05
Mar
12

The Priesthood

Lesson Five of the teachings of George Albert Smith deals with the priesthood.  It emphasizes the LDS Church’s claim that the priesthood was lost after the death of the 12 Apostles until it was restored at the time of Joseph Smith.  It then goes on to repeatedly make the claim that only LDS priesthood holders have divine power and authority. Among many other things, this means, for example, that non-LDS baptisms are empty rituals.

It probably could go without saying, but just to be clear it needs to be stated that Christians don’t share the view of history presented in this chapter.  They don’t believe that the Lord wanted to set up a permanent organization of apostles, high priests, seventies, etc.  They don’t believe that there was a total apostasy when the 12 apostles died.  They don’t believe that John the Baptist or Peter, James, and John appeared and ordained Joseph Smith into the priesthood.

One reason they don’t believe any of this is because the Bible tells us about the priesthood that the Lord instituted in the New Testament.  Peter describes it in his first letter.  From the first verse of his letter we see that Peter was writing to converts to Christianity scattered throughout the Mediterranean world.  They were men and women from all different races and nationalities.  In chapter two, he is still addressing them all when he says:  “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light” (v.9).

All believers, regardless of race or gender, are in the Lord’s priesthood.  People enter it the moment they are brought to faith.  All believers are part of the chosen generation. All believers are part of the holy nation.  All believers are peculiar or special people.  And all believers constitute the royal priesthood.

This passage also tells us what they are to do.  They are to “shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”  They are to praise God.  And God surely deserves praise.  Because Jesus paid for all our sins, he forgives us freely.  He forgives us so completely that he doesn’t even remember them – much less demand any payment from us.   “And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.”  (Hebrews 10:17)  Because Jesus paid for all our sins, he gives eternal life, not conditioned on a person’s worthiness, but as his free gift.  “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 6:23)  Because God has saved us freely and fully in Jesus, he deserves all praise.

And neither is a person’s living eternally with Heavenly Father dependent on the ordinances performed by the LDS priesthood as George Albert Smith states.  That is completely dependent on Jesus’ work:  the perfect life that he credits to the account of believers – his death that washed away all sin.

Faith in Jesus Christ, not the LDS priesthood, is the source of all divine power and authority.

Advertisements

183 Responses to “The Priesthood”


  1. 1 JBR
    March 6, 2012 at 12:44 am

    And this is just another reason why the Bible must have to be relegated to tongue-in-cheek importantance in Mormonism as “scripture”

    Everything seems to be validated as the truth as long as the Bible is read in parts and dribbles… for if the Bible was not considered nothing less than inerrant, it would be the very Word that exposes Mormonism’s claims of th etruth.

  2. March 6, 2012 at 3:30 am

    JBR, your lies about Mormonism are just dribble.

    Now, answer this. Why did Jesus call Apostles and set up his church the way he did, if he did not intend for it to continue that way.

    10 He that descended is the same also that aascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

    11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

    12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

    13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: (note how it say that His church is set up for us all to gain knowledge of Christ, until we all become unto a perfect man…the same measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ)

  3. March 6, 2012 at 3:49 am

    Kate

    You tell me who is lying.

    The LDS church teaches this:
    “As man now is, God once was;
    As GOD NOW IS, man may be”
    (the Life and Teachings of Jesus & His Apostles Course Manual , p. 59)

    “You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same and ALL GODS have done before you, namely by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace” (Joseph Smith quoted in The Life and Teachings of Jesus & His Apostles Course Manual, p. 24.)

    “I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith., p 345″
    “God is glorified and perfected man, personage of flesh and bones.” (Gospel Principles p 9.)

    “We shall standin our relationship to them as God our Eternal Father does to us, and thereby this is the most glorious and wonderful privilege that will ever come to any of the sone and daughters of God” (Elder Melvin J. Ballard, quoted in Doctrines and Covenants Student Manual, p. 359.

    “We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring.” (Joseph Smith, quoted in Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual, p. 132)

    Now please look at these from the Bible. Then I have question for you:

    ” 8Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.” Isaiah 44:8

    “5 I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God.” Isaiah 45:5
    ” 10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Isaiah 43:10

    “18For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. 19I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.” Isaiah 45:18

    “21Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. 22Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.” Isaiah 45:21-22

    Kate , you might ask how did my God His start start. My God had no begining, He always was. The bible tells me this : “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” Psalm 90:2.

    The LDS church teaches that God was once a man like we are now and even now in in human form. The LDS church also teaches that others gods at one time gave Him birth. According to LDS teaching there were other gods before I AM. So my question to you is, in all these passages where God says there is no other and He knows of no other, do you think God is lying?

  4. March 6, 2012 at 4:36 am

    Nope…you are just reading what you want to, into scriptures. And I know that you will just say the same thing back to me. I just quoted a scripture that states we will all come to be perfect unto the measure of the fullness of Christ. You just want to ignore all of the scriptures in the Bible that teach truths that those with ears can hear and eyes can see…the mysteries of His Kingdom. You just want to ignore all the verses that tell you that you have to work out your salvation, that faith without works is dead…etc. Instead of seeking knowledge from God about what Grace is, you would just rather pick out the scriptures that sound like you don’t have to do a thing, without truly reading the context in which they are written.

    I know my Father in Heaven and His Son Jesus Christ, my Savior. I know them because I seek them and I seek wisdom and knowledge, and because I follow Christ and his commandments, and believe Him when He asks us to obey Him, and do as He did, being baptized, receiving the Holy Ghost, following His Church which he set up with Apostles and Prophets. And because I continue to do the things He asks (as we all have the opportunity to do), I have ears to hear and eyes to see and know of the mysteries of His Kingdom, that your friends here would spit upon and call dribble. I am secure in my testimony and know that I can surely say that neither you nor I will go to hell.

    You might actually learn something from this article. It’s very good!

    http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=2968

  5. 5 joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 6:51 am

    ORIGINAL Christian beliefs…

    THE WESTMINSTER DICTIONARY
    OF
    CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY
    **Deification**
    Deification (Greek theosis) is for Orthodoxy the goal of every Christian. Man, according to the Bible, is ‘made in the image and likeness of God’…It is possible for man to become like God, to become deified, to become god by grace. This doctrine is based on many passages of both OT and NT (e.g. Ps. 82 (81).6; II Peter 1.4), and it is essentially the teaching of both St. Paul, though he tends to use the language of filial adoption (cf. Rom. 8.9-17; Gal. 4.5-7) and the Fourth Gospel (cf. 17.21-23)
    The language of II Peter is taken up by St. Irenaeus, in his famous phrase, “if the Word has been made man, it is so that men may be made gods’ (adv. Haer v, Pref.), and becomes the standard in Greek theology. In the fourth century St Athanasius repeats Irenaeus almost word for word, in the fifth century St Cyril of Alexandria says that we shall become sons ‘by participation’ (Greek methexis). Deification is the central idea in the spirituality of St Maximus the Confessor, for whom the doctrine is the collollary of the Incarnation: “Deification, briefly, is the encompassing and fulfillment of all times and ages’…and St Symeon the New Theologian at the end of the tenth century writes, ‘He who is God by nature converses with those whom he has made gods by grace, as a friend converses with his friends, face to face.’…
    St Iraneus from the second century was an orthodox founding father of Christianity.
    “Do we cast blame on him [God] because we were not made gods from the beginning, but were at first created merely as men, and then later as gods? Although God has adopted this course out of his pure benevolence, that no one may charge him with discrimination or stinginess, he declares, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High.”…For it was necessary at first that nature be exhibited, then after that what was mortal would be conquered and swallowed up in immortality.” — St Irenaeus, Against Heresies
    St Clement of Alexandria another orthodox leading Christian theologian from the 2nd century had this to say in his Exhortation to the Greeks — “Yea, I say, the Word of God became a man so that you might learn from a man how to become a God” In The Instructor Clement also says this — “if one knows himself, he will know God, and knowing God will become like God…His is beauty, true beauty, for it is God, and that man becomes a god, since God wills it. So Heraclitus was right when he said, ‘Men are gods, and gods are men.'”
    St Justin Martyr in also the second century had this to say — “[men are] deemed worthy of becoming gods and of having power to become sons of the highest.”, Dialogue With Trypho
    St Athanasius from the 4th century the person that the Athanasius creed is named after has this to say in De Inc. — “The Word was made flesh in order that we might be enabled to be made gods….Just as the Lord, putting on the body, became a man, so also we men are both deified through his flesh, and henceforth inherit everlasting life.”, “He became man that we might be made divine”

    “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect. Philippians 3:12
    1. There is scarce any expression in Holy Writ which has given more offence than this. The word perfect is what many cannot bear. The very sound of it is an abomination to them. And whosoever preaches perfection (as the phrase is,) that is, asserts that it is attainable in this life, runs great hazard of being accounted by them worse than a heathen man or a publican.
    2. And hence some have advised, wholly to lay aside the use of those expressions, “because they have given so great offence.” But are they not found in the oracles of God? If so, by what authority can any Messenger of God lay them aside, even though all men should be offended? We have not so learned Christ; neither may we thus give place to the devil. Whatsoever God hath Spoken that will we speak, whether men will hear or whether they will forbear; knowing that then alone can any Minister of Christ be “pure from the blood of all men,” when he hath “not shunned to declare unto them all the counsel of God.” [Acts 20:26, 27] ”

    Brought up before was the question of what, if anything was left out of the Bible… Well, if so many of the VERY FIRST Christian Church were teaching DEIFICATION, then perhaps THEY and NOT YOU knew what Christianity is all about..

  6. 6 joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 6:58 am

    (forgot to get notified of follow on posts.. crazy 1am….)

  7. 7 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 1:56 pm

    In the Protestant Church, we use the term sanctification rather than the term theosis and we understand this to be the power of the Holy Spirit working in our hearts that enables us to be like Christ.

    The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches a doctrine of theosis in which man takes on divine characteristics. Man does not become divine, but in Christ can partake of divine nature. This Church’s version of salvation restores God’s image in man.

    The LDS Church teaches a doctrine of exaltation which means to literally become a god.

    When one takes a look at Christian Doctrines of theosis, it is very evident that these doctrines have nothing to do with the LDS ideas of exaltation and literally becoming a god.

    “Joseph Smith’s doctrine of exaltation was not in any meaningful sense a restoration of a lost doctrine of theosis. The doctrine of theosis was never lost, and the doctrine of deification taught by the church fathers was radically different from the doctrine Joseph Smith taught. Joseph taught that God was once a mortal man who became exalted to Godhood, and that we can do the same thing and become Gods of the same nature and powers as our God.” ~http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2011/08/did-joseph-smith-restore-theosis-part-one-the-mormon-doctrine-of-exaltation/

  8. 8 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    A restoration has to match the original or it is not a restoration.

    From http://carm.org/priesthood-authority-and-mormonism:

    In contrast to the Mormon Church’s teachings, the Bible has quite different things to say about priesthood. First, the Aaronic priesthood was limited to Jewish male members from the tribe of Levi who were descendents from Aaron (Ex. 28:1; Num. 3:5-13; Heb. 7:5). The priesthood was inherited by descent from Aaron, not received through ordination. It was never supposed to be practiced by Gentiles (non-Jews). There is absolutely no teaching about this doctrine of Aaronic priesthood being practiced by Gentiles in the Old or New Testaments.

    Furthermore, the Aaronic priesthood was done away with through Christ as the final priest (Heb. 7:11-12) who fulfilled the Law as the eternal Priest (Heb. 7:11-28; 8:6-7ff). The Old Testament priests were mediators, but now Jesus is the only Mediator between men and God (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 7:24-25; Jn. 14:6). Therefore, there is no need for this Aaronic priesthood authority today. Finally, the High Priest in the Old Testament would enter the holy of holies once a year to make a sacrifice for sins of himself and others (Ex. 30:10; Heb. 9:7, 19-22). However, Jesus completed the work of salvation by being the High Priest and the sacrifice (Heb. 3:1; 9:11-12, 25-26)! Since Christ’s work is finished (John 19:30), there is no need for a High Priest on this earth. Christ is the only mediator and High Priest in heaven (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 8:1-6).

    Melchizedek Priesthood

    Second, there is absolutely no mention in the entire Bible about a special class of Melchizedek priests. Melchizedek is mentioned briefly in the Old Testament in two places (Gen. 14:18-20 and Ps. 110:1). In Genesis 14, Melchizedek is a king and priest who blesses Abraham and to whom Abraham gives tithes. Psalm 110, a royal Messianic Psalm, applies this priesthood of Melchizedek to Jesus who is also a priest and king (cf. Matthew 22:44; 26:64; Mark 16:19; Heb. 5:5-6). However, nowhere in the Old or New Testaments do we see the practice of ordaining males to the office of the Melchizedek priesthood. Jesus alone is mentioned in the New Testament as a priest after the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 5:1-4ff).

    The Priesthood of All Believers

    Instead, the Bible teaches that all believers have priesthood authority (1 Peter 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). Even in the Old Testament, the nation of Israel was to be a kingdom of priests (Ex. 19:5-6). However, Jesus is the unique High Priest (Heb. 7:23-8:13). Each believer has the authority to preach the Gospel, baptize, and govern the kingdom of God on this earth. It is not something that is limited to males who are above the age of 12 or 18.2

  9. March 6, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    Kate

    I’m not the one ignoring Bible verse Kate. I learn all I need from the Bible. Joseph Smith says there were other gods and there will be more, God says there never were and will never be. They can’t both be true. One of them is a liar. I know God doesn’t lie. You, on the other hand can’t seem to answer.

    ” 10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Isaiah 43:10

    This is not a mystery this is a contradiction based on a lie. Were the other gods, will there be more, or not Kate?

  10. 10 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    “Even though LDS have no Biblical basis for their doctrine of “priesthood,” LDS scripture says that John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1829 and laid his hands upon them and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on them just before they were baptized (P. of G.P. J.S. History 1:68-73). Since LDS believe baptism is necessary for salvation, Joseph and Oliver must have been unsaved sinners at the time they received the priesthood! LDS also teach that baptism must precede receiving the priesthood, so why didn’t John the Baptist baptize them first? He was of the Levitical priesthood lineage and was filled with the Holy Spirit even before he was born (D. & C. 84:27; Luke 1:5-15). Surely he had the authority since he baptized the Lord (Matt. 3:13-16). Whether John the Baptist was a spirit or a resurrected man, he could have baptized Joseph Smith if the Spirit of the Lord baptized Adam as recorded in the P. of G.P., Moses 6:64-65. But, in Joseph Smith — History, John the Baptist told Joseph to baptize Oliver, and Oliver to baptize Joseph. However, Joseph was not baptized when he baptized Oliver, so Oliver’s baptism was invalid by LDS standards! Then Oliver, immediately baptized Joseph. If Oliver’s baptism was invalid by LDS standards, that also made Joseph’s invalid because he was baptized by Oliver whose baptism was not valid! Next, Joseph, who was not properly baptized by LDS standards, conferred the Aaronic priesthood on Oliver, who was not properly baptized (LDS would reject that ordination today). Then Oliver, who was improperly baptized and ordained, conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on Joseph who had not been properly baptized. But, John the Baptist had already conferred the Priesthood of Aaron on both Joseph and Oliver before they baptized each other. Since they conferred that same priesthood on each other after they baptized each other, they must have lost the priesthood John gave them when they baptized each other or they did not really get it in the first place! Either way, they had no authority to baptize or ordain each other by LDS standards today! If Joseph and Oliver already had the Aaronic Priesthood after they baptized each other, it would have been useless to ordain each other to that which they already possessed! But, if they did not have the Aaronic Priesthood, they had no authority to baptize each other and therefore every Mormon’s baptism is invalid today because it is based upon the authority that Joseph and Oliver supposedly received when they baptized each other!” ~ http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/mclaims6.htm

  11. March 6, 2012 at 2:26 pm

    Thanks for the post Choose.

    Josh:

    Read Choose’s posts first. Then read below.

    Then you think God was mistaken? There were other Gods and there will be others like Him? These are really very direct and simple questions.

  12. March 6, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Continuation of prior post

    Josh

    Like I said in another post, the notion that people can become even “like” gods is virtually the same as the forst temptation in the Garden of Eden. “. . . and ye shall be AS gods, knowing good and evil.” Genesis 3:5. Do you think that is coincidental?

  13. 13 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 3:15 pm

    “We become united with God by grace in the Person of Christ, who is God come in the flesh. The means of becoming “like God” is through perfection in holiness, the continuous process of acquiring the Holy Spirit by grace through ascetic devotion. Some Protestants might refer to this process as sanctification. Another term for it, perhaps more familiar to Western Christians, would be mortification—putting sin to death within ourselves.”
    ~http://www.antiochian.org/content/theosis-partaking-divine-nature

  14. 14 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 3:26 pm

    So, if St Irenaeus is lying, then from the very start of the Christian belief, there was corruptness. You may believe LDS is corrupt, but from what I have posted it is very evident that from inseption, Christianity tought the same thing that we are teaching.
    As to the God question, I can only theorize as I did not recieve the revelation. I know the first commandment says to have no gods before me. I would say 98% of people probably read this as idols that were being worshiped, but you can read this as there are other gods, dont forget that I am “I AM”. I also ask the question if God was, and there was nothing, then by definition there was something. If there was something, then there by definition could not have been nothing.. Before your first thought (be it a spiritual thought or physical) is there anything? No, there isnt. I dont exist and therefore to me nothing else exists. does that mean that God did not yet exist.. No it doesnt. It means it doesnt really matter, but suffice it to know that I did not exist.
    Ever see Horton hears a Who, or read the book?
    Perhaps our entire universe, everything we can tangibly explain is nothing more than a speck to others. Did God create this speck? he says he did.

  15. 15 shematwater
    March 6, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    DAVID

    Genesis 1: 1 “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

    If this was the beginning of all things that ever were than God began when he created the Earth. However, since this makes absolutely no sense, I think that this does not refer to the beginning of all things, but to the beginning of this Earth. As such, the Bible itself is written concerning this earth, and only this earth, for its record begins at the creation of this earth, and ends with the destruction of this earth.
    So, all your verses that say there is only one God and all that (which I will not speak of in detail at this time) must also be understood as speaking of this earth, and only this earth. For this earth these is but one God, and there will never be another God formed for this Earth. However, that does not mean that there was never a God for a different earth, or that there will not be more Gods for future earths. Only that there is only one for this earth.

    Also, in the other thread you do bring up the very important point that we can become gods, with the little ‘g’ and not Gods with the big ‘G’. This is am important point. We will never have the same authority as our Father, for we will always be his children, and thus we will always be under him, and will always worship him. None of the quotes you give say we will be equal with him. Just remember that alike and equal are not the same thing.

  16. 16 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    Perhaps the “there were no gods before me” is referencing the First commandment.. “there will never be a god you worship before me.” As I said before, I did not personally receive this revelation, so obviously this is purely conjecture.
    We as LDS do recognize Christ as “the God” that appeared to Moses (as do other Christian churches)… And hold God and Christ to be separate. We also hold Christ as “the God” that formed this world. By definition, if Christ is “God, and.God is God, then there are more than one “God”. (here comes the trinity is one excuse..) Early Christianity taught they were separate, just as they taught we can become like God. If you.dont accept thw founders of Christianity, then you negate the entirity of Christianity.
    I really wanted to get back to this on the proper post, but when discussing how the bible was put together, someone listed the rules that were used.. To paraphrase one rule said if it didnt conform to what was being taught, it was not scripture. Well, here we have something that is not “mainstream” so, it must not be scripture.

  17. March 6, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    Choose: If you want to have any validity with what you say, don’t use CARM to quote from. That place is a cesspool and isn’t even worth addressing.

  18. 18 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    Shem:
    I was so close to posting the big G little g thing last night too.. Glad you caught that as well and wrote on it

  19. 19 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    David: regarding the first temptation.. Was Satan lying or telling a half truth? Why were adam and eve kicked out of the garden after eating of G&E fruit… They would have eaten of the tree of life and never died, and thus would have been fully “like god”, knowing good and evil and never dying. God knows good and evil,.man knows good and evil. I. This respect alone, we are like God. Jesus offers us everlasting life. God has everlasting life (we cant go back to before God, and be alpha and omega) but we can go from this point with everlasting life, just as God goes forth from this point. Faith the size of a.mustard seed can move mountians, right? How much more faith do u think you will have when in heaven? Enough to move an entire world? The entire heavens? As I have said before,.mine in not to usurp God, mine is to become like him

  20. 20 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    The doctrine of theosis has roots in a statement made by Irenaeus: he became “what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is in Himself.” This really refers to our adoption as sons of God, not our divinisation. Irenaeus. Against Heresies 3.19.1. ANF 1, p. 448.

    The Word “was made man so that we might be made God” ~Athanasius

    “Athanasius said that Christ became man so that man might become God. What did he mean? At least once he clarified this in his third treatise against the Arians: “To become as the Father is impossible for us creatures.” “There be one Son by nature…we too become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the earth, and yet called gods, not as the True God or His Word…. We are sons, not as the Son, as gods, not as He Himself. ” (Orat 3.19-20; Robertson 404-405). Similarly, in Orat 1.37 he briefly noted that we are children by grace, not by nature. We are like the Son “not in essence but in sonship, which we shall partake from Him” (De Syn 53; Robertson 479).

    If we cannot be gods by nature or essence, in what way are we to be like God? “We are as God by imitation, not by nature” (Orat 3.20; Robertson 405). Jesus did not mean “that we might be as God,” but that we should imitate him (Orat 3.19; Robertson 404). “Albeit we cannot become like God in essence, yet by progress in virtue imitate God” (Ad Afros 7; Robertson 492).” ~ http://www.angelfire.com/md/mdmorrison/hist/DIVINIZ.html

    BTW, the Arians were heretics.

    Looks to me like another example of the LDS taking things out of context.

  21. 21 choosethechrist
    March 6, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    Kate said, Choose: “If you want to have any validity with what you say, don’t use CARM to quote from. That place is a cesspool and isn’t even worth addressing.”

    Are you saying CARMs portrayal of the OT priesthood is inaccurate? If so, perhaps you should brush up on your Bible studies because the LDS “priesthood” in no way shape or form resembles the OT Biblical priesthood.

  22. March 6, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    I have noticed that there seems to be some contradiction between LDS materials regarding the loss of the “priesthood”, most notably in Doctrine and Covenants 7 where we read, “And the Lord said unto me: John, my beloved, what desirest thou? For if you shall ask what you will, it shall be granted unto you. And I said unto him: Lord, give unto me power over death, that I may live and bring souls unto thee. And the Lord said unto me: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, because thou desirest this thou shalt tarry until I come in my glory, and shalt prophesy before nations, kindreds, tongues and people… and unto you three (Peter, James, and John) I will give the power and the keys of this ministry until I come.” Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual (Religion 324 and 325) further clarifies on page 18 that “The keys of the ministry… constituted the authority of the Presidency of the Church in their dispensation.” From these passages, it seems that the priesthood as the LDS church conceives of it never did truly pass from the earth: it was impossible for it to suffer a complete extinction while John lived and John was promised life until the return of Christ. I find that there is a much better case to be made for the Biblical explanation in which the priesthood has belonged to all believers in all ages than for the disappearance of this authority after the time of the Apostles and its reappearance during the time of Joseph Smith.

