MORMONS (LDS) what is this "great apostasy" that you claim to have happened?

[jpaul1953]

Hi, Chris of WA,
I have been busy all day, but wanted to take a moment now and respond briefly. I want you to know that I respect your opinion and appreciate your comments and questions.

I agree that it may not make sense by the world’s terms. I agree that Jesus knew that the apostles would be killed, and that He knew there would be a struggle in the church to keep the doctrines pure. He also knew that the message of the gospel was so profound and impactful that even if the doctrines became impurely taught, many many wonderful people would live by the main messages and seek to love their neighbor, seek to not judge others, seek to help the poor, and seek to have the cleansing power of the Savior in their personal life knowing that He had suffered for their sins.

The Savior was clearly aware that the Jews had taken the teachings of the prophets of the Old Testament, and made those teachings into something different than the original teachings. He spoke about this often. The Savior is perfect, and being perfect He allows agency completely, with no force or coercion involved in how He operates with humankind or with the church He established. He allows people to do whatever they want to do and choose to do. He would even allow them to change key doctrinal points or key ordinances. It would be against how He taught and what He taught if He were to not allow humankind to do whatever they want. They choose. We choose.

Christ called strong apostles, but if the church grew too fast or if the apostles were killed so quickly that they couldn’t preserve the true doctrine in every city where the gospel was being taught because they couldn’t be in all places at once, then the natural sequence of events would be that as someone liked their own idea better than how things were being done, then they would insert their own idea (perhaps based on tradition they brought with them into the church) and argue that it be done their way. This led eventually to the councils where agreements were made as to what was the doctrine they were all going to agree to, to try and avoid the disunity that was becoming prevalent.

I don’t agree with the assumptions you have made, though I understand why you would make them.

Again, Chris, I hope you understand the distinction I am making which is that Christ and the Holy Spirit do not force behavior or force choices that people make. People are free to make their own choices. I think it is clear that enough changes were made in key doctrines and ordinances that one can detect those changes. Obviously, you will disagree with that. But the Reformation was clearly an attempt to “go back to what the Bible taught.” How could the Holy Spirit be the “permanent guardian of the Church and its mission” if the Holy Spirit allows total and uncompelled agency of everyone in the church?

I don’t cling to the apostacy theory. I cling to the doctrinal purity of Biblical teachings. I love those teachings, and know that they are true. I also love Christ, and know that His mission and the plan of Salvation He carried out because of His love for us, will not fail and will accomplish exactly the mission He had in mind when He offered His life as a willing sacrifice for all of His Father’s children.

Parker,

Here we go again.Just as someone else believed you are not a Christian, just as other churches state, , because you don’t belive that Jesus Christ is perfect, even if in the human form.

The most important gift He gave the world, is THE CHURCH, infallable because he watches over it. IT CANNOT PASS DOWN INCORRECT DOGMAS, UNLESS CHRIST DOESN’T REALLY LOVE US and doesn’t care what we think (let us lie so you could be right- TOTAL INTENTIONAL MISLEAD ON YOUR PART)

How dare you. You are a wolf in sheep’s clothing. When Christ said about Heaven and earth being in agreement, you understand it from a different fork in the road. He is guaranteeing it, not allowing for whatever goes, goes. That’s a direct intelligent falsehood. of misunderstandings to validate your story. I’m tired of your continual challenging the CHURCH, with your intentional misguided thoughts to get weak Catholics to follow your church.

May Christ have mercy on your soul.

jpaul1953

 

[mjf001]

MFJ,
I have read writings that show there were disagreements among the early “apologists.” Paul certainly writes in a way that shows there were disagreements when he was alive.

The biggest distinction of a practice within early Christianity versus practices today, is the strength of the witness from the Holy Ghost that enlivens the dialogue and the writings in a way that shows the same kind of assurance that Peter had when Christ told him his knowedge was revealed by His Father in Heaven, and when Paul wrote that his knowledge was brought to him by being “spiritually discerned”. (1 Corithians 2:14)

What I’m looking for are writings that protest the removing of ordinances or doctrines from Judaism or early Christianity which are uniquely LDS. That would be a good start in showing the great apostasy actually happened.

