point: God appears to be fixated on road safety if general conference is anything to go by, because it is mentioned more often than most other things. Or in the prophet Monson’s final talk for the April 2008 conference, the most important thing to know is that an 80 year prophet should not use a microwave when his wife is in hospital. Anyway, that’s a sidebar].
So, we have revelation from the LDS church, but the rest of Christendom is silent. God does not speak to them. Pick up a copy of ‘Deus Caritas Est’, or ‘Spe Salvi’. Look at ‘Lumen Gentium’ or the countless other Papal Encyclicals. These are letters and treatise akin to the writings of Paul and John and Peter when they spoke to individual groups of Christians or to the world in general. Read these works from the largest non-LDS Christian denomination and tell me that there is no revelation. And if you will compare them to some LDS conference talks. If Brother Holland and LDS members tell us that the LDS general conference addresses are modern scripture and are revelation, then I call for these great encyclicals and treatise to be allowed in as evidence that god speaks to us today. And yet Brother Hollands talk strongly suggests that the only people receiving revelation are the mormons.
[Continued in next post - this one was too long]
P
Prince_Hal
Guest
[Continued from previous post]
He says: “We believe in a God who is engaged in our lives, who is not silent, not absent….” And so Brother Monson do we as non-LDS Christians - because the Bible clearly tells us so, and so does the earth and all created things scream to us that God lives and that Jesus is the Christ and that the Holy Spirit is vibrant in the hearts of the Christian people. Wake up LDS people and look around you.
I suppose I can say more, and probably will later. But may an explanation that you can ignore if you will - not a problem. Why am I so worked-up about this thread ? My weakness and I apologise. I just this weakend sat through yet another LDS sacrament meeting. I learned something so important - endurance !! It seemed that the entire congregation was bored out of their minds. People were eating, playing with children, sleeping. And this is constant. No wonder when prophet Monson tells us about the microwave that everyone cracks up with laughter. In comparison to the weekly diet served up at LDS sacrament meeting, then the Lord has spoken. But mormonism is more about bending the will and mind to accepting the LDS church as being true and obedience to it. No, no no. Christianity is about turning our hearts to God and then let all the other pieces fall where they will. For me when those pieces of the jigsaw fall they fall into the pattern of the Catholic Church. There is a subtle distinction in the approach. So, to a mormon if sacrament meeting was boring and uninspiring - what was wrong with you (not the speaker or the church that creates such a milieu). So, I was tired from the battle of sacrament and my heart was breaking because of fear that my children will get caught in this brain liquifying stupor and my wife had already offered up her brain for transplant. And the biggest chastisement was to myself for my weakness in not seeing how I can change it. So my apologies - I am weak and I struggle.
But back to Brother Holland. This was a talk in LDS terms that has to be given an A plus. It served its purpose to stregthen the LDS people in their belief of the truthfulness of the LDS church and as God’s chosen few in the sea of revelation denying corrupt Christians - but it does little to teach God’s Word or His Truth. My anger arises in that I am inclined to believe that Brother Holland knows exactly what he is doing. Perhaps he is misguided like many others. Perhaps he is blinded. I hope so, but I am more inclined to believe that he deliberately deceives because it is better to deceive if the end goal is achieved, i.e. keeping LDS people LDS.
God bless and Mary pray for me,
Hal.
He says: “We believe in a God who is engaged in our lives, who is not silent, not absent….” And so Brother Monson do we as non-LDS Christians - because the Bible clearly tells us so, and so does the earth and all created things scream to us that God lives and that Jesus is the Christ and that the Holy Spirit is vibrant in the hearts of the Christian people. Wake up LDS people and look around you.
I suppose I can say more, and probably will later. But may an explanation that you can ignore if you will - not a problem. Why am I so worked-up about this thread ? My weakness and I apologise. I just this weakend sat through yet another LDS sacrament meeting. I learned something so important - endurance !! It seemed that the entire congregation was bored out of their minds. People were eating, playing with children, sleeping. And this is constant. No wonder when prophet Monson tells us about the microwave that everyone cracks up with laughter. In comparison to the weekly diet served up at LDS sacrament meeting, then the Lord has spoken. But mormonism is more about bending the will and mind to accepting the LDS church as being true and obedience to it. No, no no. Christianity is about turning our hearts to God and then let all the other pieces fall where they will. For me when those pieces of the jigsaw fall they fall into the pattern of the Catholic Church. There is a subtle distinction in the approach. So, to a mormon if sacrament meeting was boring and uninspiring - what was wrong with you (not the speaker or the church that creates such a milieu). So, I was tired from the battle of sacrament and my heart was breaking because of fear that my children will get caught in this brain liquifying stupor and my wife had already offered up her brain for transplant. And the biggest chastisement was to myself for my weakness in not seeing how I can change it. So my apologies - I am weak and I struggle.