  23. 23 Kent
    March 6, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    Mormons teach that we can’t have eternal life to be in the presence of God in His mansions unless, in additional to our faith in Christ, we are temple worthy to enter their temple in the first place and to follow the temple ordinances as well as other Mormon laws and ordinances.

    Reportedly one of the rituals Mormons go through in the temple occurs in a room called the Garden of Eden Room that protrays Adam and Eve being instructed by someone protraying our ‘older brother’ Lucifer who shows them how to defy God’s lessor law of eating of the tree of knowledge in order to obey the greater law of being fruitful and mulitlplying. Lucifer is wearing an apron with free mason symbols that represents the power of his priesthood and the Mormons in the temple are given aprons with the same symbols themselves that represent the fig leaves that Adam and Eve fashioned for themselves after they had eaten of the tree.

    I realize ex Mormon Ed Decker, who is recalling the Garden of Eden room ritual in the video from the link below, to Mormons his name is ‘mud’, but of instead of being critical of Decker as a person and whatever his motivation for divulging this information is, is what he says happens in this ritutual true of not? Also, if that ritual really occurs at Mormon temples would anyone join the Mormon church if the missionaries told them up front that converts one day may be going through rituals representing Lucifer instructing Adam and Eve how to disobey God and that they could be wearing an apron that symbolizes his power and priesthood if the converts are deemed worthy enough?

    I realize that Mormons don’t like it when I discuss something like what goes on in their temple as they would likely say I don’t have the knowledge to properly understand what goes on there.

    One thing I do know though is, if rituals that are described above do go on, then I don’t want to or need to partake in anything that has Lucifer giving any instructions on anything.

    All I need to know is that Jesus Christ died in my place to save me, a sinner who cannot ever save myself, and that he rose again on the third day and that total faith in who He is and the work He did alone is enough to give me eternal life!

  24. March 6, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    Kent, all you do is spew anti-mormon garbage. And don’t go into the “you are judging me” mode. I am judging your fruits….which are putrid and vile. It is not even worth responding to you…so I would hope everyone here simply ignores anything more that you say. I am surprised that Mark would allow you to post Ed Decker stuff. He has been proven many times over to over-sensationalize, twist and pervert, and mock sacredness….which Christ condemns.

  25. March 6, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    Shem

    Before I reply to another post, I just want to say I appreciate the quality and tone of the discussions. Thanks for that.

    From your post:

    “Genesis 1: 1 “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

    If this was the beginning of all things that ever were than God began when he created the Earth. However, since this makes absolutely no sense, I think that this does not refer to the beginning of all things, but to the beginning of this Earth.

    It does indeed refer to the creation of the heaven and the earth. It does not anywhere say or even suggest that God began at that time. God (my God) is eternal and has no beging and no end. “2Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. ” Psalm 90:2

    “So, all your verses that say there is only one God and all that (which I will not speak of in detail at this time) must also be understood as speaking of this earth, and only this earth.”

    There is nothing in the Bible to support that conclusion. He says he knows of no other god and God knows everything there is to know. He would know of other Gods if there were in fact other Gods.

    The small “g” I said referenced simply those people who were given God’s law. And from the rest of the Psalm, they certainly weren’t acting like gods since the plea was for GOD’s deliverance for the oppressed and the wicked.

  26. March 6, 2012 at 6:16 pm

    Josh

    “Perhaps the “there were no gods before me” is referencing the First commandment.. “there will never be a god you worship before me.” As I said before, I did not personally receive this revelation, so obviously this is purely conjecture.”

    I should maybe say more about this but, thats’ just wrong.

  27. 27 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 6:17 pm

    Kent:
    Are you denying that Satan has any power at all? You dont want to ve a part of something that says Satan has power?
    He does have power, not more than Christ, and definitely not mpre than God. Symbols of power have been used throughout history… A king wearing a Crown is a great example. Is it because he wears the crown that he is king, or does he wear the crown as an outward symbol to others that he is king?
    Did Aaronic priests wear certain garments to partake in temple ordinances? If I remember correctly, they sure did.
    If I tattoo a huge cross on my chest, does it make me Christian? If I am Christian, can I use the cross to signify to othera that I am Christian?
    A symbol is nothing. It REPRESENTS something. It does not give or take power.
    Satan is a creation of God. I am a creation of God.. Would I choose not to be a creation because Satan also is a.creation?

  28. March 6, 2012 at 6:24 pm

    Kate

    still can’t answer that question?

  29. March 6, 2012 at 6:27 pm

    Yes, David, but because it will be a lengthy response, I don’t have time right now…I am schooling my kids. I will get back to you on that…but only if Kent’s vileness is removed from this blog. Otherwise, this blog succumbs to the slime that CARM is.

  30. 30 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 6:30 pm

    I want to ask another question to David regarding this “God knows everything” deal..
    If God does know everything, then why did he repent of creating man?
    Genesis 6:6…. If he knew man would mess up so, why would he repent of creating him? Do I undersrand this completely, probably not..
    As to his spirit always being here.. Genesis 6:3 says my spirit shall not always strive with man.
    And David, why is that interpretation wrong? Did you receive that word.directly from God? Did you choose what got added to the Bible, and what got left out?
    You day the spirit has spoken to you and we will never be like God. I say it has spoken to me, and that we will be like God. Both of us can be right, through my ynderstanding of heaven :)

  31. 31 shematwater
    March 6, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    ACGHEEN

    I actually addressed this on a different thread, but here it is again.
    Mormon 8: 10
    “And there are none that do know the true God save it be the disciples of Jesus, WHO DID TARRY IN THE LAND UNTIL THE WICKEDNESS OF THE PEOPLE WAS SO GREAT THAT THE LORD WOULD NOT SUFFER THEM TO REMAIN WITH THE PEOPLE; and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth.” (I don’t mean to yell.)
    If God took these three men, who had the same promise as John (3 Nephi 28: 6), then it is reasonable to assume that God also took John and for the same reason.

    DAVID

    That all depends on how you read the Bible, as I have frequently stated.

    “He says he knows of no other god and God knows everything there is to know.”

    This is true, but in a conversation concerning the United States I could easily state that “there is no title of nobility, no not one.” Would this mean that titles of nobility do not exist? No. It would mean that in the context of the discussion they do not exist.
    As I said, the fact that the Bible begins its narrative with the creation of this earth, the context of the Bible is this earth. As such, everything it says must be understood as concerning this earth, and only this earth. As such, the statement that is no other God pertains only to this earth, for that is the context of the Bible.

    Your argument appears to me like an American telling the British they don’t have any royalty because the United States Constitution says there can’t be any royalty.

  32. March 6, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    Josh

    “David: regarding the first temptation.. Was Satan lying or telling a half truth?

    He was lying. The omission of the other half of a truth is a lie. I hope you don’t think a half-truth is still the truth.

    “Why were adam and eve kicked out of the garden after eating of G&E fruit… They would have eaten of the tree of life and never died, and thus would have been fully “like god”, knowing good and evil and never dying. God knows good and evil,.man knows good and evil. I. This respect alone, we are like God.” ”

    God doesn’t need to eat fruit from the tree of life to live forever and no one made God (I know your views are diffrent on that – but just know that they are not biblical). We are not like God, and never will be. That’s why we can never save ourselves thats why God Himself had to come down from Heaven and sacrifice Himself for our sins. His perfect life and precious blood was the ONLY thing that would satisfy the failure to live up to the demands of perfect obedience God must have in the law. No one else’s efforts could satisfy the punishment required for the sins every person whoever walked on the face of the earth. That’s why Hebrews 10: 10-18 says what it says and why our puny little rags (works) contribute nothing to save us. Thats why grace, in order to be grace can never be earned to any degree by feeble or even “mighty” human effort.

  33. March 6, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    Kate

    I understand time constraints, although fundamentally it boils down to a yes or no answer.

  34. March 6, 2012 at 7:57 pm

    David,

    You know what my answer will be, but I want to back it up with more information. Though I have to say, Shem has already addressed this issue time and time again quite well.

  35. March 6, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    Kate

    Shem’s answer shows his view that when God said he knew of no other Gods that he really didn’t mean it, that though he had God parents and there are supposedly other Gods, God said he didn’t even know of any. According to Joseph Smith, God came from God parents. God said that before him there were no God nor will there be ANY after Him, and that he knew not any other gods. Shem’s answer pigeonholes God, limits His power, and His reign. Shem’s answer assumes facts that have no basis in biblical scripture and even assumes God would have some reason to deny knowing even his own parents. If you want to rely on Shem’s answer, then tell me why God would deny knowing or even acknowledging His parents.

  36. 36 Kent
    March 6, 2012 at 8:38 pm

    Kate, I said reportedly, which means that I have heard through the Ed Decker videos, that the Garden of Eden room ritual takes place in the temple, which means I don’t know if it takes place or not. But if it does take place, then Lucifer is protrayed as instructing Adam and Eve to eat of the tree of knowledge, which was disobeing God on, as Mr. Decker explains it, on a lessor command, in order to be able to obey God by being fruitful and multlipying, a greater command.

    It is not unreasonable or vile to ask 1. if it does in fact take place and 2.Not to be critical of Mr. Decker as a person or even his motives for doing so but merely confirm and explain the information that is presented or deny that it takes place at all.

    So far, I have never, unless I missed it, have had a Mormon answer my questions about this as the usual responses are to get upset at me, as you did, for bringing it up or that I don’t have enough knowledge to comment or, basically, even enquire about the goings on in the temple.

    Joshtried said, “Are you denying that Satan has any power at all? You dont want to ve a part of something that says Satan has power?
    He does have power, not more than Christ, and definitely not mpre than God. Symbols of power have been used throughout history… A king wearing a Crown is a great example. Is it because he wears the crown that he is king, or does he wear the crown as an outward symbol to others that he is king?
    Did Aaronic priests wear certain garments to partake in temple ordinances? If I remember correctly, they sure did.
    If I tattoo a huge cross on my chest, does it make me Christian? If I am Christian, can I use the cross to signify to othera that I am Christian?
    A symbol is nothing. It REPRESENTS something. It does not give or take power.
    Satan is a creation of God. I am a creation of God.. Would I choose not to be a creation because Satan also is a.creation?”

    But if what Mr. Decker said is true about the Garden of Eden room ritual, why would anyone want to wear the symbol of the priesthood and power of Lucifer which are represented by the symbol on the apron given to Mormons who go through the Garden of Eden room ritual? After all, Lucifer rebelled against God so the symbol and the power of the priesthood of Lucifer would be of rebellion not obediance to God don’t you think?

  37. 37 shematwater
    March 6, 2012 at 9:21 pm

    KENT

    I have never been through the Temple, though I am going to go through in the next month or so. However, I will say a few things.

    Ed Decker is not a reliable source, and never has been. It is an interesting idea, but I would question anything that is in the video, as it is all twisted and sensationalized to create the biggest negative response in the view that could possibly be created.

    Second, the question is one that is most likely never going to be given an answer you will be satisfied with that is actually true. The Temple ceremonies are sacred, and are not to be shared lightly. They are reserved for those who have made those covenants, and are not for the world. As such, anyone who is faithful in the church will not answer, and anyone who does answer is not faithful and thus is suspect in both motive and understanding.

    For instance, while I have never been through the temple, I am pretty darn sure the garments do not represent the fig leaves that Adam and Eve wore. After all, God replaced these with animal skins. The accounts sound more like Ed Decker’s usual twisting of truth to make the ignorant (no insult intended) believe what he wants them to believe rather than the truth.

    DAVID

    “Shem’s answer pigeonholes God, limits His power, and His reign.”

    No it doesn’t, and this only shows your inability to understand what I am saying. God knows about all the gods that exist, and I have never stated otherwise. What he doesn’t know is any other God that pertains to this earth, because there is no other God that pertains to this earth.

    Try not to add meaning to my words that just simply aren’t there.

  38. 38 Kent
    March 6, 2012 at 9:44 pm

    The following link contains excerpts from a book that confirms what Mr. Decker says about the endowment ceremony and the Garden of Eden room ritual, with the exception of confirming that the aprons given to Mormons taking part in the ceremony have the symbol of the power and priesthood of Lucifer on them, the same symbol that Lucifer is protrayed as wearing. After reading through it, although I don’t believe the ceremonies in it are in tune with biblical truth, I don’t find most of them disturbing. However, wearing the symbol of the power and priesthood of Lucifer, if in fact the aprons given to the people in the Garden of Eden room ritual do have this symbol on them, is extremely disturbing to me and I never, ever want to wear such an emblem.

    http://packham.n4m.org/endow31.htm

    TEMPLE MORMONISM: ITS EVOLUTION, RITUAL AND MEANING
    Published by A. J. Montgomery
    156 Fifth Avenue, New York
    1931

  39. March 6, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Shem

    I disgree. The LDS God is pigeonhold in what he has control over and even into a physical human form. And even though you say he knows of other other gods he refuses to acknowledge them. Why, can he not acknowledge the parents the LDS church claims he has?

  40. March 6, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    Shem

    If there are many gods presiding over other “earths,” why not acknowedge them? I understand what your saying and I will hold you too it.

  41. 41 Kent
    March 6, 2012 at 10:33 pm

    Shem, thank you for your civil response but, besides the symbol itself being disturbing and beyond Mr. Decker’s direspectful tone, evident in how he presents the issues, the fact remains is the information he presents about people wearing the symbol of the priesthood and power of Lucifer true or not?

    Especially troublesome to me is, if it is true, that Mormons are instructed, as Mr. Decker says, to always wear the aprons while they are partaking in the temple.

    Regarding how Mormons, in this case Kate, get upset at me for questioning something they consider beautiful and sacred, consider that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light so just because something appears as something good doesn’t always mean that it is in fact a good thing.

  42. March 6, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Kent, your posts are not even deserving of response, but because you are using trash to promote something that is completely false, I will answer you….NO. What you have to back you up, videos, books, whatever, you are pulling up from the filthy bottom of the anti-mormon barrel.

  43. 43 Joshtried
    March 6, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    A question I have here for those of both parties is this:
    What power and authority does Satan hold? How, if in any way, is it similar to the authority Christ held?
    Something to point out here is this: when moses was trying to gain israels freedom, the “evil” priests were able to do a lot that moses did. I dont remember what eventually tipped the scales, other than crossing the sea.. My point here is Others DO have power, even some of the same powers as the “Good” side.

    Back to the multiple gods question…
    Genesis 3:22 “behold the man is become as one of us”… Who was God talking to??? Does he talk to himself in plurality?? this CLEARLY says US… Not behold, he is become like ME.. So who is this us?
    I agree with Shem and Kate that the passage you quoted refers to this earth. Otherwise, why would he say WAY before what you stated, back IN THE BEGINNING, man is as one of us?

  44. 44 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 3:06 am

    From: http://www.mormonthink.com/priesthood.htm

    The early revelations of the church set no precedence for one’s need for “priesthood authority” in order to be called of God, ordained (accredited) to an ecclesiastical position within the church, engaged in the work of preaching repentance and baptizing for the remission of sins, nor to ordain (set apart/accredit) others within the church. Book of Commandments 3 states, “If ye have desires to serve God, ye are called to the work . . . and faith, hope, charity, and love, with an eye single to the glory of God, qualifies him for the work” (D&C 4). No priesthood requirement mentioned! Book of Commandments 24 states that salvation could come to those who “would believe . . .in the gifts and callings of God, by the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and of the Son . . . Every elder, priest, teacher or deacon, is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him, by the power of the Holy Ghost which is in the one who ordains him” (D&C 20, emphasis added)–which emphasizes an individual’s spiritual gifts, the calling that comes from God himself, and the Holy Ghost (not priesthood) in the one who ordains which would stipulate the gifts of the individual.

    Is it possible the priesthood restoration events were not literal, given the many problematic details surrounding those claims?

    If Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery did not receive a conferral of the priesthood from the ancient apostles, was their authority to act in the name of God unique? Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the “only true and living church” on the earth?

    Is the church’s “Priesthood” . . . real?

  45. 45 RLO
    March 7, 2012 at 3:54 am

    So, Kate is back…

    telling Christians their “. . .posts are not even deserving of a response. . .”
    accusing them of “. . .using trash to promote something that is completely false. . .”
    stating Christians are “. . .pulling up from the filthy bottom of the anti-mormon barrel. . .”
    trying to insist a Christian’s “. . .vileness [be] removed from this blog. . .”
    referring to Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry as “. . .the slime that CARM is. . .”
    responding to a Christian with “. . .all you do is spew anti-mormon garbage. . .”
    calling a Christian’s fruits “. . .putrid and vile. . .”
    again saying about CARM: “. . .That place is a cesspool and isn’t even worth addressing. . .”
    telling a Christian his “. . .lies about Mormonism are just dribble. . .”

    It’s so comforting to have her high level of emotional intelligence back in the discussions again. . .

    Reading through her contributions on this topic alone, two passages from the Bible come to mind:

    “Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.” Ephesians 4:15

    and,

    “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.” 1 Peter 3:15-16

  46. 46 Kent
    March 7, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Thank you RLO, all I was doing was asking questions and I didn’t get any answers accept from one person, it is all a bunch of lies without telling me what the truth is and from another person that Mormons likely won’t answer what I am asking because it is considered sacred.

    Anyway, regarding the aprons, upon doing some further reading, I found that the apron the character of Lucifer now wears in the Garden of Eden ritual is now black and apparently it doesn’t have the free mason symbols on it now, but it did have them in previous years, and the apron the Mormons are now given to wear is green and it also doesn’t currently have the symbols but, apparently, it did have those symbols in past years as well. But aren’t the same symbols that are described as being on the aprons in the past still on the buildings of the Mormon temples?

    But regardless, reading up on this subject, and there are no Mormon sources to verify what goes on in the temples so all we can quote is second hand sources that Mormons wil not accept and they aren’t likely to tell us either, it doesn’t really matter to me for my own eternal life because I don’t need any temple or other ordinances so I don’t need to go to any temple as that is all extra stuff added on anyway that isn’t in the Bible.

    Below is the gospel I have been given and it is the gospel I pass on to other people and it is all I or anyone else needs to believe for eternal life where SAVED EQUALS ETERNAL LIFE and not just being able to to live in the afterlife with a chance of being able to progress to be there someday.

    I pray and hope that there are Mormons reading this Blog who are questioning what their church has taught them and they take what is written below to heart and that they can know now, this moment, that they can be in the mansions where God is forever.

    Corinthians 15:1-4

    15 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 BY WHICH ALSO YOU ARE SAVED, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

    3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures

    Acts 16:29-34

    29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “SIRS, WHAT MUST I DO TO BE SAVED?”

    31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34 Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.

    Romans 10:9-13

    9 THAT IF YOU CONFESS WITH YOUR MOUTH THE LORD JESUS AND BELIEVE IN YOUR HEART THAT GOD HAS RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD YOU WILL BE SAVED. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. 13 FOR “WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED.”

  47. 47 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    A Restored Priesthood?

    The significance of the priesthood to Mormons is revealed in the words of Mormon writer Mark E. Petersen: “Without a divinely approved ministry there can be no Church of God on earth” (Ibid., 15). There are two priesthoods in the L. D. S. Church from which all authority results—the Melchizedek and the Aaronic (Doctrine and Covenants 107:1-3, 5). Concepts regarding both are entirely false.

    No Aaronic Priesthood Today

    There can be no Aaronic priesthood today for:
    1.That priesthood was a part of the law of Moses, which was permanently “taken” away by Christ’s death (Colossians 2:14). (Note: the Greek, erken, in the perfect tense denotes the permanent abolition of the law of Moses [Robertson 1930, 494].)
    2.Only descendants from Levi could administer those Aaronic priestly functions (Hebrews 7:5), and, as all tribal records were destroyed in A.D. 70, a lineage determination is impossible.

    Christ’s Priesthood

    The priesthood of Christ “after the order of Melchizedek” was an anti-typical “likeness” (Hebrews 7:15) of the former. It is heavenly, not earthly, in its nature (6:20). And it is “unchangeable” (7:24), the meaning of which is “perpetual, spoken of Christ’s priesthood as ever remaining to him inviolate, never passing from him to another” (Robinson 1855, 68).

    That genuine Christians are “priests” in a spiritual sense, we do not deny (1 Peter 2:5; Revelation 1:6), but there is no earthly, physical priesthood authorized by God today.

    It is our devout prayer that sincere Mormons would candidly examine the evidence, renounce this false system, and in true obedience, turn to the Lord.

    ~http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/204-is-the-mormon-church-the-restored-church

  48. 48 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    4. The claimed “restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods” was not necessary and never happened.

    Once again, we have both historical and biblical reasons to question the LDS Church’s claims that heavenly beings came to earth to restore the priesthoods. The LDS Church claims that in 1829 John the Baptist conferred the Aaronic priesthood on Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, and that later that same year the apostles Peter, James, and John conferred the Melchizedek priesthood on them (Gospel Principles, 97). The earliest “revelation” informing the people about this is D&C 27:5-13, a three-hundred word text added in 1835 to what was Book of Commandments 28 by being literally spliced into the middle of a sentence. That earlier work, published in 1833, contains no mention of these ordinations. This evidence supports the conclusion that unfortunately it appears Joseph Smith made up the story sometime after 1833 to buttress his religious authority.

    In any case, we can be sure that John the Baptist and those three apostles did not confer such priesthoods on anyone in 1829, because the Bible’s teaching clearly does not allow for such an occurrence. According to Hebrews 5-8, the Aaronic priesthood was part of the old covenant enacted through Moses that had become obsolete as a result of the coming of Christ. In addition, Jesus alone holds the priesthood “after the order of Melchizedek.” Hebrews uses this expression to mean that Melchizedek was a type or prophetic foreshadowing of the eternal high priesthood of Jesus Christ (see our response to chapter 14 of Gospel Principles for more on these points). John the Baptist could not have conferred a priesthood that had been obsolete for nineteen centuries, and Jesus was certainly not going to confer his own authority as our heavenly high priest on Joseph or Oliver or anyone else!

    http://www.irr.org/mit/GP-BSG-17-Restoration-LDS-Church.html

  49. 49 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 1:04 pm

    “In no place in the word of God does it say that an Elder is after the order of Melchisedec, or after the order of the Melchisedec Priesthood… This matter of ‘priesthood,’ since the days of Sydney Rigdon, has been the great hobby and stumbling-block of the Latter Day Saints… Authority is the word we used for the first two years in the church—until Sydney Rigdon’s days in Ohio. This matter of the two orders of priesthood in the church of Christ, and lineal priesthood of the older law being in the church, all originated in the mind of Sydney Rigdon. He explained these things to Brother Joseph in his way, out of the old Scriptures, and got Brother Joseph to inquire, etc… This is the way the High Priests and the ‘priesthood’ as you have it, was introduced into the Church of Christ almost two years after its beginning—and after we had baptized and confirmed about two thousand souls into the church… In Kirtland, Ohio, in June, 1831, at a conference of the church, the first High Priests were ordained into the church”—An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer, 1887, p. 64

  50. 50 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 1:07 pm

    The terms “high priest” and “High Priesthood” (verse 67) are missing from the original version of this revelation published in the Book of Commandments in 1833.