I’m going to read the entire chapter of 1st Corinthians Chapter 2, not just the one verse you quoted. Then, I’ll get back to you.

 

[jpaul1953]

What I’m looking for are writings that protest the removing of ordinances or doctrines from Judaism or early Christianity which are uniquely LDS. That would be a good start in showing the great apostasy actually happened.

I’m going to read the entire chapter of 1st Corinthians Chapter 2, not just the one verse you quoted. Then, I’ll get back to you.

mjf101,
He can’t produce any books validating his claim because there are none. This is made up based on many groups who dislike the Church. I believe LDS, overall. does good on every level I have seen except on this level, Biblical interpretations. They are against the Church.

Parker writes well and types much better than I but he is releasing lies on the network to cast doubt in the minds of the less stable Roman Catholics.

Every church, outside the Catholic Church, tries hard to find ways to cast doubt on the Church by spreading untruths about our Church.

If Parker wanted the truth he would humble himself under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and ask for the truth. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Ask about the upper management of their temple members that can and will become gods over their own individual planet. But one must be married to be given this highest honor and in good standing with their temple. (that means Jesus doesn’t qualify because he’s not married). LDS believes that gods (not God) were originally men, including our God of the universe, who is actually the god of our planet alone. Now that 's different than how we’re taught.

Why keep this a secret, Parker, or am I causing an apostacy as you are trying to do to our church.

You’re not naive, you’re cool calculating. Watch out fellow Christians, Parker is on the prowl.

jpaul1953

 

[ClementRome]

Not so. It is completely consistent with the Bible and with Bible prophecy, both.

SO when Joseph Smith claimed there were people living on the moon, which later we found out wasn’t true, how do you reconcile that? Dosen’t he fail the test as a prophet according to Deuteronomy? Moses claimed that is a man made even one false prophecy, he was not a prophet. Joseph Smith made allot more than one. Or the Native Americans not having any taces of Semitic blood. Let alone the millions of people who died when the Nephites and the Lammanites fought. There would be enormous archaeological evidence in South America if such happened.

BTY, I myself do respect the LDS, especially their great help in protecting marriage. I’ve read the whole book of Mormon and some D&C. They are interesting.

Also claiming a great apostasy happened means that the Holy Spirit was not able to guide the Church correctly. God surely has enough power to protect the Church. Whats the point if the Church is gonna break down 150 years later. Jesus never said to Peter that he would drop the keys and loose the Church.

 

[mjf001]

mjf101,
He can’t produce any books validating his claim because there are none. This is made up based on many groups who dislike the Church. I believe LDS, overall. does good on every level I have seen except on this level, Biblical interpretations. They are against the Church.

Parker writes well and types much better than I but he is releasing lies on the network to cast doubt in the minds of the less stable Roman Catholics.

Every church, outside the Catholic Church, tries hard to find ways to cast doubt on the Church by spreading untruths about our Church.

If Parker wanted the truth he would humble himself under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and ask for the truth. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Ask about the upper management of their temple members that can and will become gods over their own individual planet. But one must be married to be given this highest honor and in good standing with their temple. (that means Jesus doesn’t qualify because he’s not married). LDS believes that gods (not God) were originally men, including our God of the universe, who is actually the god of our planet alone. Now that 's different than how we’re taught.

Why keep this a secret, Parker, or am I causing an apostacy as you are trying to do to our church.

You’re not naive, you’re cool calculating. Watch out fellow Christians, Parker is on the prowl.

jpaul1953

I know he won’t be able to come up with objective evidence to back his claims. No LDS I’ve ever asked as been able to produce a single shred of evidence. However, every time the apostasy issue comes up, I feel I have to ask in part to give the a chance to produce some objective proof and in part to try to encourage some critical thinking on their part and on the part of others who may be reading.

 

[mjf001]

Parker,
I read 1 Corinthians 2. The way I read it, St. Paul is telling the Corinthians he taught them the truth. He seems to be warning them not to led astray and telling them to use the power of the Holy Spirit to discern the truth. This does not address the apostasy, nor does it say there will be a total apostasy. Nor do I see any unique Mormon Rituals or doctrines in this passage.

I don’t think you answered my question.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The Savior was clearly aware that the Jews had taken the teachings of the prophets of the Old Testament, and made those teachings into something different than the original teachings. He spoke about this often.

