Mormons and authority

[jadamo]

Indeed it is, because we believe an apostle is not a bishop or a pope. Apostolic succession vanished from the earth with the deaths of the apostles a long time ago, and was only restored when a resurrected Peter and James along with John, who was translated, placed their hands on Joseph Smiths head and restored the priesthood. If this truly happened as I have said, then there really is not point in arguing further.

Why would Apostolic succession vanish from the earth? Why would Jesus teach the Apostles that no one lights a lamp to hide it under a basket, but puts it on a lampstead to let its light shine forth? And is Jesus not the light of the world? Indeed, Jesus came, taught, gave authority, died and resurrected, only to put this new light under a basket if authority truly vanished from the earth. We’re all in agreement that baptism is very important to salvation, but without authority, that’s A LOT of people who died w/o being baptized. God didn’t do a very good job if he allowed that many people to live and die w/o baptism, and who now have to wait until their current relatives baptize them by proxy.

And how do you KNOW, without any doubt, that authority was restored by Peter, James and John to Smith? Smiths word? Who were the witnesses other than Cowdery (who was excommunicated in 1838)? Did Smith test these spirits to see if they were truly from God? Why is Smiths word better than the dozens of early church fathers who documented Apostolic succession and guarded the deposit of faith they were given by the Apostles themselves? After all, if Jesus failed to give proper instructions, and the Holy Spirit was truly unable to guide the fledgling Church after the Apostles died, how can we truly trust the Holy Spirit this time?

How can I tell Joseph Smith is a true prophet and not Felix Manalo, who claims the same thing as Smith? Manalo also claims to be the last prophet sent to restore the true church of Christ b/c all other churches are apostatized…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iglesia_ni_Cristo

Janderich, I do not doubt your sincerity and devotion to God and your faith, I know you do your best to follow God and live a good and devout life, and I do the same. However, faith, to me, means to truly trust, and truly believe God when he says to have peace and not fear the persecutions of the world. To completely and totally, submit ourselves to His Will, no matter what. Faith is no longer faith, and hope is no longer hope, if God truly allowed a worldwide apostatsy to occur (and apparently didn’t bother to let anyone else know). How can I believe in an all-loving and all-merciful God if he allowed so many generations of His children to ignorantly follow deceptive teachings? But then “restore” the truth when the end is near, when the false teachings have been spread throughout the world to every tongue and nation? I thought God wanted His light to be spread to all tongues and nations…that’s 1800 years worth of correction your church has to make now.

 

[JamesCollins]

Arguing with Mormons about the violent acts of their church leaders is fruitless. Almost all churches have their share of violence and sexual misconduct. Only the Mormons among those who claim Christianity have completely bogus scriptures with no ancient tradition to bolster their authority. The Mormon scriptures are completely fraudulent – Nephi, Mormon, Lehi and Moroni never existed. The Book of Abraham was not a translation of Egyptian papyri. The facts completely undercut their authority.

 

[marywarfield]

By what authority do the Apostles of LDS teach
that Adam was really Michael the Archangel? That
he arrived in the Garden of Eden with several wives?
He just arrived there WITH the wives thereby directly
contradicting Genesis?

By what authority do the Apostles of LDS teach of
Jesus’ several wives and children?

By what authority do the Apostles of LDS teach
that God began as a man?

By what authority do the Apostles of LDS teach
that Jesus was conceived through physical sexual
intercourse between Mary and a man in direct
contradiction to the Gospels?

And by what authority Janderich do you believe
you also will progress to being God yourself? For
if you are a Mormon man therein lies your desire
and why you are here at Catholic Answers looking
for converts to assist you in good standing thereby
receiving your own planet to rule. By what authority?

 

[RebeccaJ]

You seem to think that I am advocating what I am merely describing. Reread my post bearing in mind that I am a Catholic. My point was that we have no basis for discussion with the LDS about Apostolic Succession because they believe the Church to have been apostate for about 1800 years and we believe it to have been the Body of Christ from the moment of its foundation until now and so it will remain until the end of time.

Oh dear, I’m sorry! I meant to reply to this post of Janderich’s.

Indeed it is, because we believe an apostle is not a bishop or a pope. Apostolic succession vanished from the earth with the deaths of the apostles a long time ago, and was only restored when a resurrected Peter and James along with John, who was translated, placed their hands on Joseph Smiths head and restored the priesthood. If this truly happened as I have said, then there really is not point in arguing further.