    “A Revelation on Church Government… Doctrine and Covenants, section xx… Verses 65, 66 and 67 were added by the Prophet some time after the rest of the revelation was given.” —History of the Church, vol. 1, pp. 64, 68, notes.

  51. 51 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    Mormon Priesthood
    All LDS males are ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood
    Deacons are 12 year old boys
    Males with Defects are Accepted (Joseph Smith had a leg defect)
    Priests do not perform blood sacrifices, nor follow biblical rites
    Many “High Priest” Bishops
    Many LDS Males receive the Melchizedek Priesthood
    LDS Males transfer to others the Melchizedek Priesthood

    Biblical Priesthood
    Must be of the Lineage of Aaron (Num. 3:6, 10; Heb. 7:5, 11-14)
    Deacons are husbands (I Tim. 3:8)
    Must Be Physically Blameless (Leviticus 21:1-23)
    Priests perform blood sacrifice and special rites (Leviticus 8)
    One legal “High Priest” at a time
    Only Jesus qualified for office of Melchizedek (Heb. 7:1-4, 23-28)
    Melchizedek Priesthood is non- transferable (Hebrews 7:23-24)

  52. 52 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    While Mormonism is quick to assert that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdry were ordained to these Priesthoods by the Biblical apostles, it overlooks the fact that not only was Jesus Himself unable to hold the “Aaronic Priesthood” because He was not born of the tribe of Levi, but none of Jesus’ apostles where able to hold these Priesthoods for they could not fulfill the necessary qualifications. Thus, the “Priesthood” authority was “changed” from the “Aaronic” Priesthood (held solely by men of the Levitical lineage) to the Melchisedec Priesthood (held by Jesus alone).

    “…what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the Priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.…” —Hebrews 7:11-12

    This Melchisedec Priesthood can only be held by Jesus because He is the only one who can fulfill the qualifications.

    “For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God.…Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. Now consider how great this man was.…For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.”—Hebrews 7:1, 3-4, 26-27

    How can any man other than Jesus be “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days”? 19. Jesus was able to fulfill these qualifications because His eternal nature as God is without “beginning of days”? Therefore, it is only in His human nature as the “Son of Man,” that Jesus possesses a genealogy and was born of his mother Mary. Furthermore, just as “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God,” 20. so only Jesus fulfills the qualification to be “holy,” “undefiled,” and “separate from sinners.”

    It is for this reason that unlike the Levitical priests of the Aaronic Priesthood who were constantly passing the Priesthood on to others to avoid the extinction of that Priesthood, Jesus permanently possesses this Melchisedec Priesthood which can never be passed down to anyone else.

    “And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable Priesthood.” —Hebrews 7:23-24

    According to Strong’s Concordance, the Greek word (aparabatos) translated “unchangeable” in Hebrews 7:24 means “untransferable (perpetual).” 21. In other words, unlike the Aaronic Priesthood that was passed down from one man to another, Jesus’ Melchisedec Priesthood is “untransferable” in that it cannot be handed-down or conferred to anyone else. Jesus possesses it permanently.

    While only Jesus can hold the official “authority” of the Melchisedic Priesthood, the Bible does mention that there is a Priesthood of all believers. In other words, anyone (whether male or female) who has been called out of spiritual darkness into the marvellous light of Christ can claim to be of the “holy priesthood” and “chosen generation” of the people of God.

    “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.…But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.”—1 Peter 2:5, 9

    Unlike the Aaronic and Melchisedec Priesthoods that required sacrifices for sin, this Priesthood of all believers brings forth the “spiritual sacrifices” of “praises” to Jesus for what He has accomplished in becoming our sole High Priest—once for all paying the price of our redemption from sin and freeing us to no longer be in the bondage of darkness.

    ~http://4mormon.org/mormon-church-true.php#blackrev

  53. 53 shematwater
    March 7, 2012 at 3:06 pm

    CHOOSE

    The thing that most people overlook is the time before Moses. While it is true that under the Law of Moses only the Levites could hold the Aaronic priesthood this was a change that was made in the time of Moses. Even at that time God was going to give the priesthood to all men (nation of priests and all that) but because of their rebellion that privilege was taken and given only to one tribe, Which is why the first born of Israel had to be redeemed, as the right of priesthood was theirs, but was being taken from them and given to the tribe of Levi.
    Thus, before the time of Moses both priesthoods were had by all men, a situation that was restored by Christ when he fulfilled the Law of Moses.

    As to your attempts to show the progression of the priesthood in the modern day, you fail to really understand things.
    D&C section four is talking about the priesthood. Verse 5: “And faith, hope, charity and love, with an eye single to the glory of God, qualify him for the work.” The work is the ministry of the Priesthood. No, it does not list the priesthood as a requirement, because it is listing the requirements for the priesthood.
    In section 20 we again see a discourse on the Priesthood. Verse 60: “Every elder, priest, teacher, or deacon is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him; and he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordains him.”
    What do you think it means to be ordained? It means to be appointed to the priesthood. One is appointed to the priesthood and by the power of the Holy Ghost are confirmed to it. There is nothing in here that contradicts anything that we currently teach. Now, I admit that it shows a progression, because God works line upon line and precept upon precept. That is not proof of anything.

    In both cases you are attempting to interpret the words by using your doctrine, and are thus twisting their meaning.

    KENT

    From everything you said I can with almost 100% confidence that it is basically all wrong. It sounds very much like people spinning some good tales in an attempt to mislead.
    First, the only color that is to be worn in the Temple, from everything I understand, is white. Thus a green apron would not be appropriate.
    Second, no one is going to be wearing anything that symbolizes the devil. If this ceremony does take place then I would say that the people you are reading either did not understand the meaning, or are intentionally twisting it.

    I still say that it is a question that you will never find the truth about through research. Honestly, it is something that should be left alone in respect for those who hold it sacred.

  54. 54 andersonddj
    March 7, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    Green Apron


    The apron worn by temple patrons is green, which is symbolic of life. The fig leaves on the green apron are a fruit known for the countless multitude of seeds. This green apron full of fruitful seeds is worn after Adam and Eve are cast out, and strategically over the loins symbolizing the new power to procreate, be fruitful and multiply.
    http://www.i4m.com/think/temples/temple_clothes.htm

    Green Apron-

    The first accessory they put on during the ceremony is their apron, which looks like this:

    As you can see the apron has what looks like leaves on the front. The Mormon learns during the ceremony that this represents the fig leaves Adam and Eve made in the garden after they yielded to Satan’s temptation. According to the temple film after they realized what they had done Satan tells Adam and Eve to take some figs leaves and make aprons to cover their nakedness, at this time the audience is then told to put on their aprons.

    (As I look back on it now I wonder why we were commanded to obey Satan, and why have Mormons never made that connection?)
    http://discoveringgrace.wordpress.com/2011/04/05/mormon-temple-clothing-and-other-rituals/

    Except for the apron, which is green and stitched to resemble nine fig leaves, the temple vestments are white and unembroidered (though the robe may be pleated).
    http://www.ldsendowment.org/clothing.html

  55. 55 RLO
    March 7, 2012 at 4:28 pm

    Shem said: “I still say that it is a question that you will never find the truth about through research. Honestly, it is something that should be left alone in respect for those who hold it sacred.”

    “Sacred” does not have to equate to “secret.” If mormonism really wanted to clarify any of these alleged misconceptions, they would throw open the doors of their temples. They would encourage the world to come in and observe all of their temple rites. They would encourage questions. And they would gladly provide answers. Just as the vast majority of mainline Christianity does. But the mormon hierarchy would never think of such a thing.

    Shem. You can continue to defend “secrecy” by calling it “sacred,” but ultimately, secrecy always implies something hidden.

  56. 56 choosethechrist
    March 7, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Here is what I understand, I understand God’s Word:

    Jesus is my high priest and also head over everything which includes the church (his body of believers) and the church is the fullness of Christ.

    Ephesians 1:22-23 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

    I share in Christ’s exaltation and enthronement because I have been made alive in Christ and am “in Christ”, as believers we have a spiritual union with Christ. I am alive in Christ and will be seated with him through my union with Christ.

    Ephesians 2:4-6 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus,

    This is because I heard and believed

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

    I am holy and blameless and through my union with Christ, I have already been made a beneficiary of every spiritual blessing that belongs to and comes from God.

    Ephesians 1:3-4 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

    No church can give me what I already have in Christ! When I believed, God marked me with a seal, the Holy Spirit!!! No man can give this to anyone! No laying on of hands, etc, etc, etc required!

  57. 57 Kent
    March 7, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    RLO said, “Shem said: “I still say that it is a question that you will never find the truth about through research. Honestly, it is something that should be left alone in respect for those who hold it sacred.”

    “Sacred” does not have to equate to “secret.” If mormonism really wanted to clarify any of these alleged misconceptions, they would throw open the doors of their temples. They would encourage the world to come in and observe all of their temple rites. They would encourage questions. And they would gladly provide answers. Just as the vast majority of mainline Christianity does. But the mormon hierarchy would never think of such a thing.

    Shem. You can continue to defend “secrecy” by calling it “sacred,” but ultimately, secrecy always implies something hidden.”

    I think Mormons should have the missonaries tell people specifically what they need to believe and do to have eternal life, be up front about it, as that is what we do, we tell them that they need to repent and acknowledge they are sinners who cannot save themselves and that they need to believe in their hearts that Jesus died in their place and rose again from the dead on the third day, and that they need tell people about their faith and that they are never to deny their faith to anyone no matter what.

    We also tell people who Jesus is, that He is God and has always been God and always will be God and that while still being God, became a man, the only perfect sinless blameless man there has ever been, to be the perfect sacrifice to take away all of the sins of the world.

    So since we will gladly tell anyone up front who Jesus is I also think Mormon missionaries should tell people up front who they believe Jesus is, that they believe that Jesus is our older brother who is also the brother of Satan whose salvation plan was accepted over his brother Satan’s plan who then rebelled and convinced 1/3 of the spirit children to rebel and become the demons of this world.

  58. March 7, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    Kate

    Still waiting . . . .

  59. 59 Kent
    March 7, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    I know, Mormons will probably say, is nothing sacred? And as Shem suggested, leave it alone regarding the temple and also that missionaries might not have been through the temple rituals so they wouldn’t be able to tell anyone about what goes on there.

    Oh, and yes, there is something I hold sacred, my Lord Jesus Christ and a Christian church is nothing unless it is all about Him and what He did for us on the cross.

    Another thing, something missionaries would know about, they should tell people up front that they believe God was a man first before he became God and that they believe man can become gods themselves as in,”as man is God once was and as God is man may become.”

    After all, we are up front about telling people that we believe God has always been God, that He created everything there is and every thing there ever will be.

  60. 60 Joshtried
    March 7, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    I have a LOT of catching up to do as far as reading goes, but I will answer the question regarding Satan’s symbol, as I went through the temple today.
    NO, it is not the same. I will not disclose more than that, so please dont ask.
    To define my use of sacred, i am not going to disclose what goes on in the temple to those that I feel would only mock it. There are questions that can be answered, amd some that you must have a prior understanding of.
    For example.. Go back and read Genesis.. God told adam not to eat of G&E tree, BEFORE he created Eve… Adam does not tell eve God forbade the eating of said fruit until after she tries to give it to him… So, Adam fell that men might be…….. Simple truth not accepted bt most of Christianity… Its right there in Genesis2 for all to read… You choose to ignore this, and yet want us to tell you more, so yoi can ignore more…

  61. March 7, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    Josh

    “Adam does not tell eve God forbade the eating of said fruit until after she tries to give it to him… So, Adam fell that men might be…….. Simple truth not accepted bt most of Christianity… Its right there in Genesis2 for all to read… You choose to ignore this, and yet want us to tell you more, so yoi can ignore more…”

    You have your facts confused. Genesis 2 does not mention when Adam told Eve, but he definitely told her. How do we know this? Easy, there was no other person there. If you read Genesis 3 you see in verse 2 Eve had indeed been told by Adam because she knew the answer to Satan’s question. Let’ read Genesis 3:1-2:

    “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
    2And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
    3But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.”

    She knew the answer to the question and further Adam’s instruction to Eve even added something to the Lord’s command to Adam. The Lord said to Adam:

    “17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, THOU SHALT NOT EAT OF IT: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. ” Genesis 2:17

    Eve, however said in response to the question “God hath said , Ye shall not eat of it, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT, lest ye die.”

    Once again, you are not reading scripture in context and reaching false conclusions.

  62. 62 Joshtried
    March 7, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    As an aside to what we wear in the temple, LDS people are buried in said clothes as well (clothing in full, I have been a.part of 2 LDS burials and been to the temple several times) they are out there for everyone one to see. If you are really THAT imterested, go fimd an LDS funeral near you. why not go participate in the whole thing and seeing with what reverence we hold said.funeral, how we talk of Christ then. Or…. Continue lurking on the internet, and taking only what you want..

  63. 63 Joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 12:23 am

    And what you quoted show that she did not understand,.and thus.made it easier to be beguiled. If “touched you will die” was added.. Say Satan reaches up and grabs it and hands it to her… Well, Satan didnt die,.and therefore the rest must be false.. So where did she learn this from? Im pretty sure Adam understood God.. Why would he add to what God said?

  64. March 8, 2012 at 12:55 am

    Josh

    1. YOu were wrong about Adam not telling Eve.
    2. No I will not assume something you dreamed up.
    3. Touch is the first thing one must do to eat.

    YOu forget that before the fall Adam and Eve knew God’s will perfectly. Adam relayed to Eve not even to take the first step toward eating which is touching. Much like the commmandment not to commit adultery is even committed in the heart simply by lusting when looking at a woman, or teh commandment against murder is committed by merely getting angry at your neighbor. You aks “Why did he add to what God said?” To make sure they don’t even take the first step toward breaking God’s command. What it shows is that she had been told by Adam and that she did understand exactly what not to do. It also, shows that Satan did’t tell her either because he asked her what God said. If he had told her, there would have been no reason to phrase the question the way he did. “Did God really say?” You know Josh. Satan started his temptation of Eve by questioning what God really said. Instead of looking for reason not to believe it, why don’t you try trusting it.

  65. March 8, 2012 at 4:07 am

    Josh & Shem

    Speaking of trusting the Word

    Old testament and New

    21As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. Isaiah 59:21

    23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. 1 Peter 1:23-25.

  66. 66 joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 6:23 am

    David:
    please tell me where it says that Adam told Eve anything (yes i said that he said something to.. i was wrong, he didnt say a single thing regarding the tree, least not that i can find). you say that i cant make an assumption, and then turn right back around and do the same. It is possible the information was gained from another place (you know, that SUBTLE serpent that twists words… like GODS word…)The only thing he every said “to” her is calling her woman, and saying man should leave his father and cleave to wife…
    next, God commanded to take care of the ENTIRE garden. The G&E tree was IN THE GARDEN, and as such, would have had to been touched sometime. to say touch leads to sin is pretty deplorable, since i work in healthcare.. my Job is to touch, and to look, and to prod and do any number of things to the human body that are of medical necessity. To say i am going to sleep with someone other than my wife because i had to examine a woman with a breast tumor is retarded.. just as is the “touch” part here. They were gardeners.. they would have had to touch it sometime..

  67. 67 joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 6:47 am

    Lets try this in order…
    Genesis 2:
    7 Then the LORD God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
    15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
    17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
    22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

    Genesis 3:
    1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
    3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’

    SO:
    God put man in garden to work it and take care of it (TOUCH IT), and commanded not to EAT of G&E tree..
    serpent comes in all crafty like
    and by now, Eve has ALREADY twisted what GOD SAID..

    Rationally now, who do you think told Eve what God said? Adam, who is in a perfected state? Or Satan, who wishes to see man fall to his level?
    I remember Satan to be he who comes to kill, steal, and destroy…
    Seems to me he destroyed what God said, stole Adam and Eve from the garden and from God’s presence, and killed them spiritually…

  68. 68 joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 6:55 am

    As to the priesthood:
    Where did king Melchizedek get his priesthood, if he was one of 2 holders to ever have it? Obviously Christ was divine, and had a link to heaven that you and I do not possess. But where did the FIRST holder get his priesthood? Why was it called different? If Christ is the only one that could have it, and it was never transferable, than Melchizedek by definition could NOT have it.
    Now if you say that 2 have had it, when only one is supposed to have it, then it becomes something that more than one can OBVIOUSLY have.. Do i have the same power as Christ right now? No. I will never be the savior of this world. Can i officiate in, and teach correctly that which he has allowed for me to do? YES, i can. Are there things that are required to get exalted other than accepting Christ? YES, there are. Can you give the gift of the Holy Ghost without authority? NO you cant.

  69. March 8, 2012 at 2:33 pm

    Josh

    OK Josh. I’ll give it yet another try. Just for you :)

    I am not assuming things when they do not contradict what is written and there is no other conclusion that can be made based on what is written. Only Adam has been given the commandment. The snake wanted them to eat the fruit and has no reservation whatsovever about lying. Not every word Adam said to Eve was recorded. Remember too that the ONLY LAW God gave to Adam and therefore the only sin they could have committed at that time was to eat the fruit. There was no sin in the world until the commandment was broken – meaning the fruit was eaten. See Romans 5:12 .

    How do I know Adam told her? Now please, keep your heart open here. Eve included in her reply to the snake “lest we die.” THAT was the warning God gave to Adam and it was repeated by Eve to the snake. What did the snake say when Eve told the snake she would die if she ate the fruit? HE LIED to her and told her the opposite! (that’s what he does he lies, he is all about lies) “You shall NOT surely die.” The snake denied that she would die. He tried to convince her that she would NOT die. Fundamentally, he was trying to convince her that God was lying to her, that God was holding things back from her, that God was not telling her everything, and that if she just did this one thing and trust what he said instead of what God said they could be “as gods.” Does any of this sound vaguely familiar?

    Josh, I don’t know why you have such a hard time believing what God says in His Word. But He said His Word is always true and that it lasts forever. There is one guy that doesn’t want you to trust God’s Word (besides Joseph Smith) – and that guy is Satan.

    I’d like to point out one other thing about how highly God regard his word. How highly do you think God regards His name? Is there any doubt how highly He regards His name? He made a command to protect it. Did you you know that God regards His Word even higher than His name?

    “2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast MAGNIFIED THY WORD ABOVE ALL THY NAME.” Psalm 138:2

    You can trust His Word – Josh – You can, just like every other generation since it was written and for the rest of eternity. “25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever.” 1 Peter 1:25

    Forever means forever. His Word is pure and additions are lies.

    “5Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Proverbs 30:5-6

  70. 70 shematwater
    March 8, 2012 at 2:37 pm

    RLO

    “You can continue to defend “secrecy” by calling it “sacred,” but ultimately, secrecy always implies something hidden.”

    Matthew 7: 6 “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”

    Proverbs 23: 9 “Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words.”

    JST Matthew 7: 9-11 “Go ye into the world, saying unto all, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come nigh unto you. And the mysteries of the kingdom ye shall keep within yourselves; for it is not meet to give that which is holy unto the dogs; neither cast ye your pearls unto swine, lest they trample them under their feet. For the world cannot receive that which ye, yourselves, are not able to bear; wherefore ye shall not give your pearls unto them, lest they turn again and rend you.”

    The Temple ceremonies are the greatest pearls anyone can ever hope to find in this world. Why would cast them before the swine of world so that they can be desecrated by fools.

    KENT

    The Missionaries have been through the temple. That is a requirement for such service.
    However, they do teach you everything you need to know and do to gain eternal life. They do not leave anything out. The Temple is a huge part of their message, and anyone who listens to them knows this, and knows the meaning of the temple and the need for those ordinances. Beyond this they don’t need to know the details. They will learn those when they enter the temple.

    As to God once being man and all that: This isn’t exactly a secret. However, it is also not all that important. It is a truth that can wait until other truths are known and understood. It is also a truth that one cannot really escape from in they regularly attend church meetings for any real length of time. People talk as if this was something that is kept hidden, and it isn’t. It is just taught in the proper time and place.

    DAVID

    Isaiah 59: 21 is speaking of the second coming when Christ will come to the faithful and repentant of Zion (see verse 20). At that time his words will be known in their fullness, and we will no longer be dependent on the written record, for his words will be in our mouths, and his spirit will be on us.
    As to 1 Peter 1: 23-25, we have never denied that his word would stand forever. This is very true. But, as I have said before, this does not guarantee that the record of his word will stand forever. That is the difference.

    “Adam and Eve knew God’s will perfectly”

    I would disagree. They knew what the command said, but that is as far as their understanding went, which is much less that perfect. They did not yet have a knowledge of Good and Evil, and thus they could not understand God’s will. This understanding came only after they had eaten the fruit, which is confirmed in the Genesis account (3: 22).
    I do not necessarily agree with what Josh has said, but it is true that they did not have a full understanding of their actions.

  71. 71 RLO
    March 8, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    Shem;

    Invoking Matthew 7:6 but yet again? That’s fine. A dog and a pig as you may see me, it doesn’t change the fact that the doors to the churches of Christianity are open to any and all. The doors to the Mormon temples are not. Truth be known? The doors to Mormon temples are even closed to the majority of Mormons.

    And one last thing, I wouldn’t consider a ceremony where I find myself re-enacting a conversation with Satan to be “the greatest pearls anyone can ever hope to find in this world.”

    RLO

  72. March 8, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    Shem

    “As to 1 Peter 1: 23-25, we have never denied that his word would stand forever. This is very true. But, as I have said before, this does not guarantee that the record of his word will stand forever. That is the difference.”

    “5Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.”

    Proverbs 30:5 says EVERY word.

    The written record (what Joseph Smith claimed was corrupted) was never compared with original Greek , Hebrew and Aramaic text. He had no idea how the translation was he was marking up compared to anything. He just started striking through portions of his English Bible and adding new things to it. No effort was made to go to the orignal texts and do a translation of the orginal. And this is suppost to be a “restored” gospel instead of a replacement gospel.

    Despite what it says in Proverbs 30:6 “6Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Joseph Smith added to God’s Word but somehow he is beleived not to be a liar when he did exactly what God says makes him a liar. The only type of prophets Jesus warns that will be coming in the last days are false prophets who wil deceive many.

