Seeking the True Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Clevus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just like every restorationist sect that popped up in the 19th century (and there were a lot of 'em) the Mormons have experienced fracturing and fragmenting of the same type.

The Wiki gives a good intro on the Mormon denominations.

Look like nearly 20 survive to today.

I’m afraid I don’t understand the question. Care to rephrase?
My church has been around since the restoration. Splinter churches ---- a lot of other churches have such as well.
 
**Prophets revealed that Christ’s church would not remain as it was originally **— additionally look at all the Protestant churches that exist today, making it clear to me that Catholicism lacked characteristics.

My church has those characteristics that Catholicism has where in its organizational structure?
What the Bible says is this, that the true Church would need to beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing, and false prophets, and those preaching a gospel other than the one Jesus and original twelve Apostles and Paul handed down.
 
What the Bible says is this, that the true Church would need to beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing, and false prophets, and those preaching a gospel other than the one Jesus and original twelve Apostles and Paul handed down.
So how do you explain going back to the church started by Christ falling into apostasy after his death ---- I will cite a scripture that foretells this ---- additionally why the number Protestants churches that came to be with issues with Catholicism was what it claims to be???

My church is not a Protestant church. We are the restored church.
 
So how do you explain going back to the church started by Christ falling into apostasy after his death ---- I will cite a scripture that foretells this ---- additionally why the number Protestants churches that came to be with issues with Catholicism was what it claims to be???

My church is not a Protestant church. We are the restored church.
You can cite a scripture as long as its from the Bible, ok?

Luther was the first who left, then the snowball started rolling as others got caught up in the same mindset, kind of like the herd mentality I guess. Each Reformer who broke away, interpreted the Scriptures in their own way, instead of how the Catholic Church interpreted them for 1500 years, and as a result we have thousands of churches who teach different things. God is not a God of confusion, but that’s exactly what we have, regardless of who might think otherwise.
 
You can cite a scripture as long as its from the Bible, ok?

Luther was the first who left, then the snowball started rolling as others got caught up in the same mindset, kind of like the herd mentality I guess. Each Reformer who broke away, interpreted the Scriptures in their own way, instead of how the Catholic Church interpreted them for 1500 years, and as a result we have thousands of churches who teach different things. God is not a God of confusion, but that’s exactly what we have, regardless of who might think otherwise.
Isa 24:5

I would agree that God is not the author of confusion, making it confusing when a potential Christian to decide what church to join.
 
Nice try.

I could provide academic sources beyond scriptures that validate these characteristics.
Since you haven’t validated some of them by scripture what would be the point of beyond scripture?
Of course, you can just hate the list when Catholicism can not prove itself to me so I would remain a member almost 30 years ago.
This statement is senseless. I didn’t say I hated the list. The list itself is not based on fact. Did you get the list from some source and have not checked it out? I looked at everyone of the quotes. I made comment on each which you did not refute. To say “nice try” says nothing but it does indicate that you can’t. I am not trying to prove Catholicism to you. You are trying desperately to disprove it. Good Luck and God Bless You.
 
Isa 24:5

I would agree that God is not the author of confusion, making it confusing when a potential Christian to decide what church to join.
I am happy that you agree with me that God doesn’t want confusion.

2 Tim. 4:3, “For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires.”
 
Since you haven’t validated some of them by scripture what would be the point of beyond scripture?

This statement is senseless. I didn’t say I hated the list. The list itself is not based on fact. Did you get the list from some source and have not checked it out? I looked at everyone of the quotes. I made comment on each which you did not refute. To say “nice try” says nothing but it does indicate that you can’t. I am not trying to prove Catholicism to you. You are trying desperately to disprove it. Good Luck and God Bless You.
I have validated by scripture. This confirms to me further why the number of translations of the Bible and how Christians in general interpret them.

Further, if you wish to dismiss the scriptures I have cited, that is your choice.
 
The Bible does not record any statement of Jesus that says He wanted the Church to carry His personal name. It is more important that we follow His commandments and do God’s will.
It is apparent to me that someone or something in a church name is more important to whose organized the church and whose church it is, speaking of Jesus Christ.
 
Isa 24:5

I would agree that God is not the author of confusion, making it confusing when a potential Christian to decide what church to join.
The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant.

You believe this prophesied the Church apostasy?
 
The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant.

You believe this prophesied the Church apostasy?
Ancient prophets foretold of the apostasy as I cited in the Isa 24:5

Further, Protestant churches would not have a foundation if the Catholic church was lacking, no need for the restoration of the gospel.
 
It is apparent to me that someone or something in a church name is more important to whose organized the church and whose church it is, speaking of Jesus Christ.
The name of the true Church was called the Catholic(Universal)Church, in the late first century, early second century. We have writings of the ECF’s that state this as fact. The immediate successors of the original twelve Apostles were members of this Church. There is no historical record of any “Great Apostasy” occurring during the first century, as the LDS claim.
 
Ancient prophets foretold of the apostasy as I cited in the Isa 24:5

Further, Protestant churches would not have a foundation if the Catholic church was lacking, no need for the restoration of the gospel.
I will ask you once again, if somebody leaves your church (LDS) to found another church, does that mean that your church is less of a church or no church at all? Does it mean that the LDS church apostatized?
 
The name of the true Church was called the Catholic(Universal)Church, in the late first century, early second century. We have writings of the ECF’s that state this as fact. The immediate successors of the original twelve Apostles were members of this Church. There is no historical record of any “Great Apostasy” occurring during the first century, as the LDS claim.
What scripture exists that the church organized by Jesus Christ was to be named the Catholic church???

Isa 24:5 another scripture Amos 8:11-12 These scriptures from ancient prophets are lying is that what you are saying about the apostasy they foretold would occur and of course did so??
 
CT, what about the contradiction between the so-called Great Apostasy and Matthew 16:18? You can’t have it both ways, one has to be wrong.
It is not my duty to prove to you what the ancient prophets said regarding the apostasy. I understand that you choose to dismiss — continue to do so. I have yet to have anyone prove to me that the ancient prophets were lying about the apostasy spoke of by them was not to happen.
 
It is not my duty to prove to you what the ancient prophets said regarding the apostasy. I understand that you choose to dismiss — continue to do so.** I have yet to have anyone prove to me that the ancient prophets were lying about the apostasy spoke of by them was not to happen.**/QUOTE]

Have you ever thought about the possibility that you (LDS church) may be interpreting those ancient prophets incorrectly? Do you toss aside Jesus’ words in Matthew 16:18? You do understand that God’s written Word in the Bible does not have contradictions, right?
 
Ancient prophets foretold of the apostasy as I cited in the Isa 24:5

Further, Protestant churches would not have a foundation if the Catholic church was lacking, no need for the restoration of the gospel.
The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant.
This verse was discussed here Isaiah 24:5
 
This verse was discussed here Isaiah 24:5
Prophets incorrect ----- wrong.

My church regarding the apostasy and the need for the restoration ----not wrong. If the true church existed through Catholicism, I submit to you God the Father and Jesus Christ would have told Joseph Smith to join Catholicism when he was asking which of the existing churches to join.

He was told to join none ---- they drew to me with their lips and their hearts were far from him — teaching the commandments of men and practices in such churches as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top