That’s what happens when I try to use my cell phone to post.

 

[Tarquin]

I don’t consider Joseph Smith violent. But there are many prophets who have done things which you might consider “violent”. Take Elijah, after mocking the priests of Baal and their sacrifice the Bible says, “And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there” (1 Kings 18:40) Their were at least 450 priests of Baal.

Respectfully, this is a distraction. The point is not who else may have been violent, but was Joseph Smith “violent,” in the sense I’m sure of unjustified or (possibly) excessive violence. Whether Elijah or Jim Jones or whoever dropped the atom bomb were violent is not the issue, and will only serve to confuse.

A second issue, which seems more related to bringing Elijah up, would be “Did God sanction the violence?” - in Joseph Smith’s case as He presumably did in Elijah’s case.

Self-defense against an armed mob, by using a gun to shoot at them, is justifiable violence in my opinion. Violence begets violence. The reason Smith was in the jail in the first place was because of violence he sanctioned and directed. Nonetheless the particular violence he committed within the jail as men were coming up the stairs to kill him was justified. But then, why would he have said, and why would current Mormons assert that he went “like a lamb”? That is a secondary problem, to me, with the issue of violence.

The other instances of violence are a bit harder to persuade a Mormon to accept, but they are there. The attitude - and acts - became much, much worse under Brigham Young, and the so-called “whistling brigades” added to that.

 

[TexanKnight]

Respectfully, this is a distraction. The point is not who else may have been violent, but was Joseph Smith “violent,” in the sense I’m sure of unjustified or (possibly) excessive violence. Whether Elijah or Jim Jones or whoever dropped the atom bomb were violent is not the issue, and will only serve to confuse.

A second issue, which seems more related to bringing Elijah up, would be “Did God sanction the violence?” - in Joseph Smith’s case as He presumably did in Elijah’s case.

Self-defense against an armed mob, by using a gun to shoot at them, is justifiable violence in my opinion. Violence begets violence. The reason Smith was in the jail in the first place was because of violence he sanctioned and directed. Nonetheless the particular violence he committed within the jail as men were coming up the stairs to kill him was justified. But then, why would he have said, and why would current Mormons assert that he went “like a lamb”? That is a secondary problem, to me, with the issue of violence.

The other instances of violence are a bit harder to persuade a Mormon to accept, but they are there. The attitude - and acts - became much, much worse under Brigham Young, and the so-called “whistling brigades” added to that.

you mean Bloody Brigham of blood oath fame?

 

[Miriam1947]

I believe I have been up front. Are you talking about me, or LDS in general? If me, what rhetoric do you see?

By the way, when I say false ritual and unbelief I am not restricting myself to Catholics. When a person believes false teaching in any form. Or when they believe physical practices alone can save them, they partake of this unbelief.

Really? Because the whole Mormon religion is full of false practices. What other religion that calls itself Christian practices the Second Anointing? The person receiving the second anointing is good to go, better even than the OSAS of some Protestants. But unfortunately only the elite get the second anointing, never the lowly guy in the pew. Guaranteed the Celestial Kingdom. Must be nice.

A super duper get out of hell free card. Many Mormons think the second anointing means that the LDS man who received it has actually seen Christ. When it basically is a recommendation from another man who also received the second anointing.

mormonthink.com/tomphillips.htm

 

[Janderich]

You don’t view resisting arrest on money fraud charges by killing two men
in a gun battle before finally being shot to death yoursel
as violent? This is in actual fact how Smith died. Do you deny that?
Most of us do consider that quite violent.

We would also consider the Meadow Massacre of hundreds
of women, men and children on a wagon train violent.
Do you consider that violent?

And how is any of that HOLY in Spirit?

Your facts on Joseph Smith are incorrect. He did not kill two people. Please review the history and you will see this is not the case.

Moreover, you have ignored your own question. You asked me to name one prophet who was, in your words, “As violent as Joseph Smith”. I gave you Elijah who killed 450 people. After this event the scriptures say he was taken up into heaven in whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). So I ask, when he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

 

[marywarfield]

Your facts on Joseph Smith are incorrect. He did not kill two people. Please review the history and you will see this is not the case.