Perhaps you missed the numerous times where Jesus made sure that people understood he is the fulfillment of the OT prophecies. If people understood these as something different, He would have had no followers. Have you not read of the woman at the well? Or His triumphant entry into Jerusalem? You have no basis for this belief.

The Savior is perfect, and being perfect He allows agency completely, with no force or coercion involved in how He operates with humankind or with the church He established. He allows people to do whatever they want to do and choose to do. He would even allow them to change key doctrinal points or key ordinances. It would be against how He taught and what He taught if He were to not allow humankind to do whatever they want. They choose. We choose.

Jesus gave us the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, to guide us in Truth. Christ leads His Church, the Holy Spirit is Her guide (and ours). You have to believe that all of this failed until your false prophet arrived on the scene 1800 years later. And suddenly today, it works for you. Self centered, is not the least of the problem in this way of thinking.

Christ called strong apostles, but if the church grew too fast or if the apostles were killed so quickly that they couldn’t preserve the true doctrine in every city where the gospel was being taught because they couldn’t be in all places at once, then the natural sequence of events would be that as someone liked their own idea better than how things were being done, then they would insert their own idea (perhaps based on tradition they brought with them into the church) and argue that it be done their way. This led eventually to the councils where agreements were made as to what was the doctrine they were all going to agree to, to try and avoid the disunity that was becoming prevalent.

Yet there is sound evidence, doctrine, holy persons, miracles, Bishops through the ages, and faithful disciples of Christ, all of which flies in the face of the lies you have to present here.

There have throughout all of Christian history been those who believe their own ideas should replace those of Christ’s Church. Joseph Smith is just one of many.

Again, Chris, I hope you understand the distinction I am making which is that Christ and the Holy Spirit do not force behavior or force choices that people make. People are free to make their own choices. I think it is clear that enough changes were made in key doctrines and ordinances that one can detect those changes. Obviously, you will disagree with that. But the Reformation was clearly an attempt to “go back to what the Bible taught.” How could the Holy Spirit be the “permanent guardian of the Church and its mission” if the Holy Spirit allows total and uncompelled agency of everyone in the church?

Please list the changes in doctrine.

We believe Jesus promised us He would always be with us. His gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was not a temporary trinket. His Church has remained strong, survived, protected the Truths He taught, through hundreds of years. Against assault without and within. Jesus triumphs. Not Joseph Smith, and his erroneous ideas that he pulled out of a hat.

We follow Him in freedom and in Truth.

I don’t cling to the apostacy theory. I cling to the doctrinal purity of Biblical teachings. I love those teachings, and know that they are true. I also love Christ, and know that His mission and the plan of Salvation He carried out because of His love for us, will not fail and will accomplish exactly the mission He had in mind when He offered His life as a willing sacrifice for all of His Father’s children.

You cling to false teachings wrapped in the name and Truth of Jesus Christ. You cling to a deception and spread it here, hoping to lead more away from Christ’s Church.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Excuse me, but I think you are working on an amazing double standard here. The Catholics count someone as Catholic who has ever been baptized as one, whether they were aware of it or not; if you were baptized as an infant, you are Catholic. If you converted to another religion, but you were baptized, then you are still a Catholic. “Once a Catholic, always a Catholic,” right?

According to this there are 68,115,001 Catholics in the USA, comprising 22% of the American population. That’s pretty good, one would think. You can certainly point to that with pardonable pride. Certainly there is nothing in this article (which, by the way, is a very pro-Catholic article on a very pro-Catholic site) that acknowledges any losses due to inactivity.

…Oh, but let’s see; according to THIS, (also a pro-Catholic site, by the way) only 28% of that 68,115,001 actually, y’know, ATTEND CHURCH. Which means that 72% of Catholics in America do not attend church. Now, if you were going to apply the same standard of counting membership for your own group as you insist upon for OURS, then there are actually only 19 million Catholics in the USA.

I don’t think you want to go there, do you? If we are going to compare activity levels, sir, then it turns out that 48% of Mormons are actually active (by your own number throwing). Catholics, in comparison, don’t show up as well.

So perhaps you shouldn’t throw those particular stones?

