Mormons and authority

[Janderich]

Taraquin, these are all good questions. I’m afraid I have run out of time tonight so I’ll takle just one more.

This way, I can come to the truth in the way that the Lord told Joseph Smith he could come to understand how to translate from one language into another: “ But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.” – Doctrine and Covenants 9:8. Lest someone hold the notion that this procedure of studying things out to determine truth applies only to Joseph Smith translating the approximately 200 pounds of metal he claimed to have found, I quote also from Doctrine and Covenants 88:118 “And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith.”

The Lord has defined how we are to learn of him, and it is not as the world learns. By all means study it out. But do not end there, it is simply the first step. Moreover D&C 88:118 helps us understand the preferred method. It’s given in the first words of the verse, “And as all have not faith…”. See, some will only turn to books, well they can learn good things that way. But if we know the right process we can learn by faith. It is more lasting and faster then book learning. To learn by faith is to hear and then experiment on the word. The word of God will begin to enlarge the soul, enlighten the understanding, and become sweet (see Alma 32:28). When we feel this, then we can embrace the doctrine with confidence and act upon it. When we act we come to know the truth. As Jesus said, “If any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine, whether if be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). Then no missing facts can separate us from the truth, for it will be part of who we are.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Taraquin, these are all good questions. I’m afraid I have run out of time tonight so I’ll takle just one more. The Lord has defined how we are to learn of him, and it is not as the world learns. By all means study it out. But do not end there, it is simply the first step. Moreover D&C 88:118 helps us understand the preferred method. It’s given in the first words of the verse, “And as all have not faith…”. See, some will only turn to books, well they can learn good things that way. But if we know the right process we can learn by faith. It is more lasting and faster then book learning. To learn by faith is to hear and then experiment on the word. The word of God will begin to enlarge the soul, enlighten the understanding, and become sweet (see Alma 32:28). When we feel this, then we can embrace the doctrine with confidence and act upon it. When we act we come to know the truth. As Jesus said, “If any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine, whether if be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). Then no missing facts can separate us from the truth, for it will be part of who we are.

God has created us as rational creatures, and gifted us with the ability to reason. There is no good purpose to believing faith and reason cannot work together. Or more to the point, one should ask who is served by asking you to not think about “missing facts”.

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord” Isaiah 1:18

 

[RebeccaJ]

Why reject such an obvious fact? Listen to your heart it is telling you the truth. Have the philosophies of men got so in the way?
.

We live in freedom, the Church does not impose on us via infallibility or “the philosophies of men”. It is Christ who we follow, and who our faith witnesses. Jesus’ proposition is to follow Him. No one is forced. He does not impose Himself on anyone.

Reason and faith both tell me that Jesus did not leave the world to wander without the ministries He established, guided by the Holy Spirit to all truth, for nearly two millennia. I find it an imposition on my faith to insist otherwise. You, seeking to enslave those who are free, with the shackles that come from doubting God.

 

[TexanKnight]

Taraquin, these are all good questions. I’m afraid I have run out of time tonight so I’ll takle just one more. The Lord has defined how we are to learn of him, and it is not as the world learns. By all means study it out. But do not end there, it is simply the first step. Moreover D&C 88:118 helps us understand the preferred method. It’s given in the first words of the verse, “And as all have not faith…”. See, some will only turn to books, well they can learn good things that way. But if we know the right process we can learn by faith. It is more lasting and faster then book learning. To learn by faith is to hear and then experiment on the word. The word of God will begin to enlarge the soul, enlighten the understanding, and become sweet (see Alma 32:28). When we feel this, then we can embrace the doctrine with confidence and act upon it. When we act we come to know the truth. As Jesus said, “If any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine, whether if be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). Then no missing facts can separate us from the truth, for it will be part of who we are.

Christ also said that we should know his followers by their fruits. What does it say that js was a convicted con man, attempted wife swapping with William Law, abused his authority, violated the Constitution, carried weapons illegally in jail, fired blindly at people in jail, cheated people in a bank scandal, took people’s money and wives, and etc. Does that really sound like a man of God?

 

[lynnanine]

but when we find a new truth we do not allow dead words to prevent the Spirit from teaching us

I’m not sure I follow this bit. Doesn’t having a new truth imply that the old truth was wrong? Which would mean God lied by giving an incorrect truth, and Gid cannot lie. What makes a truth suddenly invalid and require abandonment because the Word of God is suddenly “dead,” according to your words.

 

[Janderich]

God has created us as rational creatures, and gifted us with the ability to reason. There is no good purpose to believing faith and reason cannot work together. Or more to the point, one should ask who is served by asking you to not think about “missing facts”.

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord” Isaiah 1:18

Of course consider, of course reason. But missing facts are simply that, missing. Tarquin wants a line of facts linking one detail to another. Well he won’t get it. History was written by the victors. They spin it their way. They get rid of facts and books that contradict their thinking. But the Lord has provided a better way. Not free from reason but in addition to it.

 

[Janderich]

I’m not sure I follow this bit. Doesn’t having a new truth imply that the old truth was wrong? Which would mean God lied by giving an incorrect truth, and Gid cannot lie. What makes a truth suddenly invalid and require abandonment because the Word of God is suddenly “dead,” according to your words.

I have seen two ways words become dead. First, they are not of God and so from the beginning lead us astray. They are presented as God’s word, but they are surely not. Second, the word of the Lord is misunderstood. It causes us to hold onto a false belief. We have to be so careful of this. If we hold onto too many false beliefs we will bury the truth. Both scenarios happen to all people. It would be foolish to think any of us have all the truth or do not have some false concepts preventing us from moving forward.

 

[taylorf]

I have seen two ways words become dead. First, they are not of God and so from the beginning lead us astray. They are presented as God’s word, but they are surely not. Second, the word of the Lord is misunderstood. It causes us to hold onto a false belief. We have to be so careful of this. If we hold onto too many false beliefs we will bury the truth. Both scenarios happen to all people. It would be foolish to think any of us have all the truth or do not have some false concepts preventing us from moving forward.

But I don’t think it’s foolish to believe that prophets and apostles should have the truth or access to the truth. Isn’t it disconserting that it’s the church’s leaders causing the misunderstanding and false beliefs? McConckie acknowledged the Lord permits false doctrine to be taught. What is the use then of a prophet or apostle if you can’t rely on what they teach?

 

[TexanKnight]

But I don’t think it’s foolish to believe that prophets and apostles should have the truth or access to the truth. Isn’t it disconserting that it’s the church’s leaders causing the misunderstanding and false beliefs? McConckie acknowledged the Lord permits false doctrine to be taught. What is the use then of a prophet or apostle if you can’t rely on what they teach?

I have made this point several times.

Authority should come from more than just claiming it. One need only look at the issue Janderich dodges re: js and his character and moral flaws, the horribly racist and bloody comments by BY and others to wonder how anyone could claim they actually speak to and for God.

Add to that the lds god and his changing doctrine, followed by lds “prophets” overruling past “prophets” and one must wonder how any Mormon could know which wa the wind blowing.

 

[lynnanine]

I have seen two ways words become dead. First, they are not of God and so from the beginning lead us astray. They are presented as God’s word, but they are surely not. Second, the word of the Lord is misunderstood. It causes us to hold onto a false belief. We have to be so careful of this. If we hold onto too many false beliefs we will bury the truth. Both scenarios happen to all people. It would be foolish to think any of us have all the truth or do not have some false concepts preventing us from moving forward.

So what’s the criteria for 1) deciding something is from God and then 2) that it is being interpreted correctly?

 

[iepuras]

But I don’t think it’s foolish to believe that prophets and apostles should have the truth or access to the truth. Isn’t it disconserting that it’s the church’s leaders causing the misunderstanding and false beliefs? McConckie acknowledged the Lord permits false doctrine to be taught. What is the use then of a prophet or apostle if you can’t rely on what they teach?

Exactly. What is the point of having prophets and apostles if they can teach false doctrine or cause confusion and misunderstanding like anybody else?

 

[eddie_too]

until a mormon gives evidence that the early church did not teach what the apostles teach, there is really nothing to discuss as to the revelations of joseph smith.

the devil has appeared and misled people throughout history, but the devil cannot go back and change the past.

if there is evidence that demonstrates that the early church did not teach what the apostles taught, provide it.

otherwise, you have nothing to believe in but the probable deceptions of mere human beings.

God gave every human being an intellect. God does not ask for blind belief from His creatures.

absent concrete evidence of some sort, any evidence at all, it is purely blind faith to accept joseph smith as anything more than, at best, a seriously misguided man.

and like i said, blind faith is a defiant act toward our Creator. it is materially a sin. i am not assigning culpability, but to believe without any evidence for your belief is sinful.

the essence of mormonism is that the early church departed from the teachings of the apostles. they have NO EVIDENCE. NONE, ZILCH, NADA, for believing that.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Of course consider, of course reason. But missing facts are simply that, missing. Tarquin wants a line of facts linking one detail to another. Well he won’t get it. History was written by the victors. They spin it their way. They get rid of facts and books that contradict their thinking. But the Lord has provided a better way. Not free from reason but in addition to it.

History is.not belief and belied is not history.

 

[eddie_too]

not only do the mormons not have a shred of evidence that supports the essence of their religion, christians have an abundance of evidence that supports the idea that the teachings of the apostles have not changed in any essential sense.

so, its a double whammy on the mormons’ teachings, so to speak.

 

[taylorf]

Add to that the lds god and his changing doctrine, followed by lds “prophets” overruling past “prophets” and one must wonder how any Mormon could know which wa the wind blowing.

Yes. And thinking about this some more…if prophets/apostles can teach in err while being divinely inspired, or while mistaking their own beliefs for divine guidance, then how can the average LDS member have faith that their own inspirations and witnesses of truth are coming from God?

Seems to me that if the church wants to assume that church leaders are prone to error when teaching doctrine, then the whole thing falls apart given that nothing can be relied upon.

 

[Stephen168]

Hi LivingWaters, For the sake of time I do not think I can adiquately answer all your questions.

Taraquin, these are all good questions. I’m afraid I have run out of time tonight so I’ll takle just one more.

The Catholic Church has the authority given to it by Christ. It has passed it on through the Bishops for 2000 years; historical fact.

The leadership in Mormonism has no authority. It was started by Joseph Smith, 1800 years after Christ, and Joseph Smith has been shown to have lied about the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, the age of the earth, etc. He has failed as a ‘prophet.’ There is nothing left of his ‘Great Apostasy’ story. Mormonism is an invention NOT a restoration; polygamy, man becoming God, non-black priesthood, Melchizedek Priesthood, I could go on but I’m running out of time.

 

[PaulDupre1]

Personally, I would like a reference/proof for J’s claim that baptismal practices were changed by the Catholic Church.

I haven’t seen anything that says Jesus was immersed. The Bible says he went down

Matthew 3:13-16

“As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water.”

Was he ankle deep? Waist deep? I don’t see any reference to immersion.

J, please provide a reference for your assertion on the changing of Baptism. Also, still waiting for your proof on this whole “translated being” thing you claim.

Yes, that’s true. The bible never says that baptism must be by immersion.

I think the misunderstanding arises because most Protestants do not live in the desert. In the desert, water is hard to find. And when you do find it, it is usually not very deep.

If God required baptism to always be by immersion, it would be very unfair to those who wish to be baptized but cannot be immersed. Consider the very ill or one on his deathbed or someone in an iron lung, or an Eskimo in the winter. Would God prevent these from being baptized? No.

 

[marywarfield]

Yes, that’s true. The bible never says that baptism must be by immersion.

I think the misunderstanding arises because most Protestants do not live in the desert. In the desert, water is hard to find. And when you do find it, it is usually not very deep.

If God required baptism to always be by immersion, it would be very unfair to those who wish to be baptized but cannot be immersed. Consider the very ill or one on his deathbed or someone in an iron lung, or an Eskimo in the winter. Would God prevent these from being baptized? No.

The Didache from the end of the first century gives
specific instructions for baptism. This was before the Church
went Apostate" according to the Mormons. So we can
trust this correct?

The Didache states: baptism by immersion if possible.
If not possible than use living (running) water. If not
possible to use living use not running.
In other words use what you have in whatever quantity
convenient. Duh!

The complete Didache.
churchyear.net/lentfatherscomplete.pdf

 

[LivingWaters7]

“For if there be no Christ there be no God;” - 2 Nephi 11:7 (3 = 1 because: if 3 - 1 = 0, then 3 = 1) And the next statement is, “if there be no God we are not.” I believe this makes three, God, Christ, and ourselves; all individual, all distinct. You see 3 does not = 1, I could ask my 5 year old and she would get it right. However, 1+1+1 does equal 3.

Right, three distinct Persons. That is what the Trinity teaches.

“. . . sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God . . .” - Mormon 7:7 (3 = 1)Yes, of course they are one. They are of the same mind, they share the same Spirit. This does not mean that all three of the are the same person.

Traditional Christians do not believe that all three are the same person. That is Modalism. Traditional Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three distinct Persons. The Son did not pray to Himself, as some LDS like to claim about the Trinity doctrine.

 

[JamesCollins]

Right, three distinct Persons. That is what the Trinity teaches.

Traditional Christians do not believe that all three are the same person. That is Modalism. Traditional Christians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three distinct Persons. The Son did not pray to Himself, as some LDS like to claim about the Trinity doctrine.

That Mormons can’t figure out the Trinity doctrine is just more evidence of their lack of authority. Janderich claimed the three persons of the Trinity share the same Spirit when they actually share the exact same nature. That is a big difference and the one thing LDS can’t seem to understand or accept. I once heard President Hinckley say the Father and Son were alike in nature, but for some reason they can’t utter that the Father and the Son have exactly the same nature.