Moreover, you have ignored your own question. You asked me to name one prophet who was, in your words, “As violent as Joseph Smith”. I gave you Elijah who killed 450 people. After this event the scriptures say he was taken up into heaven in whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). So I ask, when he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

Historical facts. Smith killed two men of the four wounded.
Check YOUR facts. Lol

 

[Janderich]

Really? Because the whole Mormon religion is full of false practices. What other religion that calls itself Christian practices the Second Anointing? The person receiving the second anointing is good to go, better even than the OSAS of some Protestants. But unfortunately only the elite get the second anointing, never the lowly guy in the pew. Guaranteed the Celestial Kingdom. Must be nice.

A super duper get out of hell free card. Many Mormons think the second anointing means that the LDS man who received it has actually seen Christ. When it basically is a recommendation from another man who also received the second anointing.

mormonthink.com/tomphillips.htm

Miriam, Miriam, when will you see that ordinances are symbols. They point the way we must walk, they are a witness of our belief, but they do not of themselves save anyone. However, when coupled with one who is committed to keeping covenants they open the windows of heaven. God is no respecter of persons.

 

[TexanKnight]

Your facts on Joseph Smith are incorrect. He did not kill two people. Please review the history and you will see this is not the case.

I see. You believe that firing blindly down stairs with an illegal gun is less violent than actually hitting the folks he was shooting at? Interesting.

Moreover, you have ignored your own question. You asked me to name one prophet who was, in your words, “As violent as Joseph Smith”. I gave you Elijah who killed 450 people. After this event the scriptures say he was taken up into heaven in whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). So I ask, when he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

And you ignored MY question. Are you saying that js, in jail for breaking the law in 1800s USA is the same as a Biblical prophet in Israel several hundred BC?

also very interesting

 

[Janderich]

Historical facts. Smith killed two men of the four wounded.
Check YOUR facts. Lol

We can discuss your distortion of history later. You asked me about prophets. I gave you Elijah as an example. The scriptures state he killed 450 priests. So I ask you again:

When he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

 

[TexanKnight]

We can discuss your distortion of history later. You asked me about prophets. I gave you Elijah as an example. The scriptures state he killed 450 priests. So I ask you again:

When he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

And you ignored MY question. Are you saying that js, in jail for breaking the law in 1800s USA is the same as a Biblical prophet in Israel several hundred BC?

also very interesting

 

[RebeccaJ]

We can discuss your distortion of history later. You asked me about prophets. I gave you Elijah as an example. The scriptures state he killed 450 priests. So I ask you again:

When he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

So, anyone who commits violence is a prophet?

What Catholics look for in someone who claims to be a modern prophet, is one who follows Christ, supporting the prophetic mission of Jesus, which is not recognizable by violence.

 

[marywarfield]

We can discuss your distortion of history later. You asked me about prophets. I gave you Elijah as an example. The scriptures state he killed 450 priests. So I ask you again:

When he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

Yes. And he himself killed no one. He didn’t have a six shooter.
Now I ask YOU again- if Matthew Mark Luke and John
were valid apostles according to you and there was
no others until Smith- why was Smith entirely and absolutely
nothing at all like Matthew Mark Luke and John?
Nothing at all and actually did everything these four apostles
said NOT to do?
Are you indicating Smith came along to prove
the four Apostles were false? Simply because all of
his thinking and behavior was in opposition to the
four and to Jesus Himself.

 

[marywarfield]

We can discuss your distortion of history later. You asked me about prophets. I gave you Elijah as an example. The scriptures state he killed 450 priests. So I ask you again:

When he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

Do you really imagine Matthew Mark Luke and John
treasure hunting? Carting around six shooters and buffalo
rifles? My understanding is they carried fishing poles.
Marrying multiple wives? Are you saying they were cowards
as they allowed themselves to be put to death without
defending themselves?

Do you imagine Matthew Mark Luke and John seeking
Money with divining rods? Do you believe they
were seers able to have occult activity with rocks
telling them where the money was?
Do you believe these four apostles had ANY interest
in money? At all? We know Smiths primary interest
was definately money.
Did Jesus spend his time looking for buried money?
Is that an occupation Jesus would have found worthwhile
at all? Were the disciples told to arm themselves with
swords and knives or other weapons of self defense?

In fact can you name ANYTHING Smith’s behavior had
in common with the four apostles you claim were valid
apostles? What? Why or why not?