If you ask the Catholic Bishops in the US how many people are Catholic, you will find that what is sited are the results from surveys, that is, what people self-identify themselves as. Many people self-identify themselves as Catholic, whether they go to Mass every day, every Sunday, once or twice a year, or not at all. WHO ARE YOU to say these people who say they are Catholic, are not CATHOLIC?!

With Mormons, you claim that people are Mormon who self-identify as something other than Mormon. This is when the divergence in numbers surface. Your church leaders keep claiming 13.5 million world-wide, yet the religious surveys continue to show this number is inflated.

The 22% of people who are Catholic in the US, self-identify themselves as Catholic. 1.6% of people in the US self-identify as LDS. That is about 4.5 million people, where, your church sites membership of about 5.8 million in the US.

 

[josie_L]

I believe that you already have mentioned the folks I speak of, and ‘great many,’ of course, would be comparative numbers in relationship to the winning group at the decision time.

Do you agree with their doctrines and theology?

Why? You don’t think that nearly 14 million members in not quite 200 years is sufficient growth? I mean, how many Christians were there in the world by 200 AD?

How many Mormons are/were being persecuted in like manner as the early Christians were?

According to one source, there were about a million Christians by 200 AD, and they made up .5% of the population of Roman Empire, approximately.

I’m sure the numbers would have been much higher had it not been for the extreme persecutions (or fear of persecution).

Whereas the Mormons comprise 1.5% of Americans. True, that’s not the sort of explosive growth we’d like to see, but it seems to be right on track with the early Christian church.

It’s not even comparable to the early church for the reason/s mentioned above.

So…you were saying?

I have nothing more to say.

 

[zaffiroborant]

The Savior was clearly aware that the Jews had taken the teachings of the prophets of the Old Testament, and made those teachings into something different than the original teachings. He spoke about this often. The Savior is perfect, and being perfect He allows agency completely, with no force or coercion involved in how He operates with humankind or with the church He established. He allows people to do whatever they want to do and choose to do. **He would even allow them to change key doctrinal points or key ordinances. It would be against how He taught and what He taught if He were to not allow humankind to do whatever they want. They choose. We choose. **

So of course He would allow an LDS prophet to mislead and preach false doctrine otherwise He would be interfering with their free choice.

Again, Chris, I hope you understand the distinction I am making which is that Christ and the Holy Spirit do not force behavior or force choices that people make. People are free to make their own choices. I think it is clear that enough changes were made in key doctrines and ordinances that one can detect those changes. Obviously, you will disagree with that. But the Reformation was clearly an attempt to “go back to what the Bible taught.” How could the Holy Spirit be the “permanent guardian of the Church and its mission” if the Holy Spirit allows total and uncompelled agency of everyone in the church?

Again you believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit will let the LDS prophets/seers/revelators preach false doctrine unless He some how interferes with their choices.

I don’t cling to the apostacy theory.** I cling to the doctrinal purity of Biblical teachings**. I love those teachings, and know that they are true. I also love Christ, and know that His mission and the plan of Salvation He carried out because of His love for us, will not fail and will accomplish exactly the mission He had in mind when He offered His life as a willing sacrifice for all of His Father’s children.

Of course you cling to the doctrinal purity of Biblical teachings pretty convenient way to go when you make up definitions for words like say oh “lo” for instance.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Yes, several people have made that point–and it’s one I actually agree with. At least I did until I ran into the Great Schism…and now I don’t know which one is the alternative.

From the LDS perspective, it is all about priesthood authority. East and West, both are part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Each recognizes the Sacraments of the other as valid, including Holy Orders. Both have the truth and graces found in the Sacraments that Jesus instituted. We are not in communion with each other, but this is not an indication that one or the other is not catholic. We both are.

So if this were really a serious consideration of yours (which I don’t think it is), I’d say, pick one. Either would get you validly baptized and receiving the Sacrament of Communion.

(Also, there are Eastern churches in communion with Rome, so the focus coming from LDS on the Latin Rite is, well, interesting.)

 

[ParkerD]

So of course He would allow an LDS prophet to mislead and preach false doctrine otherwise He would be interfering with their free choice.

Again you believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit will let the LDS prophets/seers/revelators preach false doctrine unless He some how interferes with their choices.