    “3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
     4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
     5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” Matthew 24:3-5

     “11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Matthew 24:11

    What is guaranteed to happen is what Jesus said would happen. False prophets will arise, not true prophets. And these false prophets will deceive many. Indeed that has happended. What is also true is that whoever adds to His Word is a liar. “The word which by the gospel is preached unto you” Peter refers to is not the same one Joseph Smith claims is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Remember your answer to me about your take on Ephesians 2:8-9 if 2 Nephi 25:23 had never been written? It is the gospel as Peter and his apostles preached it that is the true gospel of Jesus Christ that will stand forever. The additions from Joseph Smith are not anywhere in what Peter and rest preached and that can only mean one thing.

  73. 73 Kent
    March 8, 2012 at 4:21 pm

    Shem said “As to God once being man and all that: This isn’t exactly a secret. However, it is also not all that important. It is a truth that can wait until other truths are known and understood. It is also a truth that one cannot really escape from in they regularly attend church meetings for any real length of time. People talk as if this was something that is kept hidden, and it isn’t. It is just taught in the proper time and place.”

    Yes, it isn’t a secret but Mormon missionaries won’t tell people they believe that God was once a man before He became God unless someone asks them. It isn’t all that important to tell people who God is? On the contrary this is very important information people should be told, who God is and who He has been in the past.

    Again, I will be up front about who I believe God is, God has always been God, God is God today, and God will always be God for eternity.

    Also, Mormon missionaries will not tell people up front who they believe Jesus Christ is, beyond a general statement that he s the son of God, which is also very important for people to know. After all, how can people know Jesus if they aren’t told who He is?

    When asked they will affirm that they believe Jesus is our older brother who is also Satan’s brother and that Jesus’ salvation play was accepted over His brother Satan’s salvation plan who then rebelled to become the devil and how 1/3 of the spirit children rebelled with him to become the demons. But they would never tell people who Jesus is unless they are asked.

    On the other hand, I tell people up front that Jesus is the Son of God, that He was, is, and will always will be God, even when He walked this earth to be the perfect sacrifice in our place, sinners who cannot ever save ourselves, who rose again on the third day so that we, who believe in Him and what He did to take away all of the sins of the world have eternal life in the mansions where God is.

    I can think of no more important questions that need to be answered then who God and Jesus are.

  74. 74 Kent
    March 8, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    Shem, i’ll clarify something from my last post, I know you think it is important to tell people who God is but, it is my understanding that you don’t think you need to give all of the details at first. However, I believe today is the day of salvation that we only have this lifetime to get it right so since anyone could be dying and leaving this earth at any moment, as we are not promised that we will be here tommorow, people need to know now all we need to know and believe to be saved.

    Hebrews 9:27

    And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment

  75. March 8, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    Josh

    “3 Do not put your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save.” Psalm 146:3

    That runs contrary to the whole idea of trusting the testimony of one man doesn’t it?

  76. 76 Joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    LDS believe that in the event of you dying before you have a chance to accept the gospel, you will have that chance in the afterlife, so to say I need to give you every single tidbit of my knowledge is a bit far fetched. if that were the case, the Bible should be MUCH shorter so that people could read it in an hour and accept it right then and there.. Over my lifetime I would say I have spent several weeks just reading (cumulative). The same is true when discussing things with people.. I dont walk up to someone and say “Satan (antichrist) shall rule this earth for 7 years!!!!” As that is something yet to happen, and very important in our future.. Is that what I start with? Probably not. Generally, people start abstractly, like why I refuse to drink soda or alcohol, or why I do my best to tell the truth, even if it will get me in trouble; why my demeanour to others is soft spoken and kind hearted (MOST of the time). If someone does not accept God is God, why am I going ro waste my “pearls” explaining to them what God is? If someone is not willing to accept Christ’s love for them, why am I going to try and explain his plan for after they accept that love?

  77. 77 Joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 5:19 pm

    I have not trusted in one man, save Christ alone. I trust God will direct us now, as he has since the conception of earth. I trust the Holy Spirit to guide my thoughts. I trust God to be the same forever, and if he called prophets before, then he will call them again. (even NOW)

  78. 78 shematwater
    March 8, 2012 at 6:49 pm

    RLO

    I have no clue where you get your statistics from.

    Truth be told our churches are open to anyone who cares to visit. Our Temples are open to anyone who desires enough to prepare themselves for entrance.

    Now, I do not consider anyone here a dog or a pig, except in that these animals are used by Christ to symbolize the unbelieving world. In that respect everyone who is not a faithful, worthy member of the true church of God as restored by Joseph Smith in these last days is a pig or a dog, depending on what metaphor you wish to use.

    What I find funny is that you cling to the Bible as the inerrant word, and yet get upset when I use it and actually follow its counsel.

    DAVID

    Peter and Proverbs both say every word, that is true: every spoken word. This does not include every written word, every transcribed word, or every translated word. It is the spoken word of God as originally delivered to the prophets.

    As to Joseph Smith’s translation, he had no need of these texts, as he was being guided directly by the Spirit of God, and on occasion directly by Christ himself. He didn’t need the second hand records of men, for he had the source and through it he restored that which the man made records had lost. Thus he did not add anything, but replaced what had been taken.
    (And by the time he died he had the Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and German bibles, and was fluent in all of them.)

    KENT

    The things you are talking about should be obvious to anyone who just thinks about the doctrine. However, these things are not important to our salvation. To be saved in the Celestial Kingdom all we need to know is that God is God, that He is our Heavenly Father, and that because he loves us he has prepared this earth and set in motion a plan by which we can return to live with him, and be like him forever. In regards to Christ we need to know that He is the literal Son of God, that he is our elder brother, that he suffered all the pain and agony that anyone can suffer, and through his suffering he has made it possible for all of us to return to our Father.
    If this is all we ever learn about God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ we can be saved in the Celestial Kingdom. As such it is all that needs to be taught to those who are not of the true faith. Once this has been accepted, then the fuller understanding of their nature and their relationship with us and each other can be reached. But that understanding is not needed for us to enter the Celestial Kingdom.
    Now, it is needed to be Exalted, for eternal life is to know God. But exaltation, though it is the final goal, must come after salvation in the Celestial Kingdom.
    It is just like school: when in high school you teach them enough to get them through. Them in College you give them a greater understanding to get a degree. You do not flood their minds in High School with all the knowledge required for College, but wait until they are sufficiently prepared.

    And Josh is correct that people will have a chance in the Spirit World to accept what they missed here. Thus a person may learn the truth and except it, but be killed in an accident before they are able to be baptized, and later go to the temple. They will be taught the truth as a spirit, and those ordinances will be competed for them by proxy here on earth.
    We do not see the urgent need to teach every detail of truth, but to teach only that which will draw the person back to the presence of the Father. The rest will come later, whether in this life or the next.

  79. March 8, 2012 at 7:26 pm

    I just want to say that I respect Mormons for holding to the vow of secrecy they have taken of what goes on in Mormon temples. If they have vowed to keep it secret, then they should keep it secret. Christians should not expect Mormons to discuss these things nor should that be held against Mormons. Christian’s should respect a Mormon’s decision to refrain from that type of discussion.

    Just for the record, from a Christian’s biblical perspective, let it be noted that nothing done in the Temple was secret. In Christianity, nobody then or now takes vows of secrecy about anything we do or believe. Everything we do and believe is freely open to public knowledge.

  80. March 8, 2012 at 8:22 pm

    Echo….
    Really? Maybe this will enlighten you…

    From http://strongreasons.blogspot.com/2008/01/temple-ordinances-in-early-christianity.html

    Temple Ordinances in Early Christianity

    In the New Testament the word “mystery” often implies a “secret rite” in the Greek (see Thayer’s lexicon also here). In the Latin Vulgate, it is often translated as sacramentum from which the English word “sacrament” is derived. LDS people mean “sacrament” when we say “ordinance.” The two words are really synonymous. In LDS terminology, referring to the Lord’s Supper as “the Sacrament” isn’t technically complete. It is “the sacrament of the Lord’s supper” or “the ordinance of the Lord’s supper.” Baptism, confirmation, priesthood ordination, etc are all “sacraments” or “ordinances.” To avoid the confusion of referring to the Lord’s Super as “the sacrament,” the Church translation of the scriptures into Spanish refer to la santa cena (the Holy Dinner) instead of to el sacramento (the sacrament).

    In many older texts and often considered the more authentic reading, 1 Cor. 2:1 says that “I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the mystery of God.” Later texts changed it to “Testimony.” Mystery fits better in the context. Let me show you why.

    For example, verse 6: “Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect (teleoi, that is, mature, or the initiated), yet not the wisdom of this world, not of the princes of the world, that come to naught. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory…”

    Then in chapter 3 he repeats this theme, saying “I, brethren, [when I was among you] could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat (adult food): for hitherto ye were not able to bear it (that is, until now you couldn’t bear it), neither yet now are ye able (and you still can’t!)” (1 Cor. 3:1-2).

    In the next chapter, Paul writes, “Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and the stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor. 4:1).

    So, It appears that Paul had in his mind two classes of Saints. The teleoi (or mature, the initiated, or “perfect”) who had given to them hidden wisdom in a mystery (sacrament, ordinance, secret ritual) who could receive the adult food. The second class was those who hadn’t received the hidden wisdom in a mystery because they were not yet ready. The people in Corinthians who had been members of the Church already for years fell into the second class, according to Paul’s epistle to them. That’s pretty fascinating.

    I think this topic is also hinted at by the author of Hebrews (whom I believe to be Paul).

    For when by reason of the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that some one teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food. For every one that partaketh of milk is without experience of the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But solid food is for fullgrown men [teleoi], even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil (Revised Version. Hebrews 5:12-14).

    Another fascinating reference to this is in Ephesians 5. In this context Paul speaks of marriage and the Church:

    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
    This is a great mystery (Ephesians 5:22-32).

    Paul refers to marriage as a “great sacrament” and also speaks of the church as a bride without “wrinkle” or “spot” painting an image of special ceremonial wedding clothing.

    Anyway, this continues after the New Testament. Here’s the info I’ve gathered so far on the topic. Please read the quotes carefully before you start saying they refer to baptism or the Eucharist (some may, indeed, but not all for reasons that will be apparent to the careful reader). I think there is some real clear indicators that the “mysteries” were often other ordinances now long lost (except to the Latter-day Saints).

    Ante-Nicene Fathers:

    For a mystery ought to be most faithfully concealed and covered, especially by us, who bear the name of faith. (Lactantius Ante-Nicene Fathers 7:221)

    And Peter said: “We remember that our Lord and Teacher, commanding us, said, ‘Keep the mysteries for me and the sons of my house.’ Wherefore also He explained to His disciples privately the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven. But to you who do battle with us, and examine into nothing else but out statements, whether they be true or false, it would be impious to state the hidden truths.” (Peter, Clementine Homilies, Ante-Nicene Fathers 8:336)

    For the most sublime truths are best honoured by means of silence. (Peter, Clementine Recognitions, Ante-Nicene Fathers. 8:83)

    But if [Simon Magus] remains wrapped up and polluted in those sins which are manifestly such, it does not become me to speak to him at all of the more secret and sacred things of divine knowledge (gnosis), but rather to protest and confront him, that he cease from sin, and cleanse his actions from vice. But if he insinuate himself, and lead us on to speak what he, while he acts improperly, ought not to hear, it will be our part to parry him cautiously. For not to answer him at all does not seem proper, for the sake of the hearers, lest haply they may think that we decline the contest through want of ability to answer him, and so their faith may be injured through their misunderstanding of our purpose. (Peter, Clementine Recognitions, Ante-Nicene Fathers. 8:98)

    But the same writer [Clement of Alexandria] in the seventh book of the same work, relates also the following things concerning him: “The Lord after his resurrection imparted knowledge (gnosis) to James the Just and to John and Peter, and they imparted it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom Barnabas was one…” (Eusebius. The Church History of Eusebius 2.1.4. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series Two. 1:104)

    The science of nature, then, or rather observation, as contained in the gnostic tradition according to the rule of truth, depends on the discussion concerning cosmogony, ascending thence to the department of theology. (Clement of Alexandria. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2. 8:42)

    Wherefore also all men are His; some through knowledge (gnosis), and others not yet so; and some as friends, some as faithful servants, some as servants merely. This is the Teacher, who trains the Gnostic by mysteries, and the believer by good hopes, and the hard of heart by corrective discipline through sensible operation. (Clement of Alexandria, Ante-Nicene Fathers. 2:524)

    [T]he mysteries are not exhibited incontinently to all and sundry, but only after certain purifications and previous instructions. (Clement of Alexandria, Ante-Nicene Fathers. 2:449)

    Now, in answer to such statements, we say that it is not the same thing to invite those who are sick in soul to be cured, and those who are in health to the knowledge and study of divine things. We, however, keeping both these things in view, at first invite all men to be healed, and exhort those who are sinners to come to the consideration of the doctrines which teach men not to sin…And when those who have been turned towards virtue have made progress, and have shown that they have been purified by the word, and have led as far as they can a better life, then and not before do we invite them to participation in our mysteries. “For we speak wisdom among them that are perfect.”…[W]hoever is pure not only from all defilement, but from what are regarded as lesser transgressions, let him be boldly initiated in the mysteries of Jesus, which properly are made known only to the holy and the pure…He who acts as initiator, according to the precepts of Jesus, will say to those who have been purified in heart, “He whose soul has, for a long time, been conscious of no evil, and especially since he yielded himself to the healing of the word, let such an one hear the doctrines which were spoken in private by Jesus to His genuine disciples.”… [Celsus] does not know the difference between inviting the wicked to be healed, and initiating those already purified into the sacred mysteries! Not to participation in mysteries, then, and to fellowship in the wisdom hidden in a mystery, which God ordained before the world to the glory of His saints, do we invite the wicked man, and the thief, and the housebreaker, and the poisoner, and the committer of sacrilege, and the plunderer of the dead, and all those others whom Celsus may enumerate in his exaggerated style, but such as these we invite to be healed…God the Word was sent, indeed, as a physician to sinners, but as a teacher of divine mysteries to those who are already pure and who sin no more. (Origen, Ante-Nicene Fathers. 4:487-489)

    In these circumstances, to speak of the Christian doctrine as a secret system, is altogether absurd. But that there should be certain doctrines, not made known to the multitude, which are (revealed) after the exoteric ones have been taught, is not a peculiarity of Christianity alone, but also of philosophic systems, in which certain truths are exoteric and others esoteric. (Origen. Ante-Nicene Fathers 4:399)

    Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers:

    Of the beliefs and practices whether generally accepted or publicly enjoined which are preserved in the Church we possess derived from written teaching; others we have received delivered to us “in a mystery” by the tradition of the Apostles… (Basil of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2. 8:40-41)

    In the same manner the Apostles and Fathers who laid down laws for the Church from the beginning thus guarded the awful dignity of the mysteries in secrecy and silence, for what is bruited abroad random among the common folk is no mystery at all. This is the reason for our tradition of unwritten precepts and practices, that the knowledge of our dogmas may not become neglected and contemned by the multitude through familiarity. “Dogma” and “Kerugma” are two distinct things; the former is observed in silence; the latter is proclaimed to all the world. (Basil of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2. 8:42)

    We ought not then to parade the holy mysteries before the uninitiated, lest the heathen in their ignorance deride them, and the Catechumens being over-curious be offended. (Athanasius, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2. 4:106)

    But first I wish to remind you who are initiated of the response, which on that evening they who introduce you to the mysteries bid you make; and then I will also explain the saying of Paul: so this likewise will be clearer to you; we after all the other things adding this which Paul now saith [in 1 Corinthians 15:29]. And I desire indeed expressly to utter it, but I dare not on account of the uninitiated; for these add a difficulty to our exposition, compelling us either not to speak clearly or to declare unto them the ineffable mysteries. Nevertheless, as I may be able, I will speak as through a veil. (John Chrysostom. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One. 12:244)

  81. 81 Kent
    March 8, 2012 at 8:49 pm

    Joshtried said, “I have not trusted in one man, save Christ alone. I trust God will direct us now, as he has since the conception of earth. I trust the Holy Spirit to guide my thoughts. I trust God to be the same forever, and if he called prophets before, then he will call them again. (even NOW)”

    But who are you trusting in because even though the Mormon church says that you follow the Biblical Jesus, the Bible doesn’t teach that Jesus is a created being who is our and Satan’s brother whose salvation plan was accepted over His brother Satan’s salvation plan so thaThat Jesus became the savior of the world.

    The Bible teaches us that Jesus has always been God, was God when He walked this earth, will always be God, and that He is the creator who created everything there is.

    John 1:1-4, John 1:14

    1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

    14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

    Jesus Himself said He was God and He never said He was merely our older brother and Satan’s brother who chose good instead of the evil his brother chose.

    In John 8 He refers to Himself as I AM the same name that God calls Himself in Exodus 3 when Moses asked Him who he should tell the people that had sent him. That is why the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Him because He said He is God.

    John 8:58-59

    58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

    59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

    Exodus 3:14-15

    14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” 15 Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’

  82. 82 Kent
    March 8, 2012 at 9:10 pm

    Sorry to get off topic a bit, but back to the temple endowment ceremony, from what I have read, it says that Adam was Michael before he was on the earth in the Garden of Eden but he didn’t remember anything that had happened before then.

    I am assuming that means Michael the arch angel but if Adam was Michael before he was Adam, was he turned into dust before he was created as Adam? Because the Genesis account says that God created him out of the dust of the ground and, ironically, even the Mormon Book of Moses from the Pearl of Great Price also says he was created out of the dust of the ground.

    The reenactment in the endowment ceremony seems to imply that Michael was whole but without his memory and he was placed in the Garden not created out of the dust of the ground. A contradiction to me if that is the case, but I realize that I may not get an answer to this question either but it doesn’t hurt to ask.

  83. March 8, 2012 at 9:40 pm

    Kent, your ignorance causes the contradictions you see. I would hope that LDS posters will refrain from answering any of your questions regarding any of this.

    “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast
    ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them
    under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”

  84. March 8, 2012 at 10:00 pm

    Kate

    Still waiting. . . . Have you seen Mark’s new post? How about that answer Kate. Do you still remember the question.

  85. 85 Joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    Does your spirit come from dust kent?
    2nd, while you may want to know what goes on in the temple, I find it disrespectful to disregard that which we hold sacred, purely out of curiousity. There are parts of the temple ceremony that can be found in the Bible/BoM. There are things that need to be understood before you enter and take on the covenants of the endowements. If you dont understand those, you are taking everything in the temple out of context, as everyone here has pointed out, context is so important.

  86. 86 Joshtried
    March 8, 2012 at 10:50 pm

    Kate:
    While I understand your stance, it should be noted that there are parts that can be discussed outside the temple. Like the creation of man: it clearly says in Genesis man was created out of dust, and that God gave said man the breath of life.. Obviously the being had no life until God gave it one.. It was just a void vessel. While I understand most of the people here are not really here to learn, but to argue (telling others what they believe after their beliefs were clearly stated by them), there are occassions for everyone here to learn & we should work to correct the falasies being taught.

  87. March 8, 2012 at 11:00 pm

    Josh,
    Agreed, but honestly, if you read through the many pages of posts, you will see they are not here to learn.

  88. March 8, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    Kate,

    Have you read all of the context/chapters surrounding of all the quotes you gave from the link concerning the church Fathers or are you just blindly trusting a man who claims to have done the research?
    Are you aware that people can pull quotes out of context to support just about anything they want to?
    Should we blindly trust men when men are capable of doing research that lacks all integrity?
    Can we be deceived by men when we don’t do our own research first?
    Is it a good idea to share something with others (that could possibly be false) if you haven’t first researched it all out yourself?

    If you don’t want to do the research for yourself, that’s fine, that’s okay, it is then probably best to stick to the Bible because you have the Bible and the context of the Bible is readily available to you.
    I recommend you read entire books about the church Father’s for yourself for when you do this, they will show you the false teachings of Mormonism.

    With regards to the portion of your post that deals with the Bible, this is MY view…

    Romans 16:25-26 “ Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him—“

    The “Mystery” that has now been revealed to the Saints “through the prophetic writings” is the mystery we share with “all nations”. So no secret there.

    The Mystery that was hidden in the past was hidden to the believers in the past as well as unbelievers. So there was nothing kept “secret” there.

    The mention your post made of “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
    This is a great mystery (Ephesians 5:22-32)” …

    This is still a mystery to us believers. Even Paul says it is a mystery to him. That has nothing to do with some “secret” knowledge.

    To respond to the milk before meat comments….

    The fact that some believers need milk before meat doesn’t mean that the meat is “secret” or to be kept “secret” it only means that believers need foundational instruction before they can even begin to understand other teachings.

    We are instructed in the Bible not to share our pearls with pigs. Does this mean that we keep secrets from them? No it doesn’t. It means they are self-proclaimed God haters and we are not expected to carry on a discussion with those kinds of people.

  89. March 9, 2012 at 12:13 am

    Echo:

    Regarding: For a mystery ought to be most faithfully concealed and covered, especially by us, who bear the name of faith. (Lactantius Ante-Nicene Fathers 7:221)

    Here is it’s context. Preceding this quote is about the end of the millennium and the loosing of the devil.

    “This is the doctrine of the holy prophets which we Christians follow; this is our wisdom, which they who worship frail objects, or maintain an empty philosophy, deride as folly and vanity, because we are not accustomed to defend and assert it in public, since God orders us in quietness and silence to hide His secret, and to keep it within our own conscience; and not to strive with obstinate contention against those who are ignorant of the truth, and who rigorously assail God and His religion not for the sake of learning, but of censuring and jeering. For a mystery ought to be most faithfully concealed and covered, especially by us, who bear the name of faith. But they accuse this silence of ours, as though it were the result of an evil conscience; whence also they invent some detestable things respecting those who are holy and blameless, and willingly believe their own inventions

    (Emphasis mine) sound familiar?

    If I get time, I’ll show you more. Yes, I HAVE read and studied much of these writings, and continue to do so. It’s a passion of mine. I apologize for using others research, but really don’t have the time these days to write much here. Also, all that work usually gets ignored anyway, so it’s time wasted.

  90. March 9, 2012 at 12:14 am

    Sorry, the emphasis didn’t show up in the post….it was on, “But they acccuse this silence of ours, as though it were the result of an evil conscience;”

  91. March 9, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Kate,

    Not judging what you see in that context, but explaining what I see in that context…

    “…and not to strive with obstinate contention against those who are ignorant of the truth, and who rigorously assail God and His religion not for the sake of learning…”

    We are instructed in the Bible not to share our pearls with pigs(who rigorously assail God and His religion). Does this mean that we keep secrets from them? No it doesn’t. It means they are self-proclaimed God haters and we are not expected to carry on a discussion with those kinds of people.

  92. 92 Joshtried
    March 9, 2012 at 12:34 am

    As to the sacred thing.. We can see this throughout the world, and people are becoming sensitive to the respects of others. What happened with the Quran burnings… The book Muslims hold sacred… We as Christians dont straight up defile this, out of respect for their beliefs. The same should be made towards any religion. Just because you dont understand it doesnt mean it can be trampled under foot

  93. March 9, 2012 at 1:27 am

    Josh said: “As to the sacred thing.. We can see this throughout the world, and people are becoming sensitive to the respects of others. What happened with the Quran burnings… The book Muslims hold sacred… We as Christians dont straight up defile this, out of respect for their beliefs. The same should be made towards any religion. Just because you dont understand it doesnt mean it can be trampled under foot”

    Amen!