But back to Brother Holland. This was a talk in LDS terms that has to be given an A plus. It served its purpose to stregthen the LDS people in their belief of the truthfulness of the LDS church and as God’s chosen few in the sea of revelation denying corrupt Christians - but it does little to teach God’s Word or His Truth. My anger arises in that I am inclined to believe that Brother Holland knows exactly what he is doing. Perhaps he is misguided like many others. Perhaps he is blinded. I hope so, but I am more inclined to believe that he deliberately deceives because it is better to deceive if the end goal is achieved, i.e. keeping LDS people LDS.
God bless and Mary pray for me,
Hal.
J
justinthemartyr
Guest
LDS does not have a position on anything whatsoever.
Since the “leadership” in the LDS claims that the leadership has the ability to change doctrine, practices, or anything they want at anytime, there is no solid or official position that means anything to anyone.
It is a floating belief system, due to change at anythime they want it to, such as it did for racism when they outlawed blacks and promoted polygamy.
They just claim that “God wanted it changed” and claim that He directed them to change it.
there is nothing solid in the LDS faith, it can change at any time, depending on how much pressure is placed on them by the people. They bend for the world, and claim it is for God.
Since the “leadership” in the LDS claims that the leadership has the ability to change doctrine, practices, or anything they want at anytime, there is no solid or official position that means anything to anyone.
It is a floating belief system, due to change at anythime they want it to, such as it did for racism when they outlawed blacks and promoted polygamy.
They just claim that “God wanted it changed” and claim that He directed them to change it.
there is nothing solid in the LDS faith, it can change at any time, depending on how much pressure is placed on them by the people. They bend for the world, and claim it is for God.
R
rich123456
Guest
Quote“Some Christians, in large measure because of their genuine love for the Bible, have declared that there can be no more authorized scripture beyond the Bible. In thus pronouncing the canon of revelation closed, our friends in some other faiths shut the door on divine expression that we in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hold dear: the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and the ongoing guidance received by God’s anointed prophets and apostles. Imputing no ill will to those who take such a position, nevertheless we respectfully but resolutely reject such an unscriptural characterization of true Christianity.”end Quote
Oh my God…. He wrote “ In thus pronouncing the canon of revelation closed” I am so grateful for the revelation I have received from Christ’s Church through the Holy Spirit. As a Catholic Jesus is my fulfillment. I need no other revelations beyond that. The revelation of Jesus in my life will never cease as long as I can take another breath as they occur and grow bigger every time I attend a Mass. I came to the table of our Lord eight years ago. What amazes me to this day is that I have received the same revelations that the Apostles received concerning Jesus, who is my Lord and my God. I continue to receive revelations concerning Him and so far none of them are contrary to Catholic belief. I like so many million others have been experiencing truth regarding Jesus because this truth has sustained Christianity for 2000 years. This truth is unchanging, it is obvious and it is all around to be found by anyone who can come to serve it well, ask for its guidance.
Listening and acting are two different things. So many times we are afraid to listen. So we ignore. We don’t want our lives as we know it to crumble. Can we trust that Jesus will pick up the pieces? For most the answer is no.
But you have to be willing to listen and learn as the Apostles first did. They had to get rid of their fears of loss and possible ridicule even to the point of dying for this truth. After Mormonism I truly feel as if mud has been placed on my eyes and Jesus has washed them for me, giving me insight that has transformed my life. He is so stable and unchanging. What more could a Mormon leader tell me about my Lord and God that the Holy Spirit has not already revealed to me? That Christ, my creator, the eternal Son of God came down to earth, lessoned Himself by coming in the form of man, washing the feet of His disciples, placing Himself as the least among us, to the point of even death on a cross. All this He did for me. Revelation has shown me that the Catholic Church teaches 100% opposite of what the LDS Church teaches. I know in my heart and soul that the LDS faith is built on pride and a lie. The Catholic faith is built on Christ because of our 100% need for Him to bring us home. Revelation has taught me true humility which is at the core of our faith. To give all to Christ without looking for any gain or glory. To want only to be with Him forever. I could go on, I could go to the scriptures to refute all that this LDS leader speaks about but I don’t need to. I know it is all there because I know Jesus. But if you have a direct question, one simple question I know that it can be answered truthfully and logically. The question then being would you accept the honest answer? I was once told by a Mormon leader that it’s ok to lie if it brings one to the truth. Can a lie bring one to the truth? I would say yes as I was once Mormon.