Of course you cling to the doctrinal purity of Biblical teachings pretty convenient way to go when you make up definitions for words like say oh “lo” for instance.

Hi, Zaffiroborant,
Sorry that I was busy all day yesterday and didn’t have time to respond to your comment. I apologize.

As to the word “lo” in the verse you had mentioned, Matthew 28:20, I will explain further. If you read John 14:16-26 you will find that the Holy Ghost was “another Comforter” “whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, …” The promise of the Comforter or the Holy Ghost was why Jesus could promise the apostles, “lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”

That word “lo” can mean “behold!” or “look!” or “see here!” I think verse 20 and 21 read together mean that the apostles were receiving a divine commission to teach specific doctrines and the ordinance of baptism in whatsoever way (“all things” being all inclusive of both doctrines and ordinances) the Savior had commanded them, and that as they did that the Comforter would be with them always, “even unto the end of the world.” (The Savior had already told them He would be going away in terms of His personal presence, and this was right before His ascension.) I think the commission was conditional in that the apostles needed to teach correct doctrine in order to keep the Comforter with them. That is completely consistent with other scriptures about how the Comforter or the Holy Ghost teaches or confirms truth to people. It is conditional on their listening and following.

The LDS prophet is the senior LDS apostle on the earth when he is called as the LDS prophet. If God did not trust him to be following the Holy Ghost in his teaching, then He would not let him live long enough to become the senior apostle. (That is not to say that every apostle who does not live long enough to be the senior apostle was not following the Holy Ghost–they do, and they also counsel together and preserve the doctrinal purity of the teachings)–but I can have and do have a personal witness from the Holy Ghost about the doctrinal purity and integrity of the teachings of the LDS living prophet, and I know by revelation from the Holy Ghost that each one in turn has been called of God. Then, you see, I don’t have to wonder whether one is a “false prophet”, because I stand on my own with a witness from the Holy Ghost–direct communication from God, not man or men or tradition, plus I also can see the blessings in my own life of living in accordance with their teachings, so this gives me a further witness, and I know with complete surety.

 

[ParkerD]

I have nothing more to say.

Josie L,
I realize this post was to Diana, but I had thought I should respond to your earlier post to me and answer your questions. I just didn’t have time yesterday. If you still end up with questions after I answer some other posts, then please feel free to let me know. I do respect your beliefs and the questions you asked.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker D,

Your claim has been made nicely but with one exception.

You state that the “sons” (YOUR WORD) (not natural of course) of the Apostles lost their way and used their personal opinions to keep the church afloat, therefore the APOSTACY. (AGAIN, I ONLY USE THAT WORD WHEN OTHERS USE IT, BUT I THINK IT HAS THE WRONG CONNOTATON.)

To understand the word of Jesus is pretty simple and well stated by Christ to obey His two commandments. Now, since your **OPINION **has been made with no historical claims written down from books held in high esteem you have passed down a lie with the use of passed down story lines. I know you are wanting to speak the truth.

What is the point of Jesus saying: " the gates of hell will never prevail against my Church".

If His Church fails then Jesus has made a blunder. You know in your heart that this cannot be the case. SO PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE WAY YOU SEE THINGS.

Thank you. You wrote it well.

jpaul1953

JPaul,
If the word “it” in Matthew 16:18 were referring back to the word “church” rather than the word “rock”, then I would respond that the word “church” refers to the group of people or “collective body of believers” who would be joining the organization that the apostles would be continuing to establish and carry on. I think, however, that the word “it” is referring back to the word “rock,” and as I had already written in an earlier post, I think Peter would teach that that word “rock” was referring to Christ, as Peter explains in a similar way when he quotes the Old Testament about the “chief corner stone” in his epistle, 1 Peter 2:6-8.

If the word “church” means the collective body of believers, then the way this group of believers prevails against the gates of hell is by (1) relying on Christ who is the chief corner stone of their faith and the author of their Salvation, and by (2) getting the same witness that Jesus is indeed the promised Christ, which witness Peter had expressed in verse 17.