  94. March 9, 2012 at 1:44 am

    But are you really seeing this Echo:

    “This is the doctrine of the holy prophets which we Christians follow;

    this is our wisdom,

    which they who worship frail objects, or maintain an empty philosophy, deride as folly and vanity,

    because we are not accustomed to defend and assert it in public,

    since God orders us in quietness and silence to hide His secret,

    and to keep it within our own conscience;

    and not to strive with obstinate contention against those who are ignorant of the truth,

    and who rigorously assail God and His religion

    not for the sake of learning,

    but of censuring and jeering.

    For a mystery ought to be most faithfully concealed and covered,

    especially by us, who bear the name of faith.

    But they accuse this silence of ours,

    as though it were the result of an evil conscience;

    whence also they invent some detestable things respecting those who are holy and blameless,

    and willingly believe their own inventions.

    I don’t know, as I read through this over and over, it actually sounds like what some of your non-lds posters do to what we consider sacred. The reason you can’t see this is because many of you are the ones rigorously assailing God and His true religion, which we have the fullness of and which you censure and jeer at. Then many of you accuse us of detestable things because we keep it sacred, thus willingly believing your own inventions.

  95. March 9, 2012 at 3:27 am

    Josh

    “Josh said: “As to the sacred thing.. We can see this throughout the world, and people are becoming sensitive to the respects of others.”

    Lets start with the law first:

    Deuteronomy 6:14-16
    “14Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you;
    15(For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.” Deuteronomy 6:14-16

    Now lets see what Jesus said:
    “6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14:6
    “18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” John 3:18

    Those who don’t believe the gospel of Jesus will be condemned. Unless of course you believe Jesus (who does not change) didn’t mean what He said in John 3:18 or He changed His unchanging mind. So what is better, to out of respect for someone’s beliefs in a false religion keep silent, and don’t bother to concern yourself with where they will spend their eternity? Or risk offending them and tell them the truth?

    What some may see as sensitive I can see as indifference or perhaps just plain fear. I’m not saying to be disrespectful certainly, but fear of offending someone should not prevent one from speaking the truth to them in the most loving way possible which can include having to be very direct in pointing out their error.

  96. March 9, 2012 at 4:05 am

    Kate

    “The reason you can’t see this is because many of you are the ones rigorously assailing God and His true religion, which we have the fullness of and which you censure and jeer at. Then many of you accuse us of detestable things because we keep it sacred, thus willingly believing your own inventions.”

    Here is something that is not anyone’s invention and they are all certainly true.

    Christ’s true church would never be defeated :
    “18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

    Jesus predicts false prophets will deceive many in the last days and that the gospel He is preaching in His time will be preached to all the earth. He even predicts that people will claim to see Christ.

    “4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,[a]’ and will deceive many.” Matthew 24:4-5

    “10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And THIS gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” Matthew 24:10-14

    “23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time. 26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.” Matthew 24:23-26

    In the last days false prophets will appear and deceive many. Matthew 24:14 says that THIS gospel of the kingdom will be preached to the whole world, not a new gospel. Matthew 24:26 says “if ANYONE tells you there he is . . . do not believe it” Joseph Smith claimed to see Jesus – do not believe it.

  97. March 9, 2012 at 4:15 am

    “I have not trusted in one man, save Christ alone. I trust God will direct us now, as he has since the conception of earth. I trust the Holy Spirit to guide my thoughts. I trust God to be the same forever, and if he called prophets before, then he will call them again. (even NOW)”

    You trust one man who claims ALL of Christianity was wrong and struck through and added to the Bible. Your entire faith and your eternity rests on whether or not Joseph Smith was a fraud or not. Your eternal fate rests squarely on the shoudlers of Joseph Smith and not anyone else. You disccount whole sections of the Bible and accept all sorts of teachings found no other place than Joseph Smith. One man.

  98. March 9, 2012 at 4:40 am

    Kate, this is a Christian blog, not a Mormon blog. I will gently and lovingly remind you that you came here to censure and jeer us. Kate, we believe you are unintentionally assailing God and His true religion. Therefore the whole point of having discussions between Mormons and Christians ISN’T to fight for the victory of being the one who is right and to blame others for willingly believing their own inventions. But rather the whole point is for everyone to learn what the Bible says so they may believe it and for all of us to be friends throughout the whole process.

  99. March 9, 2012 at 5:54 am

    No Echo, in my opinion, your statement is a bold lie. What I see is that your purpose here is to pull LDS people away from their faith. What I see is that you tell LDS people they are liars and are going to hell (in many ways and words). If your whole point of having discussions between LDS Christians and Non-LDS Christians isn’t to fight for the victory of being the one who is right and to blame others for willingly believing their own inventions…what in the world would you call all the blogging you are doing? Lovingly teaching others how to come to Christ? Wow…really? By their fruits ye shall know them…..scan this blog and you can’t help but wonder what the fruits of Markcares’s Weblog are harvesting.

  100. March 9, 2012 at 6:10 am

    Right David, Christ’s true church will not be defeated. The Gospel of Jesus Christ as restored to the Earth by the Prophet Joseph Smith teaches that we are all God’s children and He wants each and everyone of us to return to Him. He loves each and every one of us, you and I, and has provided a way for us to succeed in mortality to be heirs to all He has. He loves us so much that he gave His Only Begotten Son to Atone for our sins and by following Him, the Truth, the Light, and the Way, we all can gain Eternal Life. Throughout the Bible, He tells us that He ” will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

    All the scriptures you quoted about false teachings, etc. can just as easily be referring to all that Mark is teaching on this weblog. Are you so secure in your testimony that you can condemn me? I am very secure in my testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel that I know without a doubt that you and I will both have the privilege if we both desire to have glory added upon our heads forever.

  101. 101 joshtried
    March 9, 2012 at 7:12 am

    Kate:
    Echo is not the enemy. He is one of MANY Christians in the world… What you said to him is like him calling you a polygamist because you are LDS… We should be very careful in choosing what we say to others, so as not to deter them. Taking a 12g shotgun filled with scripture and blasting it into peoples chest wont get the message across..

    David:
    1. your first law:
    Deuteronomy 6:14-16
    “14Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you;”

    I have gone after no other gods. I accept Christ as my savior, and I AM as my God. Have you not read a single thing i wrote? whether i believe others are possible to exist does not matter here. What matters is that i accept God for who HE is. I worship no one else. i never have, and i certainly never will. Insinuating that i do is highly deplorable. Im sorry if you couldnt handle me pointing out that SOME Christians pray through someone other than Christ… yet again, apparently this is acceptable, because they ONLY use the Bible…
    It’s okay to chastise me for believing that someone can become LIKE God (which scriptures say over and over and over), but it is okay to allow Christians to pray to someone that is not Christ.. you tell me which is right and which is wrong there…

    2. “So what is better, to out of respect for someone’s beliefs in a false religion keep silent, and don’t bother to concern yourself with where they will spend their eternity? Or risk offending them and tell them the truth?”

    Obviously, we both think the other is wrong. I am still not going to tell you things that i hold sacred if all you WANT to do with them is try and bash me in the face with them. You can say anything in the world, offer me any amount of money, you can put a gun to my head. I am not going to tell you what i hold sacred (especially with a gun to my head). If there was genuine want to learn and to find out why we believe some of the things we do, then MAYBE we could advance in SOME of what goes on in the temple, and PARTS of what i hold sacred. Until you are like me though, you cannot and will not understand anything i am saying regarding this stuff. You can tell me I am wrong until you are blue in the face, but I will not give you more to treat like crap.

    3. “What some may see as sensitive I can see as indifference or perhaps just plain fear. I’m not saying to be disrespectful certainly, but fear of offending someone should not prevent one from speaking the truth to them in the most loving way possible which can include having to be very direct in pointing out their error.”

    Speaking to people is always a delicate matter, and as i said to Kate, trying to blast your gospel into people is not going to work. Ever. Political Correctness should be put aside in such a matter as this, BUT there are still limits. To be brutally honest is vital, but what good has that honesty done if the person turns away from you because of the repulsiveness of the rest of your message?

    To this:
    4. Christ’s true church would never be defeated :
    “18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

    you said before that logic doesnt always apply when speaking of the Gospel, and of understanding God right? No where in this passage does it say that the Church shall remain on the earth. If it is in heaven, it is still not being prevailed against. perhaps you dont want to think of it this way… your loss.

    5. Jesus predicts false prophets will deceive many in the last days: 26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out;

    No where did Joseph parade someone as “Jesus” in front of others. No “Jesus” performed great miracles, as is listed should be done. God has had prophets on this earth so many times, I lost count.. and now you say God wont send a prophet at all? ALL that will be available is “false” prophets… I feel sorry for you if you think heaven is shut..

    6.You trust one man who claims ALL of Christianity was wrong and struck through and added to the Bible. Your entire faith and your eternity rests on whether or not Joseph Smith was a fraud or not. Your eternal fate rests squarely on the shoudlers of Joseph Smith and not anyone else. You disccount whole sections of the Bible and accept all sorts of teachings found no other place than Joseph Smith. One man.

    I told you EXACTLY what i believe, and you choose to ignore it. YOU think YOU know ME better that I DO?? Had we ever met before, or you even knew my wifes name, I MIGHT accept this. YOU are sitting who knows how far away on a computer somewhere on earth, and CLAIM to have the power to see into what I believe. You have no idea of the things which you speak. you have no idea the life i have led, the things i have seen, or the reasons for ANY of my beliefs. I can honestly say, right here and right now, that God HIMSELF has spoken to me before. I know this of a surety. I know that i was LDS when this happened. I know that God would not leave his people to struggle in the wilderness, grasping at HUNDREDS of INCORRECT CHURCHES.
    You claim Christianity is correct, i have pointed out FIVE FUNDEMENTAL FLAWS that HUNDREDS of churches have… yet THEY are still correct to you.. are you defending EVERY CHRISTIAN CHURCH ON EARTH, or are you defending YOUR BELIEFS? I have clearly pointed out at LEAST one difference (I think its closer to 2 or 3..) between Lutherans and other churches.. so which are you defending? I defend the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, each and every time i speak.

  102. 102 joshtried
    March 9, 2012 at 7:33 am

    Also to Echo:
    Thank you for appreciating that which is sacred. Knowledge is power, but sacred is sacred. :)

    Kent, you posted:
    He was in the beginning with God.

    This is from your post…. to be WITH means to not be the SAME AS… I am not here with myself (i could be here BY myself)… i am here WITH my wife, in my bedroom in the middle of the night..
    WITH implies 2 things being in common space ( i ate a hotdog WITH ketchup, i wrote this message WITH my keyboard) are the hotdog and ketchup one item, or are they 1 in purpose, to create good food.. Am i and my keyboard the same thing, or are we 1 in purpose to type this message to you?

    again, you posted:
    And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten

    NOT “the glory OF the only begotten”
    INSTEAD “the glory AS OF the only begotten..
    this word AS means that there are AT LEAST 2 glories like the only begotten’s.

  103. March 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm

    Josh,
    Blasting him with 12g shotgun of scripture? I hope you take some time to reread all the blogs and comments before you reprimand me.
    Also, most Christians do not do what he is doing…I have a great many Christian friends. Do you even understand what this blog and their “money-making business” is? Maybe you should do some research before you say he is just a great guy wanting to love us.

    I called him out on what he and those here say on this blog and their purpose, not what other Christians say.

  104. March 9, 2012 at 3:56 pm

    Josh

    There are so many points you missed about my post. But first I’d like you to do one thing. Go back and look at what I said that were my actually words, contrast them to how much of what I posted was simply quoted scripture, and then see how much of what you argued against was nothing more than what I quoted from scripture. OK, let’s take each one.

    1. “I have gone after no other gods. I accept Christ as my savior, and I AM as my God. Have you not read a single thing i wrote? whether i believe others are possible to exist does not matter here.”

    I quoted the whole commandment, but my point was to simply show you that in God’s commandment about prohibiting the worship of other Gods, He says He is a jealous God. That was my whole point in quoting that commandment. But since you raise the issue about other gods, one should not gloss over fundamental differences about God as you (the LDS church) describes I AM and the I AM of the Bible. The God of the Bible is Spirit [John 4:24 “God is a Spirit: . . .”] and only Jesus became human [ 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . 14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” John 1:1 and 14] The Heavenly Father of the Bible had no beginning, [“. . . even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” Psalm 90:2] and is not made of flesh and bone. Joseph Smith (one man) said “God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man . . . We have IMAGINED and SUPPOSED (my emphasis) that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea . . . ” (calling God a liar – sound familiar?)” and Satan is most definitely NOT another son of God. Satan is a fallen angel (Revelation 12:7-9). The God of the Bible is a three in one Triune God, and that He is THE ONE AND ONLY GOD ANYWHERE, the LDS church believes they are three separate Gods and that they are three of many. So I leave you to rach your own conclusion about whether you worship the same I AM I do. Whether you believe other gods are possible to exist is relevant here because we both look at God so differently and my God is a jealous God who knows with absolute certainty that HE is the ONLY God.

    “It’s okay to chastise me for believing that someone can become LIKE God (which scriptures say over and over and over), but it is okay to allow Christians to pray to someone that is not Christ.. you tell me which is right and which is wrong there…”

    Is it chastising to quote scripture to someone when that scripture repeatedly says there are no other Gods? Scripture is to be used for correcting, and instruction. See 2 Timothy 3:16. We are to be like God in the heart, He give us a new heart that makes us live for Him and praise Him not live for ourselves have goals to be gods one day in the future ruling over our own kingdoms. And the “LIKE God” distinction is no distinction from being a god especially in view of what is taught to Mormon children “As man now is, God once was; As God now is man may be.” There is no ambiguity there Josh.

    2. “I am still not going to tell you things that i hold sacred if all you WANT to do with them is try and bash me in the face with them.”

    Could you more specific about what exactly you are talking about where you think I “bash[ed] you in the face.” I know I have been direct but bashing – that doesn’t sound like me (at least to me). I haven’t gotten into the Temple discussion.

    3. “To be brutally honest is vital, but what good has that honesty done if the person turns away from you because of the repulsiveness of the rest of your message?”
    Tell what I have said, that are my own words, that you found repulsive.
    4. “No where in this passage does it say that the Church shall remain on the earth.”
    Peter was on earth, the Holy Spirit came to the other apostles at Pentecost. They were told to and make disciples of all nations. Nations are on earth as are people who make up the church. In addition Jesus was given ALL power over heaven and earth. “18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Matthew 28:18. Josh why are so quick to assume things in the Bible that are NOT there? You keep doing this.
    5. “No where did Joseph parade someone as “Jesus” in front of others. No “Jesus” performed great miracles, as is listed should be done.”
    I said nothing about parading around with a false Christ. I said that Jesus predicts false prophets will deceive many in the last days: 26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; ” Joseph Smith did not say to “go into the desert” to see Jesus, but he did claim to he saw Jesus in the woods. That for me is enough to take Jesus warning about false prophets seriously, and know for sure that Joseph Smith is one of those false prophets Jesus warned us not to believe because they will deceive many, but you think a prophet saying he saw Jesus in the woods is true. When Jesus was describing things that will happen in the last days he said 14And THIS gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:14. The gospel preached to the ends of the earth is one Peter and the apostles were preaching not some “restored” gospel that rewrote and added to the original.
    6. “I told you EXACTLY what i believe, and you choose to ignore it. ”
    You don’t believe Joseph’s Smith claim of a total apostasy? Joseph Smith claimed they are ALL wrong every last one. If that is not what you believe then you don’t believe at least that much of his “testimony.” God speaks to me too – through His Word and he says we live by faith not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7), that there are no other Gods, that He is Eternal, that Jesus is God and always has been from everlasting to everlasting and to not believe false prophets in the last days who claim to have seen Jesus somewhere else, and who also warns that even if an angel from heaven give you a gospel other than the one that Paul and the other apostles had preached let him be accursed (Galatians 1:8-9).
    I am a Lutheran, I am using God’s Word to defend His church which is the family of all true believers which is far more than just true believing Lutherans.

  105. 105 shematwater
    March 9, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    DAVID

    It is easy to quote scripture, but as I have said many times, it is the interpretation of that scripture that matters. After all, even Satan quoted scripture when he tempted Jesus, but Jesus knew the true meaning.

    KENT

    Let us speak of the creation. I make no mention of the Temple ceremony, only of the creation of man.
    First, it is true that the Bible does say Adam was formed of the dust, but this is speaking of his physical body. After this was formed God breathed life into it, or placed his spirit into the body that had been created. The spirit that was placed in the body was Michael the Archangel. When it entered the physical body that God had formed of the dust the living soul created was named Adam, signifying that he was the first man. When this happened the veil was placed on his mind and Adam had no more memory of being Michael the Archangel, for he no longer remembered his spirit existence.

    Now, Brigham Young does make the state that “Adam was formed from the dust of an earth, but not this earth,” which would imply that he was brought to the garden fully formed. This may seem like a contradiction, unless you consider that the account given uses symbolism to teach certain aspects (like the taking of the rib). Then one can see that the formation from the dust is just another symbol used to satisfy those of lesser understanding without actually giving about too much information.

    KATE

    I think Echo is here for the reasons he states, though, like many of us, this intention slips away at times due to the content and manners of the threads. I also think that he honestly believes this to be the best way, though I disagree with that idea.
    I know I have not always been the most cordial person in my discussions with him, and at times I get very annoyed at what seems to be purposeful twisting of what I say. However, I think for the most part that is not what he wants.

  106. 106 Kent
    March 9, 2012 at 4:18 pm

    Joshtried said, “Does your spirit come from dust kent?”

    No, but I don’t believe spirits existed before God created Adam out of the dust and he became a living soul. The idea of a spiritual creation before the physical creation is something Mormonism added to the creation story. Yes, I believe God always knew He would create us but that He hadn’t done so, spiritually or physically, until the beginning in Genesis.

    Of course, I also don’t believe anything, such as planets before the creation account of Genesis existed either so there were no planets yet for God to have been a man on before He was God. God has always existed though, He has always been God, and He did create everything from nothing.

    Planets orbit stars so since God placed the stars in the sky on the fourth day of the creation, hence there were no planets either before then.

  107. March 9, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    Shem

    “It is easy to quote scripture, but as I have said many times, it is the interpretation of that scripture that matters. After all, even Satan quoted scripture when he tempted Jesus, but Jesus knew the true meaning.”

    Satan lies too and he appears as an angel from heaven who have false prophets . And he also questions what God says and tries to get us to do the same. So let me quote another passage for you. Be sure to interpret it correctly:

    “13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
    14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
    15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” 2 Corinthians 11:13-15

  108. March 9, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    Josh

    One other thing about modern day apostles.

    “14And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” Revelations 21:14

    Twelves apostles Josh.

  109. 109 shematwater
    March 9, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    DAVID

    I know the meaning, and I must ask if you do.

    Regarding the twelves apostles, I am not sure what your point is. The twelve that served under Christ in the New Testament will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Luke 22:30; Matthew 19:28). They are known as the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, for they are they that served during his mortal ministry. They hold preeminence over all other apostles ever called, and so the foundations of the city should rightly reflect this fact.
    This does not mean that other apostles cannot be called, only that they do not hold the same standing and authority as the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb.
    Note: Even Joseph Smith will be judged by these men, for he is of the house of Israel.

    KENT

    So what you are saying is that our doctrine contradicts yours. I am perfectly fine with this. After all, ours is the correct doctrine, so if it didn’t contradict yours in some points there would be a problem.

    You were asking about our doctrine, and we answered you. Now you say that you don’t accept our answer because it is not your doctrine.
    This is one reason why I have always found it difficult to have any real discussion on these kinds of threads. This kind of reasoning pops up way too much.

  110. 110 Kent
    March 9, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    Shem said, “Now, Brigham Young does make the state that “Adam was formed from the dust of an earth, but not this earth,” which would imply that he was brought to the garden fully formed. This may seem like a contradiction, unless you consider that the account given uses symbolism to teach certain aspects (like the taking of the rib). Then one can see that the formation from the dust is just another symbol used to satisfy those of lesser understanding without actually giving about too much information.”

    Yes it does sound like a contradiction to me as both the genesis account and the Book of Moses account say “the ground” not a ground implying the ground was on the earth. Of course, even the Book of Moses account is saying there was no physical creation before the beginning in Genesis that everything existed only spiritually. So if that is the case, then how could there have been other planets for Michael, before he was Adam, or even God Himself to be a man on before the physical creation of Genesis?

    Genesis 2:7

    7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

    Moses 3:7

    7 And I, the Lord God, formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul, the first flesh upon the earth, the first man also; nevertheless, all things were before created; but spiritually were they created and made according to my word.

    Also, why does the taking of the rib from Adam to form Eve have to be symbolic? As can’t God do anything? It is our human understanding that says no one can create a person from someone else’s rib and that does make sense that we can’t do so but God can.

  111. 111 Kent
    March 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Shem said, “So what you are saying is that our doctrine contradicts yours. I am perfectly fine with this. After all, ours is the correct doctrine, so if it didn’t contradict yours in some points there would be a problem.

    You were asking about our doctrine, and we answered you. Now you say that you don’t accept our answer because it is not your doctrine.
    This is one reason why I have always found it difficult to have any real discussion on these kinds of threads. This kind of reasoning pops up way too much.”

    Joshtried asked me if my spirit came from dust and I answered him why I don’t believe it does come from dust that it didn’t exist yet before the creation of Genesis.

  112. March 9, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Shem

    “They are known as the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, for they are they that served during his mortal ministry. They hold preeminence over all other apostles ever called, and so the foundations of the city should rightly reflect this fact.
    This does not mean that other apostles cannot be called, only that they do not hold the same standing and authority as the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb.”

    I anticipated that response, but without sources beyond the Bible, there is no basis to support the LDS belief that there will ever be more than twelves apostles. I know that doesn’t come as a shock to you. I was only pointing out that the last book of prophesy in the Bible mentions only twelve apostles and acknowledges no more than 12.

  113. 113 choosethechrist
    March 9, 2012 at 5:35 pm

    I think Kate needs to be reminded that she is on a Christian blog and since she has made the decision to participate in these discussions, that the Christians here are deserving of her respect whether she agrees with the content of these blogs or not. It would be pretty arrogant of me to think that I could go to an LDS blog and impose Christian teachings on the LDS in their own forum and not expect push back from them and in fact going to LDS blogs to fight LDS heresy is something that I just do not do myself. My goal is to reach LDS people who are questioning and searching for truth and if they are here reading, I’m quite sure they are already familiar with what the LDS here are presenting. It seems to me that the LDS here are solely concerned with defending their church and their own faith and are not the least bit concerned about our “education” or eternal destination and why should they be since there will be no eternal hell for us Christians anyway (according to them)? If the LDS are so firm in their faith, why worry about anything on this blog? If what the LDS have is so perfectly wonderful that no one would ever consider leaving, then why the concern about anything that is presented here? If you are so proud of your beliefs and firm in your faith, what does it matter what anyone else has to say about it? Perhaps the LDS life is not all it’s cracked up to be after all and that’s why you feel the need to fight tooth and nail against such heinous ideas such as Biblical scripture, Orthodox Christianity, God, and following Jesus Christ? Did you seriously think that your choice to follow heretical teachings would not result in a response from those of us who know it is wrong? Christians have been fighting heresy since Christianity began and we’re not going to stop just because the heretics can’t take the heat!

