Mormons and authority

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesCollins
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Janderich said:
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.
Click to expand...
LivingWaters7 said:
I have found that most, if not all, of the verses cited by LDS in relation to a complete apostasy and loss of authority either refer to partial/personal apostasies (and not an apostasy of the Church), or something unrelated in the Old Testament. I find much more Biblical support for the continuation of Christ’s Church, His Kingdom, after He establishes it, which He did anciently.

Further, when LDS speak of a restoration, it is difficult to actually point to a cohesive body that believed similarly to the LDS. For example, was there a Church anciently that can be pointed to that believed in baptism for the dead, the necessity of temple ordinances for eternal life, “Seventy” as a priesthood office name (and not just seventy men), an embodied God the Father (let alone one that progressed to/achieved Godhood), etc? Where is there evidence that the LDS really restored these things that were supposedly lost? This is a question that helped lead me back to Catholicism.

The one area that I will grant makes more sense to me in the LDS world is the issue of authority to perform sacraments/ordinances. LDS believe that only the priesthood in the true Church has the authority to validly perform ordinances. Therefore, only they have that authority (in their view). This makes more sense to me than viewing, for example, Orthodox as having valid apostolic succession, valid orders/priesthood, and valid sacraments, despite them not being in full communion with the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
But if they actually have the authority for these sacraments/ordinances why
is it all done entirely under the cover of complete secrecy?
 
marywarfield said:
U;)

Hmmm. And you know this how? The Holy Spirit was a useless
unfruitful thing for several hundred years until Smith
was born and took up a gun to defend it? Is that
what you are saying?
Click to expand...
The Spirit has never been unfruitful. It guided men and women to do right anciently as well as today. In so much as truth has been taught and received, the Spirit sheds forth light, knowledge, and understanding to all the family of Adam and Eve. However, the greater manifestations of the Spirit were gradually lost to the church, and the greater truths of how to approach God were buried in false ritual and false belief. Insomuch as we strip ourselves of man’s teaching and humble ourselves before the Lord we receive the Spirit more abundantly. I know this because I have, in large measure, experienced it.
 
RebeccaJ said:
The evidence is of course contrary to your claims. But we’ve been over this before.

The fact is, as stated by the OP, Mormons begin from a place.that denies the Holy Spirit, and Jesus’ commitment to His bride. It is the Protestant claim that Christ cannot be found in His own Church. Mormons never present anything that does not support the Protestant roots of Mormonism.

Bald assertions in regards to Jesus and the Apostles failing may fly in Mormon circles, if doesn’t with Catholics.

it is irrational to believe Peter, James and John didn’t appoint successors while alive, but did so from the grave. All based on your belief that Bishops.are.not successors. Well, the pillars of the Church appointed successors while living is much more reasonable than believing they didn’t, but came back from the dead to get it right.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
I simply mean that I don’t limit my statement to Catholicism. Yes, early on ordinances were changed and false belief crept in. But even today in the LDS church people believe that temple ordinances in and of themselves save.
 
Janderich said:
I simply mean that I don’t limit my statement to Catholicism. Yes, early on ordinances were changed and false belief crept in. But even today in the LDS church people believe that temple ordinances in and of themselves save.
Click to expand...
which is nothing like what the Jewish temple had been used for.
 
Janderich said:
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.
Click to expand...
Since you believe false teaching, I pray you cease partaking in unbelief…
 
Janderich said:
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.
Click to expand...
False ritual as in baptizing dead people?
False belief as in God is nothing more than an imperfect
man who progressed?
False belief as in the New Jerusalem will be on the American continent?
Or as in the Second Coming of 1891?
Can you name ONE prophet as violent as Smith?
 
truthseeker32 said:
which is nothing like what the Jewish temple had been used for.
Click to expand...
very true. The lds temple was used for blood oaths, female subjugation, and to portray Catholic priests as agents of Satan.

Never heard of ANYTHING like that happening in the Jewish Temple
 
Janderich said:
I simply mean that I don’t limit my statement to Catholicism. Yes, early on ordinances were changed and false belief crept in. But even today in the LDS church people believe that temple ordinances in and of themselves save.
Click to expand...
Hm. So the Zmormon belief that Jesus was a polygamist
with several children is a true or false teaching in Mormonism?

Journal of Discourses Volume 4 page 259?

The teaching of Smith that there are a plurality of Gods- Three actually
Father Son and Holy Ghost and the Mormon Church is
making more Gods through “progression” including Smith?
Is this according to you false or true teaching?
“Teachings of…Smith” page 370.

And all of these teachings diametrically oppose the Bible
which the Mormons proclaim as the Word of God?
True or false teachings?
 
marywarfield said:
False ritual as in baptizing dead people?
False belief as in God is nothing more than an imperfect
man who progressed?
False belief as in the New Jerusalem will be on the American continent?
Or as in the Second Coming of 1891?
Can you name ONE prophet as violent as Smith?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Janderich said:
Thanks TexanKnight, and I you.
Click to expand...
No worries about me. God led me from the church that taught polygamy due to js’ cheating, that teaches that the lds god was once a sinful man, that taught that Jesus is dishonest, weak and cruel. I hope you someday leave it, too
 
Janderich said:
I don’t consider Joseph Smith violent.

illegally carrying a gun in jail and blindly shooting people is not violent? Proclaiming death to all who opposed him was not violent? We must have a different definition of violence

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.

are you saying that things in 1830s USA were exactly the same as Israel hundreds of years BC?
Click to expand...
 
Janderich said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
Janderich said:
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.
Click to expand...
So let’s back up to this: You admit then that Matthew
Mark, Luke and John were valid apostles under the Holy
Spirit. All of these were meek as lambs never resisted
arrest and thought being martyred (without resistance) was
an honor.
And then there were no more valid Apostles until
Smith came along and he was “martyred” after he and his
buddy Hiram were smuggled six shooters to blast
their way out of town.

If they were valid apostles what were the guns for?
Can you give me any reason at all why an Apostle
of God would need to pack a six shooter?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top