Christ also will hold the keys to hell and open the gates of hell at the end of the Millenium, so He will prevail against the gates of hell and the powers of darkness, and let the prisoners out of their prison because they will finally bow the knee and confess (willingly without compulsion) that He is their Savior also. Satan will have been vanquished, and Christ will have been victorious as He promised.

Of course there are no “historical claims” from books of that time period, other than the fact that the apostles wrote in their epistles trying to keep the followers of the church consistent in doctrinal purity, and expressed frustration and concern about some who were going astray or leading others astray. The changes were gradual, not as though someone turned out the lights all of a sudden. But the people doing the “writing” were the same people who were involved to some extent in the changes, so they either wouldn’t see it or wouldn’t acknowledge it and write about it.

I have sought to write earnestly and sincerely about what the Holy Ghost has confirmed to me as truthful witness from God about the doctrines of the gospel. I may not have expressed myself well, but I’ve tried. I respect the beliefs of your church, and the many good things it does as an institution as well as its members do throughout the world.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,

When Christ said about Heaven and earth being in agreement, you understand it from a different fork in the road. He is guaranteeing it, not allowing for whatever goes, goes. That’s a direct intelligent falsehood. of misunderstandings to validate your story. I’m tired of your continual challenging the CHURCH, with your intentional misguided thoughts to get weak Catholics to follow your church.

May Christ have mercy on your soul.

jpaul1953

JPaul,
I don’t have the impression that there are any “weak Catholics” who read this forum. I think strong Catholics read this forum. I have been answering questions, and sometimes trying to clarify. Some might be more curious about the LDS church, perhaps, after reading in this forum, but my goodness they have strong beliefs already as you do.

 

[ParkerD]

SO when Joseph Smith claimed there were people living on the moon, which later we found out wasn’t true, how do you reconcile that? Dosen’t he fail the test as a prophet according to Deuteronomy? Moses claimed that if a man made even one false prophecy, he was not a prophet. Joseph Smith made a lot more than one. Or the Native Americans not having any taces of Semitic blood. Let alone the millions of people who died when the Nephites and the Lamanites fought. There would be enormous archaeological evidence in South America if such happened.

BTY, I myself do respect the LDS, especially their great help in protecting marriage. I’ve read the whole book of Mormon and some D&C. They are interesting.

Also claiming a great apostasy happened means that the Holy Spirit was not able to guide the Church correctly. God surely has enough power to protect the Church. Whats the point if the Church is gonna break down 150 years later. Jesus never said to Peter that he would drop the keys and loose the Church.

Clement Rome,
If Joseph Smith wrote or expressed an opinion about people being on the moon, then I think he had a right to speculate but that does not mean he was being prophetic at that moment. My goodness–a prophet is still a human being with human weaknesses. When they speak or write through the power and influence of the Holy Ghost (as noted in 2 Peter 1:21), then they are being prophetic and bearing witness of Jesus Christ and His gospel. But only Christ was perfect with perfect words at every moment.

As to Semitic blood, please be aware that the Old Testament has prophecy that there would be a dispersion of the tribes of Israel into all parts of the world.

The Nephite-Lamanite wars were a relatively small group of people (far less than a million) fighting against each other, and the victors walked away and carried all the weapons that were around with them. Also, the Book of Mormon says there was a curse in the land such that all things of value (“treasures”) would either be buried and lost in the earth, or stolen.

I appreciate your positive comments about the LDS church. I have a great deal of respect for the Catholic church. I have been here to correct misconceptions and answer questions.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker,
I read 1 Corinthians 2. The way I read it, St. Paul is telling the Corinthians he taught them the truth. He seems to be warning them not to led astray and telling them to use the power of the Holy Spirit to discern the truth. This does not address the apostasy, nor does it say there will be a total apostasy. Nor do I see any unique Mormon Rituals or doctrines in this passage.

I don’t think you answered my question.

MJF,
Thanks for reading the chapter and thinking about it. I think you wrote correctly about what you read there. I do think, however, that it implies that relying on tradition or the wisdom of men is inadequate for protecting true doctrine from impure doctrine and doctrinal changes. As you said, it emphasizes the Holy Spirit to discern truth.

 

[Zundrah]

Why do Mormons need to prove their denomination is correct by proving another’s to be wrong?