  114. 114 Kent
    March 9, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    Shem, one of the very cornerstones of my very beliefs is the fact that nothing existed either physically or spirutually before God created everything, including Adam the first man, in Genesis.

    So I wasn’t throwing in the God couldn’t have been a man on another planet just out of the blue as if He had been a man first, then, I believe, He couldn’t have created everything there ever has been or ever will be.

  115. 115 Kent
    March 9, 2012 at 6:01 pm

    choosethechrist, yes but I for one for one have been insensitive to what they hold as dear, maybe I was a little overzealous in questioning what goes on in their temple, so for that I apologize.

  116. 116 shematwater
    March 9, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    KENT

    As I have said before, the Bible (and thus the Book of Moses, as it is part of the JST) talks only concerning this Earth (Moses 1: 40). The creation that it describes is the creation of this earth. According to the account everything pertaining to this earth was created spiritually before it was created physically. This does not mean there were not other physical creations, only that this creation started in the spirit.

    As to what Brigham Young said, it is not a contradiction when one considers the nature of a narrative, and the art of teaching through story telling. Just as we do not believe that Eve was literally formed from Adam’s rib, Brigham Young believed that the wording of this account is more symbolical than literal. According to him the entire creation story is a symbolic representation, and that none of it is literal. I am not saying that he is right. This was his opinion. But if he is right than one must first understand the symbols before one can say that he has contradicted the meaning.

    DAVID

    The original twelve apostles
    1. Simon, whom Christ named Peter
    2. Andrew his brother
    3. James
    4. John
    5. Philip
    6. Bartholomew
    7. Matthew
    8. Thomas
    9. James the son of Alphæus
    10. Simon called Zelotes
    11. Judas the brother of James
    12. Judas aIscariot

    Others who are called apostles in the New Testament
    13. Matthias, chosen to replace Judas (Acts 1: 15-16)
    14. Paul, who addresses most of his epistles as being an apostle (Acts 14: 14)
    15. James, the Lord’s brother (Galatians 1: 19)
    16. Barnabus (Acts 14: 14)

    So which of these sixteen apostles is Revelation 21: 14 referring to?

  117. March 9, 2012 at 7:51 pm

    Choose,
    I have only come here to help correct the incorrect distortions presented about our doctrine. I made my presence known here when I found out that Mark heads up a not-for-profit organization to raise money to pull LDS people from their faith. (tilm.org) Why do I care? Because it bothers me to see people deceived by others who are twisting and distorting doctrine and if they are young in their understanding of the Gospel, they can be fooled. There is no purpose to understand our doctrine here. That is why no matter how long these threads get, the same twisted ideas get repeated over and over and no matter how we are able to show you what we believe and how it’s supported by the Bible, it is trampled and lost through-out all the “love-talk”.

    I have had some email me privately to thank me for coming in here and standing up for truth….some who were almost deceived but when read what I and Shem have written, realized they had the truth all along.

    Yes, I have come to a Christian blog…but what you do here is not Christian. No where in the Bible do I read where Christ tells his disciples to lie. That might seem bold to you, but when we try to straighten you out about what we are saying, or what our beliefs are, you go right back to square one.

  118. March 9, 2012 at 9:06 pm

    Our mission…

    “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation.” Mark 16:15

    “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” Mathew 28:19-20

    “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” John 3:16

  119. March 9, 2012 at 9:21 pm

    David: You keep asking for an answer to your question. I told you that anything I wrote would just repeat everything Shem wrote and you still continue to reject anything he says, so why would I try to repeat it all?

  120. March 9, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Shem

    Interesting question but it sure only says 12 apostles. What is more important than the number of apostles is that none of the apostles ever claimed that the Bible was an open cannon. Not one of these apostles preached a faith + works justification or that they can add their own new scripture which contradicts the Bible. Perhaps that was the point I should have emphasized rather than the number of apostles named in Revelations. But since you ask I’ll see if I can get some further information for you re: Paul, and Barnabus. There is no question they were apostles. We know about Matthias, Some of the orignal apostles went by a couple of different names so that may explain the others — i’m not sure yet. I can’t answer what Revelations 21 is talking about but there were another 2 or 3 others that were apostles by the names you listed. But there is nothing about ongoing apostles adding to scripture in the Bible.

    While I’m thinking of it. I have a question for you. Revelations 22:18 says:

    “18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
    19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

    Joseph Smith added and subtracted from numerous books of the Bible. Does this passage not concern you as far as what it means for Joseph Smith?

  121. March 9, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    Kate

    No need to repeat it if your answer is a wholehearted endorsement of Shems. I got the impression from your last post on this that you may have something else to add. I could ask you though the same question I asked Shem above about Revelations 22:18.

  122. 122 RLO
    March 9, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Kate;

    In response to post #117 above:

    In all truthfulness, I have no objection to your coming here to say what you want to say. But the tone with which you frequently express yourself is another matter. We all, Christians and Mormons alike, can get a little snarky here on occasions. And I’ve seen both Christians and Mormons alike apologize and pull back a bit when they recognize they’ve momentarily let their emotions get the best of them.

    But the ways in which you are continually addressing people here is way over the top. Many are expressing their concerns about this in their posts. I tried bringing this to your attention. Echo has tried giving you a mild admonishment. Choosethechrist has commented on this. Even two of your own fellow Mormons have addressed you, concerning the ways in which you are speaking to people here.

    I can fully understand you not agreeing with the Christian views being expressed, just as Christians don’t agree with the Mormon views. But maybe we should all just stick to addressing the issues at hand, rather than making ad hominem attacks.

    Regrettably, by your own admission, you’ve only come here with your preconceived motives and an axe to grind against the TILM organization, and all the Christians posting here who share TILM’s concerns for the eternal welfare of Mormons.

    Kate, please, please reconsider Mark’s blog post entitled, “Winning the Person or Winning the Battle?” dated September 23, 2011. We really are not the evil people you are trying to make us out to be.

    RLO

  123. March 9, 2012 at 10:34 pm

    The book of Revelation was written before other books that are in the Bible and even before the Bible was actually canonized. So the verse actually applies to the actual book of Revelation and not the Bible.

    Also, the book of Revelation is neither a gospel nor an epistle, and was placed at the end of the Bible because it is in its own category. It was not a final chapter for the New Testament.

    Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman, in Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, wrote:

    The very real danger that [New Testament] texts could be modified at will, by scribes who did not approve of their wording, is evident in other ways as well. We need always to remember that the copyists of the early Christian writings were reproducing their texts in a world in which there were not only no printing presses or publishing houses but also no such thing as copyright law. How could authors guarantee that their texts were not modified once put into circulation? The short answer is that they could not. That explains why authors would sometimes call curses down on any copyists who modified their texts without permission. We find this kind of imprecation already in one early Christian writing that made it into the New Testament, the book of Revelation, whose author, near the end of his text, utters a dire warning [quotes Revelation 22:18–19].
    This is not a threat that the reader has to accept or believe everything written in this book of prophecy, as it is sometimes interpreted; rather, it is a typical threat to copyists of the book, that they are not to add to or remove any of its words. Similar imprecations can be found scattered throughout the range of early Christian writings.

  124. 124 Joshtried
    March 9, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    Kate, the 12g remark was not directed toward you. I appologize for the confussion there. It was directed generally to all, I guess I should have seperated it as such. I have read his posts..
    I greatly appreciate your posts as well, and have grown in knowledge for them, but I think there other times when it is better to say nothing than to inflame. Like the CARM issue.. While it is most likely garbage, giving supportive reasons for calling it so helps people like me who has never heard of it before. I am not trying to upset you, but rather to try and help everyone on here keep these posts warm and well intentioned, vs accusatory and putting people on the deffensive (if they are deffensive, they will never learn)

  125. March 9, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    Kate

    “It was not a final chapter for the New Testament.”

    I hope that you are not implying that it is not the inspired Word of God and is a lesser book, because that would be very wrong. It contains the testimony of the triumphant risen Christ. “3Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.” Revelation 1:3.

    Though 22:18 may relate to Revelations alone Joseph Smith did both of what it prohibits. He added and subtracted from the Book of Revelations. ANd he did it a lot. See your JST for details. But there is no question he did what was prohibited and the warnings are servere.

  126. 126 shematwater
    March 10, 2012 at 12:22 am

    DAVID

    My point is that others were appointed as apostles, and proof of that is in the New Testament. As for continuing the appoints, it was Paul (in Ephesians 4) that said apostles were among those offices given to bring the saints to perfection. So, unless everyone is perfected then Paul most certainly taught a need for the continuation of the office.

    As to an open cannon, what do you think all the epistles are if not additions to the scriptures they had. I have a question for you: If the apostles did not teach an open cannon at what point did it close? Where is this stated?
    The simply fact that the apostles were still writing is enough evidence for me to accept that they believed in an open cannon.

    As to Revelation 22: 18, Kate is right in that it applies only to the book of Revelation. This book was written before many others in the New Testament, including the gospel of John and his three epistles. To say that it refers to the entire Bible makes no sense.
    As to adding and subtracting from it, just consider this: If a man was to come and remove chapter 8 from the book of revelation, and then several years later another person comes and puts it back, who is at fault? Is the second man guilty of adding to the words of the bible, or is the first man guilty for taking them away? Or are both guilty?
    This is what your accusations sound like to me. Joseph Smith added nothing, nor did he subtract anything. What he did was to replace that which others had removed, and take away that which others had added.

  127. March 10, 2012 at 1:30 am

    Shem

    “The simply fact that the apostles were still writing is enough evidence for me to accept that they believed in an open cannon.”

    Here is my answer to this. Jesus had this to say about the apostles who would be the writers of the new testament:

    “26But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John 14:26

    “13Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.” John 16:13

    Now lets look at what the Bible says are the qualifications the apostles looked for to replace Judas, because this sets out the qualifications of an apostle:

    “20For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
    21Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
    22Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. Acts 1:20-22”

    An apostle must have accompanied the 12 apostles the entire time Jesus was with them, and must, starting with the baptism of John, right up until the day He ascended to Heaven they must be a witness to Christ’s resurrection. No one else meets those critera and no one else ever will.

    “As to adding and subtracting from it, just consider this: If a man was to come and remove chapter 8 from the book of revelation, and then several years later another person comes and puts it back, who is at fault? Is the second man guilty of adding to the words of the bible, or is the first man guilty for taking them away? Or are both guilty?
    This is what your accusations sound like to me. Joseph Smith added nothing, nor did he subtract anything. What he did was to replace that which others had removed, and take away that which others had added.”

    IF someone removed chapter 8 or anything from the book of Revelation and then it was added back in, the person adding the true text back would not be doing anything wrong. The problem is Shem – that didn’t happen and that is an easily proven fact that you can check yourself. I would encourage you do so, but before you do remember that God’s Word never failed – Joseph Smith deceived you – But God never left you and He is still with you to turn to. You can use what is called an interlinear Bible to do this. These Bibles have the orginal greek (new testament) and hebrew (old testament) passages along with English translations. Go to the book of Revelations and compare the JST passages of your own LDS Bible to the original translation and you will see where Joseph Smith added and substracted from original translated language. Of course I can’t make you do this, but if you truely believe that is what happened and that Jospeh Smith restored things that had been improperly translated, you will see, in no uncertain terms – what the truth is. I hope you sincerely want to find it. Please let me know if you plan to follow through.

  128. March 10, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    David said: “I hope that you are not implying that it is not the inspired Word of God and is a lesser book”

    Not at all. I believe the Bible to be the Word of God. I also know and have read many of the other writings that were being written at the same time as those that were canonized into the Bible by men. I know that when things are left in the hands of men, mistakes can happen as well as things left out. I believe their is much more of the Word of God out there and can be found through much study by faith and by the Spirit to know truth. I do not limit God and his ability to speak to us, whether through scripture or prophets. And I know that through personal revelation, the Holy Ghost can teach all truth. I love that fact!

  129. March 10, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    Kate

    if you believe the Bible is the Word of God, then why don’t you take the warning in Revealtions 22 seriosusly? Joseph SMith did what it prohibited. He added and substracted from what is the original – that’s ORIGINAL translation of the Book.

  130. March 10, 2012 at 6:51 pm

    See….this is exactly my point. I told you what Revelations was about and it’s like you didn’t even read it. Hence, the round and round we go again.

  131. 131 shematwater
    March 10, 2012 at 9:44 pm

    DAVID

    “An apostle must have accompanied the 12 apostles the entire time Jesus was with them, and must, starting with the baptism of John, right up until the day He ascended to Heaven they must be a witness to Christ’s resurrection. No one else meets those critera and no one else ever will.”

    Then what of Paul being and Apostle? He was not with them from the baptism to the Ascension. How did he get his appointment?
    What of Barnabas?
    Again your claims make no sense, and are directly contradicted by the Bible.

    As to Joseph Smith, I know the evidence, I just believe a prophet of God more than the scholarship of men.

  132. March 11, 2012 at 2:59 am

    Shem

    “Then what of Paul being and Apostle? He was not with them from the baptism to the Ascension. How did he get his appointment?
    What of Barnabas?”

    The criteria I referenced before is what the apostles used to pick a replacement. Acts 9 describes Jesus’ appearance to Saul and his conversion to Paul. He and Barnabas were “set apart” by the Holy Spirit in Acts 13:2 for the work to which He had called them and then both are referred to as Apostles in Acts 14:14. That’s all I can tell you about Paul and Barnabas, but note that they were both called directly by God and their calling was described in Acts.

    “Again your claims make no sense, and are directly contradicted by the Bible.”

    I find it odd that when LDS scripture directly, by it words, contradict the Bible you don’t find a contradiction, but in the Bible when something is silent it is a contradiction. Here scripture mentions Jesus’ direct selection of Paul for Christ’s work of spreading His Word to the Gentiles, and the Holy Spirit directly sets apart Paul and Barnabas to preach the Word, and that somehow conflicts with the fact that when replacing an apostle they were guided by the criteria to select to POTENTIAL apostles. The actual selection of Matthias, however, was by their having the Lord show them which of the two potential apostles He chose by lot.

    “23And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. 26And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.” Acts 1:23-26.

    I see no contradiction. There were criteria the apostles used to narrow the choices of potential apostles in Acts 1 but in every actual selection – God was directly involved. The manner in which God chose his apostles does not in any way mean that office continues on after they died. Certainly there is nothing to suggest that these apostles could create their gospel to replace what other apostles had been preaching, in fact that was specifically what Paul warned against in Galatians 1.

    Shem I realize that you are likely not to agree, but I hope I have explained to you how I don’t see the contradiction you do.

  133. March 11, 2012 at 3:13 am

    Kate

    “See….this is exactly my point. I told you what Revelations was about and it’s like you didn’t even read it. Hence, the round and round we go again.”

    No I don’t see. With all due respect to your “Bible schloar” any scholar that thinks the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God is worthless to me. You said:

    “This is not a threat that the reader has to accept or believe everything written in this book of prophecy, as it is sometimes interpreted; rather, it is a typical threat to copyists of the book, that they are not to add to or remove any of its words. Similar imprecations can be found scattered throughout the range of early Christian writings.”

    Every word of scripture is pure and God breathed. The warning has no limitation on mere copiers, it was a warning against revision – and Joepsh Smith certainly revised this book. What makes you think this warning would apply to an errant copier but not to a deliberate corrupter of the Word?

  134. March 11, 2012 at 3:22 am

    Shem

    “As to Joseph Smith, I know the evidence, I just believe a prophet of God more than the scholarship of men.”

    sorry for the double post but I just wanted to make sure that you knew there is a resource out there to use. Remember, it wouldn’t hurt to look for yourself. My encouragement to you is just have your eyes open and don’t back way from verfying whatever you want using a resource you feel is reliable. The truth is only verified by inquirey and the truth is what you are looking for.

  135. March 11, 2012 at 3:58 am

    David, you said, “What makes you think this warning would apply to an errant copier but not to a deliberate corrupter of the Word?”

    Yet, you claim the Bible is inerrant, but contains writings of apostles years after the fact, handled in the hands of copyists, and all that works for you because God showed every man, whose hands had anything to do with those writings, copies, etc. exactly how he wanted every word written.

    Now I certainly don’t doubt God’s ability to do that, but for you to believe it worked that way, and that though the statement in Revelations happened way before some of the other writings in the Bible, it is ok for other writings to have been put in as God’s word, even though you say the statement in Revelations specifically condemns that.

    But because Joseph Smith, a prophet of God, translated further scripture (that does not contradict the Bible, even though you would like to state that) and brought it forth and brought about the restoration of the true Church on the earth, then he is a corrupter of the Word, because he did it after the statement in Revelations?

    I’m just not following your thought process with that.

  136. March 11, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    Kate

    I’m just not following your thought process with that.

    My thought process is this. Revelations prohibits additions or substractions to it. Joseph Smith did both. I can’t make it any plainer than that.

  137. March 11, 2012 at 7:48 pm

    Kate – the first line above should be in quotes because I’m quoting you.

  138. March 11, 2012 at 8:35 pm

    David — Yes, I understand that is what you are saying, but if that is the case, then how do you reconcile that with the parts of the Bible that were written after that Revelations verse was written. Do we need to disregard that part of the Bible?

  139. March 11, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    Also, since the inerrancy of the Bible came up, some of you might do well to read this article.

    http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_the_Bible/Inerrancy

  140. March 12, 2012 at 2:16 am

    Kate

    I’m not talking about otehr parts of the Bible. Revelations says do not add or take away from Revelations. He did both. The other letters have nothing to do with the fact that Joseph Smith added and substracted from the book of Revelations. You are so quick to completely ignore the warning just be you can point to other books. They have nothing to do with this. He altered Revelations – that alone has causes enough problem all by itself. No article will convince me that the Bible has mistakes. You need to believe that in order to ignore portions you don’t like.- Like the warning in Revelations. I think God is fully capable of protecting His Word and His Church.

  141. 141 joshtried
    March 12, 2012 at 2:41 am

    I am curious David, what parts of The Book of Revelations did Joseph Smith change?

  142. March 12, 2012 at 3:19 am

    So be it David. If that is what you think, then the plagues that were written in the Book of Revelation, should have come upon Joseph Smith….but nope…no plagues. “…If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:”

  143. 143 joshtried
    March 12, 2012 at 5:09 am

    David:
    “I find it odd that when LDS scripture directly, by it words, contradict the Bible you don’t find a contradiction, but in the Bible when something is silent it is a contradiction. Here scripture mentions Jesus’ direct selection of Paul for Christ’s work of spreading His Word to the Gentiles, and the Holy Spirit directly sets apart Paul and Barnabas to preach the Word, and that somehow conflicts with the fact that when replacing an apostle they were guided by the criteria to select to POTENTIAL apostles. The actual selection of Matthias, however, was by their having the Lord show them which of the two potential apostles He chose by lot. ”

    You (or someone, not reading far enough up… time…) said that there was a criteria that needed to be met, then it was contradicted that Christ himself could choose Apostles. If Christ can choose apostles, and the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” says that he has chosen Apostles, where is the conflict? If the Holy Spirit directly comes and “Sets them apart”, what conflict is there?
    We believe that the Holy Spirit and Christ continue to do this work, and you say they have stopped. Does the Lord not have the power to continue doing this? Is he to busy sitting at God’s right hand (as choose has pointed out)??

  144. March 12, 2012 at 2:02 pm

    Josh

    “If Christ can choose apostles, and the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” says that he has chosen Apostles, where is the conflict? If the Holy Spirit directly comes and “Sets them apart”, what conflict is there?”

    The conflict is in Jesus’s warning right here :

    “3And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
     4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
     5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” Matthew 24:3-5

     “11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Matthew 24:11

     “24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” Matthew 24:24

    Paul warns of others preaching a different gospel:

    “6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:  7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.  8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.  9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:6-9

    13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
     14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
     15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. 2 Cor. 10-15

  145. March 12, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    Kate

    “Revelation, should have come upon Joseph Smith….but nope…no plagues.”

    God Word is true. If you honestly think we can see these plagues from here you are mistaken. Just because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

    “3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
    4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” 2 Peter 3:3-4

  146. 146 shematwater
    March 12, 2012 at 2:57 pm

    DAVID

    “I find it odd that when LDS scripture directly, by it words, contradict the Bible you don’t find a contradiction, but in the Bible when something is silent it is a contradiction.”

    I never once said there was a contradiction in the Bible on this point. What I said is that your explanation of the Bible was in contradiction to the words of the Bible, and so I reject your explanation. Try to get my meaning right.

    Let me explain. You said “Now lets look at what the Bible says are the qualifications the apostles looked for to replace Judas, because this sets out the qualifications of an apostle.” In this you make no mention of the Spirit. You clearly state that the Bible lays out the qualifications of an apostle to be.
    “An apostle must have accompanied the 12 apostles the entire time Jesus was with them, and must, starting with the baptism of John, right up until the day He ascended to Heaven they must be a witness to Christ’s resurrection. No one else meets those critera and no one else ever will.”
    Now you have been faced with a problem, in the fact that Paul and Barnabas being called apostles contradicts this statement, that an apostles has to have accompanied the 12 throughout the mortal ministry of Christ. So you have changed the criteria, now claiming that these specific requirements only applied to the replacement of Judas, and were only a guideline, with the Spirit being the one to actually make the appointments. See the problem here? Your first statement contradicted the Bible, and now your second statement, while in line with the Bible, of necessity contradicts your first.

    Also, Acts 13: 2 does not say that these men were set apart by the Holy Ghost. Let us read verses 1-3.
    “Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
    As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
    And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.”

    So, while it was the Holy Ghost that called them, it was through the other men laying their hands on them that they were set apart for the ministry. They were called by the Holy Ghost, and under his direction were set apart by those having authority to do so. This is an important point.

    “The truth is only verified by inquiry and the truth is what you are looking for.”

    I have the truth, for the Holy Ghost is the testifier of all truth, and he has told me that Joseph Smith was a prophet, that every correction he made to the Bible was inspired by God and restored the scriptures to their original plainness and perfection. I need no other evidence than the witness of God.

  147. March 12, 2012 at 2:58 pm

    David — it specifically said the plagues mentioned in the Book of Revelation. You would see those plagues. Sorry, your logic doesn’t work there. I am not scoffing at anything the Lord said. I am believing his Word. It seems that you do not really believe He meant what He said. The fact that those plagues did not come upon Joseph Smith, shows that the curse was not intended how you think it was intended, but rather toward the copyists at the time John gave that Revelation.