And the first rituals of breaking bread in the catacombs
came after the four Apostles visited the Elks Club or
something? Since we know the first ordinances created
by Smith came from rituals of the Freemasons 32nd degree two
months after Smith joined them.
So is the source of the Holy Spirit in LDS actually
the Masonic Lodge?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Janderich, and any other LDS participating, I have a few questions if you don’t mind:

1. LDS claim a restoration of “Aaronic Priesthood” and “Melchizedek Priesthood”. Do you believe that the ancient Church of Jesus Christ had these two priesthoods? If so, what is your evidence?
2. LDS claim a restoration of the offices of the priesthood. Do you believe that “Seventy” is a priesthood office? Did the ancient Church of Jesus Christ have this office? If so, what is your evidence?
3. Is “prophet” viewed as a priesthood office? What exactly is a “prophet”, and how do the LDS prophets function differently from leaders of other churches and religions, in that prophetic role and calling?
4. Are 12 Apostles necessary for the Church of Jesus Christ? If so, then why did the LDS Church not have 12 Apostles until 1835, 5 years after the church was established? Was it the restored Church of Jesus Christ, with the “same organization” as the primitive Church in 1830?
5. Do the modern LDS Apostles perform miracles?
6. How do you view the previously cited Acts 1:20, which talks about taking the “bishoprick” of another, in relation to Matthias replacing Judas? Do you find that relevant at all to the Catholic/Orthodox view that the Apostles appointed Successors, the Bishops?

Thank you.

 

[jadamo]

I don’t consider Joseph Smith violent. But there are many prophets who have done things which you might consider “violent”. Take Elijah, after mocking the priests of Baal and their sacrifice the Bible says, “And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there” (1 Kings 18:40) Their were at least 450 priests of Baal.

Elijah killed the “prophets” of Baal, an idol whom the Israelites had begun worshipping when they were required to only worship the Lord (“You shall not have other gods before me” Ex 20:3). In 1 Kings 18, Elijah challenged the “prophets” to prepare a bull & invoke Baal to consume the offering with fire. They called out to Baal for half a day and nothing happened. So Elijah did the same, he offered a bull to God and God answered by consuming the bull with fire in front of all the Israelites and “prophets”. God sent him to do this so that the drought would end, and the people would once again know that God is Lord, and Baal is not a god. These “prophets” were killed b/c they were serving a false god and not the true God, they had led the Israelites away from the Lord. Furthermore, Elijah wasn’t caught up to heaven until 2 Kings 2:11, not immediately after he killed the “prophets” of Baal. There are many instances of God allowing war and violence in the OT, it was how He was able to show his power to His people so that they would believe in Him and no other god.
I don’t see any mighty power being shown by Smith shooting other men and trying to escape out a window to save his life. Yes, he was being shot at, but he was in jail for breaking the law. He destroyed a printing press simply b/c it called him out for practicing polygamy and lying about it.
Elijah shows humility and trust in God, he was a true prophet of God.

 

[marywarfield]

Elijah killed the “prophets” of Baal, an idol whom the Israelites had begun worshipping when they were required to only worship the Lord (“You shall not have other gods before me” Ex 20:3). In 1 Kings 18, Elijah challenged the “prophets” to prepare a bull & invoke Baal to consume the offering with fire. They called out to Baal for half a day and nothing happened. So Elijah did the same, he offered a bull to God and God answered by consuming the bull with fire in front of all the Israelites and “prophets”. God sent him to do this so that the drought would end, and the people would once again know that God is Lord, and Baal is not a god. These “prophets” were killed b/c they were serving a false god and not the true God, they had led the Israelites away from the Lord. Furthermore, Elijah wasn’t caught up to heaven until 2 Kings 2:11, not immediately after he killed the “prophets” of Baal. There are many instances of God allowing war and violence in the OT, it was how He was able to show his power to His people so that they would believe in Him and no other god.
I don’t see any mighty power being shown by Smith shooting other men and trying to escape out a window to save his life. Yes, he was being shot at, but he was in jail for breaking the law. He destroyed a printing press simply b/c it called him out for practicing polygamy and lying about it.
Elijah shows humility and trust in God, he was a true prophet of God.

My understanding is Elijah called to God who rained fire
and destruction down on the altars of the false prophets
thereby revealing to the people how false the prophets
were. Whereupon the PEOPLE were so angry THEY
slew the 450 false prophets. Which a similar occurrence
happened within the Mormon conclaves several time-Mormons
and others became so angry they tried to kill Smith.

 

[Horton]

By the way, when I say false ritual and unbelief I am not restricting myself to Catholics. When a person believes false teaching in any form. Or when they believe physical practices alone can save them, they partake of this unbelief.

Bingo! ^^ sounds a lot like LDS to me.