I don’t understand this way of thinking. If you believe you are right, why does what anyone else do or not do to your liking matter at all? Can’t you just stand on your position alone?

I like reading about the family aspects about Mormons, and they sound like really nice people. I just have a hard time with believers stating they are right because someone else is wrong. It shouldn’t be a basis for being correct IMHO.

Hi strawberry Jam, I’m glad you came on here - but look I went away for the weekend and my thread gained 95 responses:whacky:! I’ve got so much to do now!
P.S Mormon are mad!

 

[Zundrah]

Hey Zund…

As you’ll see on that link, the Mormon church believes it all went horribly wrong shortly after the apostles.

For what it’s worth I believe the Mormon church itself is a great apostasy…Joseph Smith was a bold-faced storyteller who was never able to provide real evidence for any of his claims, including this one. His Book of Mormon is a utter fabrication which, while claiming to be ‘‘another gospel of Jesus Christ’’ is incompatible with the true gospel.

Along with many other ‘Christian’ groups which formed in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries (including JWs etc), the Mormon church claims to be a restoration of ‘true Christianity’. But true Christianity has never taught that there are other gods, that we can become gods, that Jesus went to the Americas before he was born in Israel etc. etc. etc. as the Mormons do.

I think it takes a lot more faith to believe that God allowed his church to become utterly corrupted, but then chose to wait for 1800-plus years to restore things…and using a man who was well known for his use of seer stones and other semi-occultic devices.

Hi MatthewCrossman,
howdy ho!

Talking about Mormons is fun! But seriously I was hoping that some Mormons would come on here so that I could have a good argument with them about this “claim”.

 

[ParkerD]

Rebecca J,
Again, I respect your beliefs and that they are different than mine.

Perhaps you missed the numerous times where Jesus made sure that people understood he is the fulfillment of the OT prophecies. If people understood these as something different, He would have had no followers. Have you not read of the woman at the well? Or His triumphant entry into Jerusalem? You have no basis for this belief.

All of the Jews didn’t follow Christ and join the church he established by being baptized into the new church. I was talking about the majority of the Jews and the Jewish leaders, not every Jew. I should have clarified my meaning, but this clarification will have to do.

Jesus gave us the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, to guide us in Truth. Christ leads His Church, the Holy Spirit is Her guide (and ours). You have to believe that all of this failed until your false prophet arrived on the scene 1800 years later. And suddenly today, it works for you. Self centered, is not the least of the problem in this way of thinking.

What I believe is that until Joseph Smith prayed about the questions he had, even though other people had had questions they didn’t have sufficient faith and assurance in their own heart that if they asked God in prayer they would receive a sure and certain answer.

The Reformationists had sought to change the church to be more in keeping with the Bible, but the kind of faith required was not what they had. They still relied on their own wisdom–the wisdom of men, even though they sought the Holy Spirit as best they could and hoped for the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the changes they made.

Yet there is sound evidence, doctrine, holy persons, miracles, Bishops through the ages, and faithful disciples of Christ, all of which flies in the face of the lies you have to present here.

I think there have been many good people in the Catholic church, as I have said all along.

There have throughout all of Christian history been those who believe their own ideas should replace those of Christ’s Church. Joseph Smith is just one of many.

Please list the changes in doctrine.

Baptism should be by immersion, at an age of accountable decision-making. The gift of the Holy Spirit should follow baptism for the baptism of fire as Christ taught to Nicodemus.

There should be a lay priesthood.

There should be twelve apostles to preserve the pure doctrine.

There should be no coercive teachings that bring people to belief based on fear.

The atonement should be trusted as atoning for the sins of Adam and Eve. Even though their sin introduced sin into the world, the atonement of Christ resolved their sin and made it so now we are only accountable for our own sins, not for their sin.

There should be attestations by the church leaders that they know full well that they are guided by revelation through the Holy Spirit, individually and collectively.

There should be an allowance for married priests and other priesthood holders.

The doctrine of marriages and families should be upheld as bringing people into a situation where they can progress in a fuller sense, and thus be valued as something to be sought after and celebrated by all the church.

There should be a “kingdom of priests” in the church, “a royal priesthood.”

The doctrine of being joint heirs with Christ should be as explained and declared by the apostle John in the book of Revelation.