  148. 148 shematwater
    March 12, 2012 at 2:59 pm

    DAVID

    “The conflict is in Jesus’s warning right here”

    There is no conflict with this warning. The warning is still valid. The problem is that this does not say that there would not be true prophets and apostles, only that there would be false ones.
    So, please show us by the Bible where God has declared that he would never again call an apostle or a prophet to lead his saints on earth. Warnings of false teachers does not translate to the ending of true teachers.

  149. March 12, 2012 at 3:31 pm

    Kate

    “You would see those plagues.”

    You assume too much.

  150. March 12, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    List the plagues David….there is no assumption on my part.

  151. March 12, 2012 at 5:05 pm

    Shem

    “I never once said there was a contradiction in the Bible on this point. What I said is that your explanation of the Bible was in contradiction to the words of the Bible, and so I reject your explanation. Try to get my meaning right.”

    I have your rmeaning right. The whole reason you mention it is to show a contradiction. These accounts in scripture do not conflict with what I said. Those were the qualifications shown for an apostle. They were used by the 11 to replace one. WIth those criterea the apostles found two possibilites. You asked about Paul and Barnabas and I answered you. God made His selections in the way He made His selections. I don’t have to explain why He did it the way He did. That’s His business. But when it came to human beings, his apostles looking for someone to replace one of their own they selected witnesses to Christ’s work. You look at this from the wrong perspective. You say “So, please show us by the Bible where God has declared that he would never again call an apostle or a prophet to lead his saints on earth.” That proves nothing. The Bible has declared

    “And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven.”

    and you don’t believe it. You believe the lie about a great apostasy. Jesus warned of was false prophets and I showed you scripture that is strikingly close to what occured with respect to the origin of LDS church. That too is not enough. I show you several passages showing there are no other gods, – and still believe there can be other gods. Now you ask me to show were hte Bible says there wouldn’t be others . That’s is not the point. Instead, show me were it says the office of an apostle was to continue beyond the lifespan of those apostles chosen directly by God and whose placement into that office is not written about in the BIble. More importantly, show me were these or any apostles wrote about gospels that were different from what they preached. It was other gospels that were the subject of the warnings. NO AUTHORITY WAS EVER GIVEN TO ANY APOSTLE TO PREACH ANOTHER GOSPEL. The LDS church claims the gospel had been corrupted. That is a lie and one that is easily disproven.

    “I have the truth, for the Holy Ghost is the testifier of all truth, and he has told me that Joseph Smith was a prophet, that every correction he made to the Bible was inspired by God and restored the scriptures to their original plainness and perfection. I need no other evidence than the witness of God.”

    “he has told me that Joseph Smith was a prophet”

    What you have embraced is a false doctrine and wishful thinking. This is the very kind of false doctrine Paul warned against, being presented in a way precisely how he said one could appear, (as from an angel from heaven – Galaltians 1) complete with prophets whose end shall be according to their works (2 Cor 11:15). Satan appeared to Eve as a sepent. The Bible says he could appear as “angel of light” (2 Cor 11:14) Do you think this could not have happened to Joseph Smith? The difference as I see it is this I trust in God’s power to protect His Word and His Church throughout all generations. If God promises he will do something I trust Him to do it. To believe He failed or allowed it to fail woud mean He wasn’t telling the truth in His Word. God never lies – ever. You believe Joseph Smith was true. I know him to be liar. The Holy Spirit tells me that in writing in His Word. Proverbs 30:6 “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”

    You trust the veracity of Joseph SMith’s vision. Everything about Joseph SMith’s testimony, from his vision, to His other gospel, to his distrust of the true scripture, to his errors in prophecies, are all signs that mark a false prophet. Jesus never mentioned to be alert for another testimony of HIs, He only warned that false prophets would come after HIm in the last days. The Word and the historical facts about the LDS church are the only “evidence” there is and it leads to the conclusion you do not wish to hear.

    “There is no conflict with this warning.”

    I disgree.

    “the warning is still valid”

    I agree.

  152. 152 joshtried
    March 12, 2012 at 5:56 pm

    Josh Said:
    I am curious David, what parts of The Book of Revelations did Joseph Smith change?

    I am still curious David

  153. March 12, 2012 at 7:32 pm

    Josh

    Look in your LDS Bible, turn to Revelations and look at your footnotes.

    Plus, these are links from the LDS Website which only show changes made that are too lenghty to be included in the footnotes. I tried to cut and paste to show them but the formating showing the revisions gets lost. So these are the links where you see the changes in italics. Again if you want to check it against the text of the orginal language, by all means do so.

    1. This first link is for revisions to Revelations 1:1-8.

    http://www.lds.org/scriptures/jst/jst-rev/1?lang=eng

    2. Second link to revisions to Revelations 2: 26-27

    http://www.lds.org/scriptures/jst/jst-rev/2?lang=eng

    3. Third link to Revelations 12:1-17

    http://www.lds.org/scriptures/jst/jst-rev/12?lang=eng

  154. March 12, 2012 at 8:55 pm

    David,

    Which of the many versions of the Bible do you think is the one that exactly matches the original Greek text that John actually wrote? Joseph Smith didn’t change anything revelatory that John wrote. He corrected errors that other people introduced into John’s writing in the many translations and copies have been made over the centuries.
    There is no doubt in my mind that the text corrected by Joseph Smith is the closest translation to the original that exits, because it has given to him by God.

  155. March 13, 2012 at 3:39 am

    Kete

    The orginal Hebrew and Greek texts support none of changes he made anywhere in the Bible. Joseph Smith knew nothing of Greek or Hebrew langauges when he made his own additions and subtractions to the King James Bible. He did not even get his 1st lesson in Hebrew until over 2 years after he had already wrote his revisions. See History of the Church Vol 2 pp. 318 & 383.

  156. March 13, 2012 at 4:15 am

    So you have access to the original text of John when he was on the Isle of Patmos? No one does. There are thousands of Greek manuscripts and the King James Version does not exactly follow the majority of Greek New Testament manuscripts. For instance, I John 5:7. found in the KJV, occurs in only four, out of almost five thousand Greek manuscripts. The phrase “book of life” in Rev. 22:19 is found in no Greek manuscript.
    (Information from Allan A. MacRae, President and Professor of Old Testament at Biblical Theological Seminary, Hatfield, PA.)

    Again, let me repeat about the warning….All writings of ancient text were hand written. Those copyist who copied someone else’s work, would often take great liberties with the text, adding and removing text. So the writers of the original often put a curse like the one in Revelation at the beginning or the end of their works.

    I am thankful to have it clarified and corrected by a Prophet of God.

  157. 157 joshtried
    March 13, 2012 at 5:19 am

    So, David.. i looked at the revised versions, and see why you say that stuff was added, but have you read the context of what was added?
    KJV:
    The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:
    JST:
    The Revelation of John, a servant of God, which was given unto him of Jesus Christ, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass, that he sent and signified by his angel unto his servant John

    Now, in reading both of these, I choose to accept the latter..
    It was John to whom this stuff was revealed. While It was the revelation from Jesus, it was taken by John. Most of the rest of 1-8 is just the same… changing HE to THEY, or other things very similar. are only MALES blessed by reading Revelations? I know in Spanish that a group of people would have the predecessor EL instead of LA if there is even one male in the group.. Even my grandparents read HE as everyone, so to change it to THEY is non-consequential to me. To properly sort who received the revelation is again, non-consequential.

    There is also a part where a part of a verse is cut from one verse, and put into another.. again, though, does this really matter? That would be like if i hit enter here
    and continued the rest of my sentence right here… it doesnt matter….

    The only thing i can see “added” and “switched” is here:
    JST:
    For behold, he cometh in the clouds with ten thousands of his saints in the kingdom, clothed with the glory of his Father. And every eye shall see him; and they who pierced him, and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
    KJV:
    Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

    Changed with to in… Every time i have heard of the second coming, it is in the clouds.. but whatever.. ill give you that, he changed it..
    ADDED 10000 saints.. this could be the “with the clouds” KJV describes, though i am honestly no scholar to try and report on these matters.
    Why would Christ bring clouds to the second coming? just curious….
    ADDED clothed with the glory of his father…. I could very well be mistaken, but this was how i pictured the second coming, even BEFORE i was LDS…

    I honestly didnt read the second one you posted, because to me the first is debating almost nothing.. the only thing i saw while comparing them side by side that was completely different where the 2 ADDEDs i posted above (i didnt spend all night comparing, as it is bed time). the second ADDED really doesnt matter, as it says in other places that this is how Christ will return. The first added then is the only real thing i see to “fight over”. As i believe that Christ’s second coming will not be done purely by himself, i accept the 10000 people coming with him. Perhaps you think Christ will come solely by himself?

  158. March 13, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    Kate

    “The phrase “book of life” in Rev. 22:19 is found in no Greek manuscript.”

    Your claim is false. It most certainly is. The phrase “book of life” is repeated in seven passages in Revelations and once in Philipians. The origninal word was “biblioon” transliterated to “biblion”word was used in 22:19. It can encompass more things than a “book” but the term includes book. It means any of the following:

    1. a small book, a scroll, a written document
    2. a sheet on which something has been written
    a. a bill of divorcement

    “So you have access to the original text of John when he was on the Isle of Patmos? No one does.” . . .I am thankful to have it clarified and corrected by a Prophet of God.

    Did Joseph Smith have it? Have you ever heard of any other text besides the LDS writings that have been written in this Egyptian language no Egyptian has ever heard of? When the Heavenly Father and Jesus spoke to Joseph SMith did they speak in a lost foreign language? Why would God speak one language and then write in a lost foreign language to the same guy? Why would he require the use of a magic stone to reveal this supposed “new gospel?” Did the “angel” Moroni speak in this Egyptian language? Did God give Mosses the Commandments in a foreign language? Did God ever speak to any other prophet in an unknown foreign language or require the use of magic stones so that his own prophets would understand Him?

    Kate if you are determined not to trust the Bible I’m not going to be able to change your mind. If you want to, without question, trust Joseph Smith with your eternity that’e entirely your perogative.

    “…. Those copyist who copied someone else’s work, would often take great liberties with the text, adding and removing text. So the writers of the original often put a curse like the one in Revelation at the beginning or the end of their works.”

    That claim is a total fabrication. “Be ye Perfect.”

    “Again, let me repeat about the warning”

    To your warning my response is:

    “Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.” Psalm 119:140

    “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.” Proverbs 30:5

    And Finally –

    “. . . and the Word was God” John 1:1.

    “The Word became flesh . . .” John 1:14.

    “Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.” Luke 21:33

    You can either believe that or not.

  159. March 13, 2012 at 2:11 pm

    Kate

    Take a careful look at these:

    “23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
    24For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
    25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” 1 Peter 1:23-25

    This, once again is God’s guarantee that his Word endures forever. There are no gapping holes in forever. The word is “incorruptible” which means it can’t be corrupted. It lives and abides forever. And it even speaks to what Word endures – “AND THIS IS THE WORD WHICH BY THE GOSPEL IS PREACHED TO YOU.” This gospel Kate – not another.

    What do you suppose 1 Peter 23:25 means to this whole idea that the Bible has been corrupted for generations and their needed to be a “restored gospel” that modified the gospel as Paul, Peter and rest of the apostles of his day preached it?

  160. March 13, 2012 at 3:29 pm

    David,
    Busy day…but hopefully I can fully respond to all that is suddenly commented on at some point today. I do want to say however, that you did not seem to understand this statement. “The phrase “book of life” in Rev. 22:19 is found in no Greek manuscript.” that means, in that verse in thousands of manuscripts does not even occur. Not that the book of life isn’t mentioned elsewhere.

    And claiming the things I wrote are a fabrication, or false, does not make it so just because you said so. That is not a very good argument. There is plenty of evidence of all that I said concerning texts. You don’t seem to understand that the “Word” in many instances refers to Jesus Christ. Also, when speaking of the “Word of God” as the Gospel, His Word, it is perfect! Every beautiful truth of the Gospel is Perfect! That is not referring to errors in the writing of it by the hands of man. That is not saying that a man can’t compile a number of ancient texts and not do it perfectly. God did not say, “The words in the Book are perfectly said as I said things,” but that what He says IS.

  161. March 13, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    I realize a couple of double negatives made some of what I said not clear. What I mean is that what God said concerning His Word does not mean that all who write it down are going to do so perfectly.

  162. March 13, 2012 at 4:10 pm

    Kate

    There were Greek manuscripts containing the phrase you say were not in the original. But since you raise this as in issue for you for this one phrase in this line of Revelations, lets look at a much bigger issue. See what is not in Genesis that Joseph Smith added to the orginal Hebrew. The orginal Hebrew text does not have this and other passages. For now I’ll just use this one:

    This only appears in the JST translation:.

    Genesis 3:4

    “4 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him; and also that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be cast down; and he became Satan.”

    Incidentally, that particlar verse in the true text, is Satan’s lie to Eve. You don’t need to reply to anymore posts as Revelations 22:19. Explain how this in Genesis is a correction when the original never said it.

  163. March 13, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    Josh

    See my post to Kate on Genesis. Is that more substance?

  164. 164 shematwater
    March 13, 2012 at 6:04 pm

    DAVID

    “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

    The rock on which the church is built is revelation. Notice that immediately prior to this verse we read “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” (verses 16-17) Thus in verse 18 Christ is telling Peter that it is on the revelation from God that the church will be founded; and in verse 19 Christ gives Peter the authority to direct that kingdom.
    This is supported in the fact that Peter is a word for a small stone, while in verse 18 the rock of the foundation is a large bedrock.
    So, as long as the church was founded on direct revelation from God nothing could prevail against it. But as soon as people left that foundation the promise was no longer in effect.

    “show me were it says the office of an apostle was to continue beyond the lifespan of those apostles chosen directly by God and whose placement into that office is not written about in the BIble”

    Ephesians 4: 11-13 “And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
    For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
    Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ”

    All the positions listed in verse 11 are required so that we may be brought to what is described in verse 13. If we do not have these than we cannot be perfected and brought to the fullness of Christ. Now, I realize that you will claim we have these in the ancient apostles, but that just doesn’t seem to fit the spirit of this passage. Of course we also have Amos 3: 7, in which we are told that God will never act without first revealing his plans to his appointed prophets.

    “show me were these or any apostles wrote about gospels that were different from what they preached.”

    I can’t, because they never did. But then, we do not have a new gospel. We have the same pure gospel that Peter and Paul preached, that Christ himself taught to the Jews. It is you who are following a new gospel that was formed in the minds of men several hundred years after the original was preached.

    “Do you think this could not have happened to Joseph Smith?”

    I think the real question here is do you think God could not have appeared to Joseph Smith if he wanted to? I know that Satan could have appeared to Joseph Smith, as he is always trying to lead people astray. I also know the difference between the spirit of God and the spirit of the Devil, and it is the first that has witnessed to me of the truth of Joseph Smith’s experience and authority.
    So, answer this: Can God appear to men in visions today as he did in the past?

    “The difference as I see it is this I trust in God’s power to protect His Word and His Church throughout all generations.”
    There is no difference here. I believe this just as much as you do. I just accept that he choose not to. There is a vast difference between choosing not to and being unable to.

    “If God promises he will do something I trust Him to do it.”
    So do I, every word; and he promised that if his church was built on the foundation of direct revelation it would not fall. The problem is that people closed their minds and hearts to direct revelation, preferring to trust their own minds in understanding the Bible. When this happened they moved themselves off that sure foundation and lost the promise of God.

    “To believe He failed or allowed it to fail would mean He wasn’t telling the truth in His Word.”
    This is wrong, for it is in the Bible that we get prophecies of the apostasy and the falling away of the early church.
    Isaiah 24: 5 speaks of the time immediately preceding the second coming and describes the inhabitants of the earth. “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.” This is a sharp departure from the true faith.
    Isaiah 60: 2 also speaks to the conditions of the world at this time. ” For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.” What is this darkness, but the spirit of apostasy that blinds the hearts of men?
    Amos 8: 11-12 tells us that “the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
    And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.” What does this describe but a time in which the true gospel of Christ is not found anywhere on the Earth, and the resulting confusion that is so evident in the reformation and revivals of Christian History.
    And of course Paul wrote the the Thessalonians that Christ’s second coming “shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” Again we have prophecy that between the first and second coming of the Christ there would be an apostasy.
    So, to believe in the apostasy is to believe that men failed, and that the word of God has been fulfilled.

    ” God never lies – ever.”
    I couldn’t agree more. However, just because he never lies that does not mean that we cannot misunderstand him.
    I am curious what you think of the references in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles to God sending a lying spirit to influence the king. (1 Kings 22:22-23; 2 Chronicles 18:21-22).

    “Everything about Joseph SMith’s testimony are all signs that mark a false prophet.”

    How?

    “His vision” Are you saying that to have a vision is a sign of a false prophet?
    “His other gospel” You mean the one that Christ and his apostles taught?
    “His errors in prophecies” I have yet to see one
    “His distrust of the true scripture” You obviously don’t know him very well as the Bible was his favorite scripture and he trusted it more than anyone else. When asked if the LDS church believed in the Bible he answer ‘Yes, and we are the only ones who do.” Sure doesn’t sound like a distrust to me.

  165. March 13, 2012 at 6:38 pm

    Excellent comment Shem!

  166. 166 Kent
    March 14, 2012 at 12:53 am

    The Bible calls Joseph Smith a liar for adding to God’s word a prophesy predicting his own coming. The extra passages tacked on to the end of Genesis are not a translation but an addition so they can’t be compared to the original language to see if they are accurately translated or not as the Book of Genesis ends at verse 26 while the Joseph Smith version continues to verse 38, not in the Bible.

    It seems a lot of what Smith says is the word of God can’t be checked for accuracy as in addition to the extra things added on to the end of Genesis in the Joseph Smith Bible, there is the Book of Mormon where the plates he translated from are not available and the Book of Abraham also, at the very least, cannot be checked against the original language but could in fact be not the writings of Abraham at all but, as I have said before, there is evidence that they may not say what Smith claims they say at all.

    Proverbs 30:5-6

    5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
    6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

    Gen 50:24-26

    24 And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he
    sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.
    25 And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from
    hence.
    26 So Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old: and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.

    (END OF CHAPTER)

    Joseph Smith Version

    Genesis 50:24-38

    24 And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die, and go unto my fathers; and I go down to my grave with joy. The God of father
    Jacob be with you, to deliver you out of affliction in the days of your bondage; for the Lord hath visited me, and I have obtained
    a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of my loins, the Lord God will raise up a righteous branch out of my loins; and unto
    thee, whom my father Jacob hath named Israel, a prophet; (not the Messiah who is called Shilo;) and this prophet shall deliver
    my people out of Egypt in the days of thy bondage.
    25 And it shall come to pass that they shall be scattered again; and a branch shall be broken off, and shall be carried into a far
    country; nevertheless they shall be remembered in the covenants of the Lord, when the Messiah cometh, for he shall be made
    manifest unto them in the latter days, in the Spirit of power; and shall bring them out of darkness into light; out of hidden
    darkness, and out of captivity unto freedom.
    26 A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins.
    27 Thus saith the Lord God of my fathers unto me, A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and he shall be
    esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy
    loins, his brethren.
    28 And he shall bring them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers; and he shall do whatsoever
    work I shall command him.
    29 And I will make him great in mine eyes, for he shall do my work; and he shall be great like unto him whom I have said I would
    raise up unto you, to deliver my people, O house of Israel, out of the land of Egypt; for a seer will I raise up to deliver my people
    out of the land of Egypt; and he shall be called Moses. And by this name he shall know that he is of thy house; for he shall be
    nursed by the king’s daughter, and shall be called her son.
    30 And again, a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed
    of thy loins; and not to the bringing forth of my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have
    already gone forth among them in the last days;
    31 Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the
    fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall grow together unto the
    confounding of false doctrines, and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and
    bringing them to a knowledge of their fathers in the latter days; and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.
    32 And out of weakness shall he be made strong, in that day when my work shall go forth among all my people, which shall
    restore them, who are of the house of Israel, in the last days.
    33 And that seer will I bless, and they that seek to destroy him shall be confounded; for this promise I give unto you; for I will
    remember you from generation to generation; and his name shall be called Joseph, and it shall be after the name of his father;
    and he shall be like unto you; for the thing which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand shall bring my people unto salvation.
    34 And the Lord sware unto Joseph that he would preserve his seed for ever, saying, I will raise up Moses, and a rod shall be
    in his hand, and he shall gather together my people, and he shall lead them as a flock, and he shall smite the waters of the Red
    Sea with his rod.
    35 And he shall have judgment, and shall write the word of the Lord. And he shall not speak many words, for I will write unto him
    my law by the finger of mine own hand. And I will make a spokesman for him, and his name shall be called Aaron.
    36 And it shall be done unto thee in the last days also, even as I sworn. Therefore, Joseph said unto his brethren, God will
    surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, and unto Isaac, and to Jacob.
    37 And Joseph confirmed many other things unto his brethren, and took an oath of the children of Israel, saying unto them, God
    will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.
    38 So Joseph died when he was an hundred and ten years old; and they embalmed him, and they put him in a coffin in Egypt;
    and he was kept from burial by the children of Israel, that he might be carried up and laid in the sepulcher with his father. And
    thus they remembered the oath which they sware unto him.

    (END OF CHAPTER)

  167. March 14, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    “The rock on which the church is built is revelation.”

    Correction:

    Christ is the rock on which the church is built.

    “For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ,” (1 Cor. 3:11).

    The term rock in the Bible is sometimes used in reference of God, but never of a man.
    •Deut. 32:4, “The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice.”
    •2 Sam. 22:2-3, “The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; 3 My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge.”
    •Psalm 18:31, “And who is a rock, except our God.”
    •Isaiah 44:8, “Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none.”
    •Rom. 9:33, “Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.”

    The Greek word “petros” is masculine; “petra” is feminine. Peter, is appropriately referred to as Petros. Jesus said that the rock he would build his church on was not the masculine “petros” but the feminine “petra.”

    •Matt. 16:18, “And I also say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.”
    •1 Cor. 10:4, “and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ.”
    •1 Pet. 2:8, “A stone of stumbling and a rock (petra) of offense”; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed.”

  168. March 14, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    “he promised that if his church was built on the foundation of direct revelation it would not fall. The problem is that people closed their minds and hearts to direct revelation, preferring to trust their own minds in understanding the Bible. When this happened they moved themselves off that sure foundation and lost the promise of God.”

    Correction:

    The problem is that people did not have access to or the ability to read the Bible for themselves or they simply have not or do not read it. The problem is that people believed what men told them. The problem is that people do not believe what the Bible says or the promises God made in the Bible. They think they have to change the words of God to fit what they want to believe.

    John 1
    12 But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God.

