Mormons 17 Points of True Church

[RebeccaJ]

The trouble with that universal argument is that you run into us annoying Lutherans who claim to be a valid continuation of the western church and that our church began at Pentecost.

Of course, you don’t have to agree with us. But we’re rather immune to that particular argument. I imagine that Anglicans are mostly immune to it as well with the Branch Theory that some of them profess.

As TK said, from the POV of someone who was once Mormon, Lutheran and Anglican look the same to us. “Some guy”, who broke off and formed his own religion. I do find it interesting to understand how Protestants view this topic. Branch Theory is a new discovery for me, and it explains a lot, from an Anglican POV. I enjoy reading your posts.

But, for the “universal argument”, Mormons would not answer the same as a Lutheran. It would be more along the lines that God preserved the Bible through an apostate church. The Bible is inspired, but it is not inerrant (because the apostate church changed the Bible). Mormonism “corrects” the apostate errors of the Bible with their additional scriptures that came from Joseph Smith and his associates.

In the end, Protestant or Mormon corrections create a new interpretation, that is separate from Catholic understanding. Of course, compared to Mormonism, Protestant interpretation is Catholic, with a few modifications here and there, that are important, but not the Grand Canyon of difference as compared to a Mormon interpretation. Mormon interpretation is something other.

As an aside, I’ve wondered sometimes why Mormons don’t add in other writings to their scriptures that contain some of what they teach/believe, particularly the gnostic “gospels”.

 

[Marie5890]

figured a Mormon or two would defend their 17 points…

Oh, not surprised to be honest.

LDS dogma is so vastly different from Christian theology, that they can’t defend it in such a way that would be theologically sound.

We know that.

So silence is all there is.

 

[Holly3278]

The Mormon “church” has one big error and that is the “Great Apostasy”. Of course they have a lot of big errors but the “Great Apostasy” is the one that I want to focus on. This error can easily be disproven by looking at history. There is a continuous line of popes going from Saint Peter all the way to Pope Francis. Also, there is not a single period in the history of the world since the establishment of the Catholic Church where someone can say that the Catholic Church did not exist anywhere in the world.And then of course there is also Jesus telling us that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church and He told us He would be with us until the end of time. Clearly the Mormon false doctrine of the “Great Apostasy” is false and is easily refuted.

 

[Marie5890]

The Mormon “church” has one big error and that is the “Great Apostasy”. Of course they have a lot of big errors but the “Great Apostasy” is the one that I want to focus on. This error can easily be disproven by looking at history. There is a continuous line of popes going from Saint Peter all the way to Pope Francis. Also, there is not a single period in the history of the world since the establishment of the Catholic Church where someone can say that the Catholic Church did not exist anywhere in the world.And then of course there is also Jesus telling us that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church and He told us He would be with us until the end of time. Clearly the Mormon false doctrine of the “Great Apostasy” is false and is easily refuted.

They do have a way, that does have some sound argument, to defend this to be honest.

It’s not like the Christian communities for the first century or so were truly “one”. So little is known, historically speaking, of these various communities, to be honest. Some is known, but not a great deal. Kind of murky.

 

[rmcmullan]

OK, TK, thanks for posting that. I was sort of wondering what you meant when you referred to it in the other thread. Sorry, but I am a little underwhelmed, I know space is limited but I don’t think you really addressed the 17 issues but instead rushed to the earliest most convenient criticism.

I guess I could say something along the lines that maybe in your mind you demolished the 17 points of the true church but I don’t think you did. And we’ve discussed these issues forever here in this forum.

<>

 

[TexanKnight]

OK, TK, thanks for posting that. I was sort of wondering what you meant when you referred to it in the other thread. Sorry, but I am a little underwhelmed, I know space is limited but I don’t think you really addressed the 17 issues but instead rushed to the earliest most convenient criticism.

I guess I could say something along the lines that maybe in your mind you demolished the 17 points of the true church but I don’t think you did. And we’ve discussed these issues forever here in this forum.

<>

Hmmmm. Funny. I was pretty clear. I understand if it underwhelms you so much that you know you have no response.

The tough thing for you is this:

a lot of the 17 points are very subjective and hold no water.

A lot of them are claimed by every church…so?

and ALL of them are accompanied by verses that do not say what the point says it says.

Finally, each one was proven wrong…whether you like it or not.

 

[Marie5890]

OK, TK, thanks for posting that. I was sort of wondering what you meant when you referred to it in the other thread. Sorry, but I am a little underwhelmed, I know space is limited but I don’t think you really addressed the 17 issues but instead rushed to the earliest most convenient criticism.

I guess I could say something along the lines that maybe in your mind you demolished the 17 points of the true church but I don’t think you did. And we’ve discussed these issues forever here in this forum.

<>

So much of Mormonism just completely fails…

It’s no wonder LDS members are just walking out the doors, never to return.

It fails.

 

[TexanKnight]

So much of Mormonism just completely fails…

It’s no wonder LDS members are just walking out the doors, never to return.

It fails.

I have challenged many Mormons to show where in the verses that accompany each of the 17 points to show me in those verses where it says what the points say the verses say.

Not a single Mormon has been able to do so.

 

[charlesby]

Bishops continue today in an office of apostolic succession, and continue to ordain and appoint priests and deacons, who serve under and for our Bishops.

How does Paul the apostle fit into apostolic succession? Isn’t it a fact that he was appointed an apostle directly by the Holy Spirit? The other apostles consented but I don’t believe that Catholicism takes proper account of the ‘Paul factor’.

 

[benjohnson]

So how do you justify to yourself that you are a valid continuation of the western Church?

When, among others…you pick and choose what to follow…like throwing some sacraments, disregard the authority of bishops, and disregard Holy Orders, which are important to both the original east and west…and you call one of the bishops the Anti-Christ.

No - we follow the church. Even have several giant books of rules.
Different definition of sacraments
No - our clergy has oversight
No - proper Holy Orders are fine
No - the expanded modern papal office is anti-Christ.

 

[charlesby]

Regarding number 2, I have a question. Since it is claimed that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon from golden plates, did those golden plates have the words “Jesus Christ” written on them? why would the language, supposedly of reformed egyptian, use two english words that didn’t exist at the time? moreover, was Joseph Smith under the impression that ‘Jesus Christ’ was really the Messiah’s name?

That sounds kinda fishy to me. I would think that if you’re going to have the Messiah’s name included in the name of your church, it would be important to get his name right, no?

Interesting points. Of course ‘Jesus Christ’ is merely the Anglicization of the Greek translation of the Hebrew equivalent words, Yeshua a variant of Yehoshuah meaning ‘Jehovah is salvation’, (cf. yasha` - to save) and Mashiyach meaning the anointed one.

I’d doubt that reformed Egyptian would have had any such word as Yehoshuah.

Mind you, those golden plates … it’s all a hoax of course, as has been well documented on sundry web sites.

 

[benjohnson]

Might work if not started by, and named after, a guy named Luther…long after Pentecost…while the Church Jesus started and Luther left is still going strong

Ahem… We’re properly called Evangelical Catholics (back before Evangelical became a dirty American word) - but you Papists kept on calling us Lutherans and the name stuck.

Allow me to bring a bit of levity to the thread, in the form of Lutheran Satire’s screed about Mormon claim that the Apostle John is still living.

youtube.com/watch?v=FTwpOfr3NDQ&noredirect=1

 

[TexanKnight]

Ahem… We’re properly called Evangelical Catholics (back before Evangelical became a dirty American word) - but you Papists kept on calling us Lutherans and the name stuck.

Allow me to bring a bit of levity to the thread, in the form of Lutheran Satire’s screed about Mormon claim that the Apostle John is still living.

youtube.com/watch?v=FTwpOfr3NDQ&noredirect=1

I see. So what Catholics called you carried more power than what you called yourselves.

Sure sounds like a strong church to me…

Regardless, you are named after the guy who left. That says it all

 

[benjohnson]

The Mormon “church” has one big error and that is the “Great Apostasy”.

If there was a Great Apostasy, I’d expect the resorted church would look like the church as depicted in the Didache.

I’ve been to a LDS Ward and it’s noting like the churches depicted in the Didache.

 

[benjohnson]

Sure sounds like a strong church to me…

Of course we are weak.

“Three times I begged the Lord about this, that it might leave me,
but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.”
I will rather boast most gladly of my weaknesses,
in order that the power of Christ may dwell with me.
Therefore, I am content with weaknesses, insults,
hardships, persecutions, and constraints,
for the sake of Christ;
for when I am weak, then I am strong.”

 

[TexanKnight]

Of course we are weak.

“Three times I begged the Lord about this, that it might leave me,
but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.”
I will rather boast most gladly of my weaknesses,
in order that the power of Christ may dwell with me.
Therefore, I am content with weaknesses, insults,
hardships, persecutions, and constraints,
for the sake of Christ;
for when I am weak, then I am strong.”

Nice try. But it changes nothing.

BTW, I grew up Lutheran. Had scholarships to Concordia in Austin and Texas Lutheran College in Seguin. But I could tell it lacked the full truth and authority. And I could never get over being called a follower of Luther. I wanted to be a follower of God. I left the Lutheran Church while a college student.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Return to the subject of the thread please.

 

[PaulDupre1]

They do have a way, that does have some sound argument, to defend this to be honest.

It’s not like the Christian communities for the first century or so were truly “one”. So little is known, historically speaking, of these various communities, to be honest. Some is known, but not a great deal. Kind of murky.

I’m not sure how “sound” their arguments are, but they are for the most part reasonable and therefore worthy of discussion.

I would hate to think that for 11 years I accepted, supported (with a great deal of my time and money) and proselytized something completely unreasonable. But then again, maybe that is just confirmation bias (aka pride) talking. I’m quite sure that that was what kept me in Mormonism long after I knew in my gut that it was all a scam.

I suspect that several of the LDS here are in the same condition, but aren’t ready to admit it just yet.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[PaulDupre1]

The trouble with that universal argument is that you run into us annoying Lutherans who claim to be a valid continuation of the western church and that our church began at Pentecost.

I love to read stuff like this from Anglicans, Lutherans and United Methodists. It gives me great hope that I will live to see a great reunification of Christianity, perhaps starting with the Orthodox (or maybe not) but including Anglicans, High-Church Lutherans and United Methodists, among others. I am 60 years old, so hurry up everybody!

And no, I don’t think that reunification means everyone quitting their churches and converting to Catholicism. It would probably be more subtle and complicated than that. I’m not sure how it will work, but I am sure that God is sure and He holds it all in His hands.

Paul

 

[benjohnson]

I would hate to think that for 11 years I accepted, supported (with a great deal of my time and money) and proselytized something completely unreasonable. But then again, maybe that is just confirmation bias (aka pride) talking.

I would not count your years at a loss - as I understand it, the LDS missionaries have most of their sucuess with the ‘unchurched’ and culturally there are good virtues in the LDS.

Now that you’ve experienced the LDS church - perhaps you have been given the knowlage to reach them with the Gospel. It would be a way of redeaming those years in a way.