God Bless
www.utahmisison.com
Oh my God…. He wrote “ In thus pronouncing the canon of revelation closed” I am so grateful for the revelation I have received from Christ’s Church through the Holy Spirit. As a Catholic Jesus is my fulfillment. I need no other revelations beyond that. The revelation of Jesus in my life will never cease as long as I can take another breath as they occur and grow bigger every time I attend a Mass. I came to the table of our Lord eight years ago. What amazes me to this day is that I have received the same revelations that the Apostles received concerning Jesus, who is my Lord and my God. I continue to receive revelations concerning Him and so far none of them are contrary to Catholic belief. I like so many million others have been experiencing truth regarding Jesus because this truth has sustained Christianity for 2000 years. This truth is unchanging, it is obvious and it is all around to be found by anyone who can come to serve it well, ask for its guidance.
Listening and acting are two different things. So many times we are afraid to listen. So we ignore. We don’t want our lives as we know it to crumble. Can we trust that Jesus will pick up the pieces? For most the answer is no.
But you have to be willing to listen and learn as the Apostles first did. They had to get rid of their fears of loss and possible ridicule even to the point of dying for this truth. After Mormonism I truly feel as if mud has been placed on my eyes and Jesus has washed them for me, giving me insight that has transformed my life. He is so stable and unchanging. What more could a Mormon leader tell me about my Lord and God that the Holy Spirit has not already revealed to me? That Christ, my creator, the eternal Son of God came down to earth, lessoned Himself by coming in the form of man, washing the feet of His disciples, placing Himself as the least among us, to the point of even death on a cross. All this He did for me. Revelation has shown me that the Catholic Church teaches 100% opposite of what the LDS Church teaches. I know in my heart and soul that the LDS faith is built on pride and a lie. The Catholic faith is built on Christ because of our 100% need for Him to bring us home. Revelation has taught me true humility which is at the core of our faith. To give all to Christ without looking for any gain or glory. To want only to be with Him forever. I could go on, I could go to the scriptures to refute all that this LDS leader speaks about but I don’t need to. I know it is all there because I know Jesus. But if you have a direct question, one simple question I know that it can be answered truthfully and logically. The question then being would you accept the honest answer? I was once told by a Mormon leader that it’s ok to lie if it brings one to the truth. Can a lie bring one to the truth? I would say yes as I was once Mormon.
God Bless
www.utahmisison.com
B
BartBurk
Guest
It makes no different what they say. They haven’t added anything valid to the canon that should make us suspect the canon is still open.
M
MomblessedX3
Guest
Can someone clarify for me…The talk in question was given at the General Conference on Apr. 5th?
Thanks
Thanks
Z
zerinus
Guest
The talk was given on the Sunday afternoon session of the Conference on April the 6th. Here is a link to the entire Conference sessions:
lds.org/conference/sessions/display/0,5239,23-1-851,00.html
And here is a link to the conferences of previous years:
lds.org/conference/display/0,5234,23-1,00.html
zerinus
J
J_C
Guest
i think Prince Hal gets right to the nub of things in posts 12 and 13. last year i sat through some (very little) of the gen. conference when I had direct tv and got the BYu station. i just couldn’t take very much of it. the two or three speakers i heard were just screwing things up royally. it was maddening. i remember yelling at the tv when the speaker called St. Mark an Apostle. I mean, come on, that is a level of Bible ignorance that is intolderable.
T
Tmaque
Guest
My problem with Elder Holland’s talk is that it doesn’t address why LDS “revelation” is authentic revelation at all. He mentions The Pearl of Great Price. Wow! Every religious scholar knows that the Book of Abraham papyrus “translation” has been discredited because the papyrus is an Egyptian funerary text. What about the Joseph Smith translation of the NT? If he was a prophet why doesn’t the LDS Church use his translation as scripture? These are just a few of many troubling aspects to LDS “revelation”.
Also disturbing to me is the fact that he mentions that most of the complete New Testament copies are less than 1000 years old. This is misleading because I’m sure he knows that the canon was set by the Catholic Church no later than 400 a.d. The fact that more complete bound copies of the NT can’t be found doesn’t prove the canon was not complete at all!!! Disappointing, but not surprising.
This is the type of misdirection of truth that caused me to leave the LDS Church and become a Catholic. I thank God every day that I have found the true church of Jesus Christ.
Also disturbing to me is the fact that he mentions that most of the complete New Testament copies are less than 1000 years old. This is misleading because I’m sure he knows that the canon was set by the Catholic Church no later than 400 a.d. The fact that more complete bound copies of the NT can’t be found doesn’t prove the canon was not complete at all!!! Disappointing, but not surprising.
This is the type of misdirection of truth that caused me to leave the LDS Church and become a Catholic. I thank God every day that I have found the true church of Jesus Christ.
- Status