    The problem is that Jesus is not savior to the Mormons. The Bible clearly teaches that it is Christ who saves, it is not any church that saves. Mormons can claim to know Christ and have a strong testimony of who they think Christ is, but the reality is that they do not believe what the Bible says. If Christ is your savior, you are worthy of exaltation right now. If Christ is your savior, you are holy and can go before a holy God right now. Mormons can not say that Christ is their savior because they are not worthy of exaltation until they have met certain requirements that must be met and they can not know just how worthy they are until the day that they die and in spite of all their doing they may be surprised to find that all they did still wasn’t enough.

    Mormons like to refer to the Biblical salvation that Christ brings as “cheap grace”, but what an insult this is to Christ the Savior who paid for the sins of the world with his blood and with great suffering and He deserved none of it. The grace that Christ bought for me was far from cheap.

  169. 169 shematwater
    March 14, 2012 at 1:42 pm

    CHOOSE

    “Christ is the rock on which the church is built.”

    And Christ will never be revealed except through direct revelation from the Father, which is what Jesus himself said to Peter.
    In the context of the verse given the rock of the foundation is referring back to the revelation that Peter had received from the Father.

    KENT

    “The Bible calls Joseph Smith a liar for adding to God’s word”

    Again, this is a matter of faith and interpretation. You say he added to the Bible, we say he restored what others had taken away. Either case is dependent on our individual belief.
    Oh, and I really don’t care that mortal scholars are unable to verify the revelations of God. It is of little consequence. God had declared it, and that is enough for me.

  170. March 14, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    Shem

    “Thus in verse 18 Christ is telling Peter that it is on the revelation from God that the church will be founded; and in verse 19 Christ gives Peter the authority to direct that kingdom. ”
    It is not that there was a revelation from God but the fact that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God which is the “rock” upon which He built His church. Is that the correct interpretation?
    “10Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, . . . . 11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.” Acts 4: 10-11
    “4 As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him— 5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house[a] to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For in Scripture it says:
    “See, I lay a stone in Zion,
    a chosen and precious cornerstone,
    and the one who trusts in him
    will never be put to shame.”[b]
    7 Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected
    has become the cornerstone,”[c] 8 and,
    “A stone that causes people to stumble
    and a rock that makes them fall.”[d]
    They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.
    See also Luke 20:8-19. When you say:
    “So, as long as the church was founded on direct revelation from God nothing could prevail against it.”
    I cannot agree. This replaces Jesus full and complete victory which He declared finished on the cross to be founded upon “direct revelation” which, from the LDS standpoint means ongoing and even a new revelation which could occur tomorrow, or sometime in the future. The foundation of the church is not the revelation but Jesus Himself. The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the World. John 1:29. “17And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. 18Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.” Hebrews 10:17-18. Also, Jesus was given all authority over heaven and earth. Matthew 28:18-20. There is no power in heaven or on the earth that has the power to take or even suspend what Jesus won for us. Christ’s church is the entire body of believers (see 1 Corinthians 12:13) this body of believers consists of local congregations. (See ex. Galatians 1:1-2.) and the all powerful Jesus is the head of the church.
    “19And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” Ephesians 1:19-23.
    There is no “so long as” in Matthew 16:18 with respect to the power of Christ’s true church as he established it to endure through all generations. The direct revelation did not defeat sin, death and the devil, Jesus did that by the sacrifice of His body and blood and His resurrection. You went on to say:
    “But as soon as people left that foundation the promise was no longer in effect.”
    The promise has always been in effect.
    “1I will sing of the mercies of the LORD for ever: with my mouth will I make known thy faithfulness to all generations. 2For I have said, Mercy shall be built up for ever: thy faithfulness shalt thou establish in the very heavens. 3I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, 4Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Psalm 89:1-4.
    “39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.” Acts 2:39
    Aside from Matthew 16:18 Jesus promises that He loses not one single believer.
    “36But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. “37All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” John 6:36-39.
    ” 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[a]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”” John 10:28:30.
    Jesus’ church, the body of believers of which He is the head has stood from the day He instituted it with Peter in Matthew 16:18 and His apostles at Pentecost.
    God’s Word has remained pure, alive and incorruptible throughout all generations. I know that is not what Joseph Smith claims but God says otherwise:
    “23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” 1 Peter 1:23-25
    Christ’s church doesn’t leave His people but people can leave His church. That is the falling away talked about in the Bible. At the root of this discussion is that Joseph Smith, one man, claims the Christ’s Church failed by claiming there was a “Great Apostasy,” that the Word was corrupted, and that God had more revelations to give and more words to say. But 1 Peter 1 23-25 is a powerful a passage against any and all such claims.
    What is prophesied about causing people to fall away is the appearance of false prophets that will deceive many. Matthew 24:11. Never once, however, is there a warning that the original Word will be corrupted or lost or so inaccurately translated that the Christ’s entire church (the body of believers of which HE is the head) would be lost and need to be restored and new revelations added. Christ warned against false prophets, not inaccurate translators, deceiving many people and leading them astray.
    You responded to my statement – “show me were it says the office of an apostle was to continue beyond the lifespan of those apostles chosen directly by God and whose placement into that office is not written about in the BIble” by quoting Ephesians 4: 11-13:
    “And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ”
    You said – ” . . . . Now, I realize that you will claim we have these in the ancient apostles, but that just doesn’t seem to fit the spirit of this passage. Of course we also have Amos 3: 7, in which we are told that God will never act without first revealing his plans to his appointed prophets.
    You are right, I will say that but I will also note looking at it from the context of the Bible, there is nothing left for prophets to prophecy about. Old testament prophets prophesied about the wrath of God for disobedience, they had visions and dreams that had meanings they explained or that had a specific purpose, but mainly they where to prophecy about the coming of the Messiah. New testament prophets are also apostles who wrote as the Holy Spirit guided them to write the gospels and epistles and then John writing the book of Revelations. All prophecies, with the exception of those relating to the apocalypse have all come to pass. What is left to prophecy about? As to the apostles, look at the office the apostles had. Sure some church today can have a position in it called “apostle” but that doesn’t make that person an Apostle in the same way as those in the Bible held that position. Those Apostles all witnessed the resurrected Christ (even Paul), they had the Holy Spirit come upon them in way which is unique to them empowering them to perform miracles including raising the dead. When they spoke in tongues, everyone who heard them no matter what their native language could understand what they were saying.
    “show me were these or any apostles wrote about gospels that were different from what they preached.”
    I can’t, because they never did. But then, we do not have a new gospel. We have the same pure gospel that Peter and Paul preached, that Christ himself taught to the Jews. It is you who are following a new gospel that was formed in the minds of men several hundred years after the original was preached.
    I’m glad you see that they all preached the same gospel. We won’t agree beyond this however. What I can do is tell you why it is not us who are following a new gospel. The reason we believe this is what I already explained in relation to Christ’s power as the head of the church and 1 Peter 23-25. The gospel which the apostles preached which Peter said is incorruptible, enduring, and for all generations would not have an 1800 year gap in it. The gospel that Joseph Smith preached is certainly not one for all generations. The evidence of this can be seen in LDS teachings and scripture that contradict passages from the Bible – even the JST Bible. Some examples that show the LDS gospel is not the gospel that was preached are:
    Nephi 25:23 2 “For we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do”
    conflicts with
    Ephesians 2:8-9, “8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
    See also Teachings of Presidents of the Church-Harold B. Lee, page 27. “The laws of God given to mankind are embodied in the gospel plan, and the Church of Jesus Christ is made responsible for teaching these laws to the world. They are given by our Heavenly Father for only one purpose, that you who are governed by law might also be preserved by law and perfected and sanctified, or made holy by the same”
    Which conflicts with:
    “19Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;” Romans 3:19-21.
    And
    The LDS third Article of Faith it says: “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.”
    Which conflicts with:
    “16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” Galatians 2:16
    These are existing contradictions between LDS doctrine and even its own JST bible. Then there is the matter of Joseph Smith altering the heart of the gospel in a way which contradicts the original Greek manuscript language. For instance,
    JST Bible revision to the KJV – adds the word “works” to the explanation of justification by faith alone in Romans 4:16.
    The KJV says: 16Therefore it is of FAITH, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

    The JST says: “16 Therefore ye are justified of FAITH AND WORKS, through grace, to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to them only who are of the law, but to them also who are of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
    Original Greek Text – The Greek word for “works” is a form of the word “ergon” which is not present anywhere in this verse in the Greek manuscript (See and compare Ephesians 2:9 & 10 for two forms of the word)
    Adding “works” to Romans 4:16 directly opposes every other section of scripture explaining justification. James 2 although speaking of works, is explaining that faith is dead without works, but never says it is a component of justification which is accomplished by Christ on the cross without any works from us.
    You answered my question “Do you think this could not have happened to Joseph Smith?” asking –
    “I think the real question here is do you think God could not have appeared to Joseph Smith if he wanted to?”
    He can if he wanted to. But He didn’t. How do I know that? Because Joseph Smith could not possibly be a prophet. “31Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;” John 8:31 Joseph Smith has not held on to or continued Christ’s teachings He has altered it. I know you won’t see it that way for the reasons you said.

    “I know that Satan could have appeared to Joseph Smith, as he is always trying to lead people astray.”
    Then open your eyes and your heart because He has deceived you.
    “I also know the difference between the spirit of God and the spirit of the Devil, and it is the first that has witnessed to me of the truth of Joseph Smith’s experience and authority.”
    You do? ” 25There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” Proverbs 16:25. Let’s take a closer look.

    1. a. When Satan tempted Eve, the first thing he did was have Eve question what God said.
    “Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?”

    1. b. The LDS church questions the accuracy of the Bible.
    LDS Article of Faith 8 says- “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. . .”

    2 a. Eve answers Satan and he contradicts God, leaving for Eve to conclude 2 things about God. One that God lied to her and the other is that God was holding something back from her.
    “4And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

    2 b. LDS Article of Faith 8 (cont) “we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.”

    2. c. LDS Article of Faith 9 – ” We believe all that God has arevealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet breveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.”

    3. a In verse 4 from Genesis above Satan is trying to (1) get Eve to distrust what God said, (2) believe what he says and (3) believe that if she disobeys what God says they will be “as gods”

    I cite here the addition of the word “work” as a requirement for justification in Romans 4:16 when the gospel as explained in that verse and elsewhere says that we are justified by faith NOT by works.

    I cite here the LDS teaching regarding exaltation. ” . . . As God now is, man may be”

    I also cite the earlier passages of LDS teaching that following the law is what makes you perfect when Hebrews 10 clearly says it is Jesus who has already made you perfect before God.

    I cite what you said in the sentence above that it was the Spirit of God that testified to you. God wants us to walk by faith not the senses. “7 For we walk by faith, not by sight.” 2 Corinthians 5:7. “18While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.” 2 Corinthians 4:18
    You asked – “So, answer this: Can God appear to men in visions today as he did in the past?”
    Can Satan appear as an angel of light? Have you always been able to trust your feelings? God can do whatever He wants. But did He appear to Joseph Smith? Would he speak to him in English and then give a prophet something in writing that needed a translation? Would God call people “fools” in Nephi for believing even a part of His Word? Consider when Nephi was supposedly written and the time between when Moroni made his appearance. Were not all those people putting their trusting in God and His Word during that time? “10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11 As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” ” Romans 10:10-12. And you think He would call such people “fools?” Why would he call them “fools” and put them to sham. Would God mock His followers like that? Mine wouldn’t.
    You quoted me saying “The difference as I see it is this I trust in God’s power to protect His Word and His Church throughout all generations.” You answered “There is no difference here. I believe this just as much as you do. I just accept that he choose not to.”
    To your last sentence above, this is the Jesus I know:
    “11For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.” “12How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. 14Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.” Matthew 18:11-13.
    I would again cite 1 Peter 1: 23-25
    “ . . . and he promised that if his church was built on the foundation of direct revelation it would not fall.”

    Not on direct revelation, but on Jesus Christ’s finished work on the cross and His resurrection. There are no “ifs” it boils down to belief or unbelief. John 3:16-18 And the belief must be of the gospel as it was preached then which is not how Joseph Smith rewrote it in Romans 4:16. Faith + works = Christ’s justification is unbelief.
    “This is wrong, for it is in the Bible that we get prophecies of the apostasy and the falling away of the early church.
    Isaiah 24: 5 speaks of . . . .”
    The darkness, the apostasy, the falling away is unbelief in the gospel of Jesus Christ as preached and referenced in 1 Peter1 23-25. The church, the body of believers with Christ as it head remains and will continue forever and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. That doesn’t mean it won’t have enemies that question it, attack it, refuse to believe what God said, and false prophets. Jesus warned about that just like Paul warned about other gospels coming from “angels from heaven” and Satan appearing as an angel of light. Like I said, we were never warned about false translators doing such an awful job in unison that the whole Bible would need revision and more books, prophets and apostles added.

    “Amos 8: 11-12 tells us that “the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
    And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.” What does this describe but a time in which the true gospel of Christ is not found anywhere on the Earth, and the resulting confusion that is so evident in the reformation and revivals of Christian History.”
    It mentions an absence of the word but this does not mention a restored Gospel or even that the original gospel was ever lost. This has to be read also along with other portions of scripture to and they say Christ church will not be destroyed and His Word endures forever. Plus it is not at all clear what time frame this is referring to.
    “And of course Paul wrote the Thessalonians that Christ’s second coming “shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” Again we have prophecy that between the first and second coming of the Christ there would be an apostasy.”
    This does not speak to an universal apostasy of the church; it is numbers of individuals falling away from faith which is what happens when one follows a false prophet preaching another gospel.

    “Everything about Joseph Smith’s testimony are all signs that mark a false prophet.”
    “How? ”
    I have explained all this above when I made the comparison to Satan’s temptation of Eve. The pattern was identical. If you haven’t seen errors in His prophecies you must not be looking very hard.

  171. March 14, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    Shem

    “You say he added to the Bible, we say he restored what others had taken away”

    You mean like the Book of Abraham where God supposedly to Abraham to lie and it turned out that the book is really a copy of an Eygptian funeral text?

  172. March 14, 2012 at 9:41 pm

    Just checking to see if it’s only me who is not being allowed to post. Makes you wonder if Mark is worried about me showing you truth?

  173. March 14, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    I guess we will have to see if he lets my comment on today’s blog get posted. As of yet, he has not let it post.

  174. March 15, 2012 at 1:06 am

    Kate, Sometimes when I make a post with links in it, my comments are held for moderation. This is an automated feature of the blog. WordPress has a feature that holds some posts for moderation when they contain a certain number of links to keep spam from automatically getting posted on the blogs.

  175. March 15, 2012 at 1:08 am

    Yes, I see that now. I apologize for thinking the worst.

  176. March 15, 2012 at 2:50 am

    Thank you Kate for your apology.

  177. 177 shematwater
    March 15, 2012 at 2:14 pm

    I notice that no one seems to pay attention to what I or any other LDS here says. It almost seems pointless to continue as we are constantly ignored.

    CHOOSE

    “The Bible clearly teaches that it is Christ who saves, it is not any church that saves.”

    I couldn’t agree more. It is Christ that saves. The problem with what you say is that He has declared that He will only save those who meet certain conditions which He has outlined for that salvation.
    Mark 16: 16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”

    Matthew 7: 21 “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.”

    Then we have the three parables of Matthew 25, in which all the people believed, but only those who acted were accepted.

    When will people get this strait in their heads. Salvation is a gift from God, but he chooses who to give it to, and he will only give it to those who prove they are capable of handling it. No matter what we do we will never be saved without Christ.

    DAVID

    I have not read everything you wrote. It is just to much, and when you said that there is nothing left to prophecy about because everything God is going to do has been done (except the apocalypse) I felt no need to continue, and so I only skimmed.
    The LDS are constantly being ridiculed and accused of limiting God, and yet you yourself have denied God the privilege of revealing His will and allowing men to prophecy on His behalf. You have declared the heavens to be closed to man simply because you don’t think there is anything else worthy of God’s attention.
    I can’t help but wonder how many millions might have been saved if there was a prophet to worn the people of Europe about the Bubonic plague that swept through the nations. What if the people were worthy enough to be guided by prophets during the 30 years war, or the hundred years war? How many could have been saved? And could the crusades and the death the resulted been avoided if there had been a prophet?
    But, obviously these things were not important enough for God to communicate to His saints the dangers they faced, or to give them guidance in their actions. Everything worth prophesying about had already been written, so what would be the point, right?

    The history of the world, and especially of the Christian religion after the apostles died, proves to me that God was not talking to people, that a spiritual darkness, as prophesied in the Bible, had covered the minds of all the people. I cannot accept a God who would leave those who truly believe in such a state.

    Now, I will make a few comments on one paragraph that you posted.

    “Can Satan appear as an angel of light?”
    Yes, and I have never denied this. However, the feeling of his presence can never duplicate that of the Spirit.

    “Have you always been able to trust your feelings?”
    When it is the Spirit of God that I am feeling, then yes. He has never led me astray when I listened to him.

    “But did He appear to Joseph Smith?”
    Yes he did, and you will admit such yourself when you see Joseph Smith standing at Christ’s side when our savior returns.

    “Would he speak to him in English and then give a prophet something in writing that needed a translation?”
    This really is just a ridiculous question and one that answers itself. You might as well ask why God did not provide Martin Luther with a German translation of the Bible. Or why the Old Testament is written in Hebrew and the New Testament in Aramaic and Greek, demanding that he personally provide his words in your own language.

    “Would God call people “fools” in Nephi for believing even a part of His Word?”
    No, and he never did. You are simply trying to twist the words of this great prophet. People are not fools for believing even part, but for rejecting the rest. I have a feeling you would consider a person a fool who accepted the four gospels but rejected all the epistles. It is no different.

    “Were not all those people putting their trusting in God and His Word during that time?”
    True believers have always put their trust in the word of God, and have never tried to limit the amount of that word that they received. They accepted what God had revealed in the past, what he revealed to his current prophets, and looked forward to the revelation of many more great truths. They did not try to limit what God could reveal to them.

    “And you think He would call such people “fools?”
    No. These people were true believers, who accepted God’s word as it was revealed, believing in revelation. It is people like you that God calls fools, for you deny God the power to teach you, and as such you have set your own doctrine above his spirit and revelations.

    “Would God mock His followers like that? Mine wouldn’t.”
    Mine doesn’t. But he does put to shame those that claim to believe in him, and yet refuse to listen when he tries to speak.

  178. 178 choosethechrist
    March 15, 2012 at 2:50 pm

    Shem said, “When will people get this strait in their heads. Salvation is a gift from God, but he chooses who to give it to, and he will only give it to those who prove they are capable of handling it. No matter what we do we will never be saved without Christ.”

    What he really meant was, if you are mormon, you can be exalted/saved by Christ+works and that God will only give salvation/exaltation to those who are prefect, worthy, and keep the requirements (works) of the LDS church.

    But, God says it is through Christ alone that we are made worthy, perfect, and holy.

    Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

    Shem does not understand that we must first come to Christ alone for our salvation/exaltation, then we do good works by following Christ and that our salvation/exaltation is not dependant upon any of our works or on any church/religious denomination or organization or on any church requirements.

    Salvation/exaltation is by Christ+nothing!

  179. 179 choosethechrist
    March 15, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    Galatians 3

    Faith or Works of the Law
    1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. 2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? 3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh?[a] 4 Have you experienced[b] so much in vain—if it really was in vain? 5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard? 6 So also Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[c]
    7 Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. 8 Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”[d] 9 So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

    10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”[e] 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”[f] 12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.”[g] 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.”[h] 14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

  180. March 15, 2012 at 3:52 pm

    Shem

    “I felt no need to continue, and so I only skimmed.”

    Don’t say I didn’t warn you. Obviously I don’t share your view of Joseph Smith. I’m more interested in see you there than him. I won’t be looking for him, I’ll be looking for you. I know its long. But you gave me a lot to respond to so that’s what I did.

  181. 181 Joshtried
    March 15, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    Choose, to start, there is a whole other thread on works… Im not going to repeat what is already over there.

  182. 182 RLO
    March 15, 2012 at 5:23 pm

    Shem;

    A couple of brief comments:

    Shem said, “I notice that no one seems to pay attention to what I or any other LDS here says. It almost seems pointless to continue as we are constantly ignored.”

    I do sympathize with you here. In fact if you change “LDS” to “Christian” in your observation above, you have expressed my own sentiments exactly.

    Shem said (to Dave), “I have not read everything you wrote. It is just [too] much…so I only skimmed.”

    I tend to agree with this observation of yours also. Whether a Christian post or Mormon post, the longer they are, the less inspired I am to read them. “More” usually ends up accomplishing “less.” But with that said, if someone is going to take the time to post a long comment, I believe courtesy dictates they should also take the time to read a long response.

    I still look forward to us getting to know each other better, apart from this blog.

  183. 183 shematwater
    March 15, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    CHOOSE

    “What he really meant was”

    Don’t tell me what I meant. I know what I meant, and you obviously have no clue what you are talking about because nothing you say is anything of what I meant. You do not know our doctrine, and no matter how many times we explain it to you you claim that what we really mean is the twisted garbage you want us to mean.

    I mean exactly what I said. God saves who He chooses to save, and he has told us through his prophets what attributes and attitudes he is looking for in those he will choose. Don’t be adding anything to what I said.

    Ephesians 2: 8-10 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
    Not of works, lest any man should boast.
    For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”
    I have said it was a gift from God, as such I have no intention of boasting. However, verse ten clearly teaches us that it is by walking in the good works of God that we qualify to receive that gift. It may be hard for your to understand this, but that is the truth.

    “Shem does not understand that we must first come to Christ alone for our salvation”

    Also, don’t tell me what I don’t understand until you first understand our doctrine. Please read 2 Nephi chapter 31. Here I quote verse 19: “And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this strait and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.”

    The first step is to believe in Christ, relying holy on His merits, for he is mighty to save. In no other way can we hope to be saved. This must come first. His grace must bring us to him, though we must choose to follow. It is only after we come to Christ that anything we do can have any effect in the eternities. However, once we have come to Him we are not finished, but must continue to live according to his word or be rejected. He has said that only those who do the will of the Father will enter the Kingdom (Matthew 7: 21) and so we must do or we cannot enter.

    “Salvation/exaltation is by Christ+nothing!”

    I never once denied this. I simply point out that that great gift is given only to the worthy. It is not by there works that they are saved, but because of them.

    As to Galatians, the Law spoken of here has reference to the Law of Moses, which was added to the Abrahamic Covenant 430 years after Abraham (See Galatians 3: 17). This Covenant was a law to those who entered into it, as it is states in 1 Chronicles 16: 16-17 “Even of the acovenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an aeverlasting covenant” and was repeated in Psalms 105: 9-10.
    As Paul is telling the Galatians that it is through this covenant, based in faith, that a man is saved, and the Bible tells us that God established this covenant in Law, it is the Bible that tells us that the Law of the Covenant is what saves those who believe.

    DAVID

    As I will still be on this Earth when Christ comes, ready to welcome Him and all those with Him, I think it far more likely that you will see Joseph Smith there.


Comments are currently closed.

March 2012
M T W T F S S
« Feb   Apr »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 182,150 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 998 other followers


%d bloggers like this: