Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bob Betts

Universal Apostasy Or Not?

Recommended Posts

Same thing happened to me. He told me he would fix it, but I'm still waiting.

Contact Lloyd at [email protected], give him your username and password, and he'll make it so.

Share this post


Link to post

Bob

What does apostacy mean? I dont think you know judgeing from the first line that I left in your responce. Has Christ had His second comming yet Bob?I really cant add any more than what has been said. :P

Mola, Notice how he ignores those posts that he cannot explain, I suppose it is like he reads scriptures. Apparently if he is not able to ban someone like on his site, he just puts them on "Ignore" and just keeps on spewing.

Share this post


Link to post

Mola, Notice how he ignores those posts that he cannot explain, I suppose it is like he reads scriptures. Apparently if he is not able to ban someone like on his site, he just puts them on "Ignore" and just keeps on spewing.

I guess this is the case. I know not every body has answers to things, but man when you just dont have an arguement any more, just admit it. THat can be a hard thing to do too. Actually atleast say I see your point, but I still dont believe the apostacy did happen.

Share this post


Link to post

No, we wait to ban people until AFTER they open their mouth, and deserve it. :P

Would it be against the rules to teach people how to practice occultism?

Share this post


Link to post

Bob Betts,

A universal apostasy was supposed to have taken place after the deaths of the Apostles. Yet, one Apostle never died, and three others, granted the same permission, and at least acting as Apostles, are doing the very thing that was supposed to have ceased. THAT'S what's obvious to ME. Telling me I don't understand and that I'm not being rational makes NO sense to me.

What? So what? It DID! After the deaths of the Apostles, the apostasy took place. Whyâ??s this hard to understand!? Ohâ?¦I know, because youâ??re confounding â??Apostlesâ? with, â??All of the Apostles.â?

The problem, Bob, is that youâ??re using your paradigm to correct the LDS view. For example, in your mind, all the Apostles died. Thus, you find it inconceivable how when the LDS manuals refer to â??apostles,â? theyâ??re not referring to them all. So you ignore the small fact, structure your strawman, and continue.

So yes, you donâ??t understand, and youâ??re not being rationale. The issue is simple:

1- Because an individual has the keys, doesnâ??t mean they need use them.

2- If you have the keys, you can still baptize, proselyte, etc., without organizing the church.

Youâ??ve seemed to grasp at a notion that since they were out there, there couldnâ??t be an apostasy. Youâ??re, again, wrong. The apostasy came about when the members of the church (and itâ??s local leadership) for good intent or bad, distanced themselves from the church, sufficient that they were fallen away. For purposes known to the Lord (and anybody with half a creative neuron in their cranium), the church was not reorganized at the time and those permitted to live, ministered in very isolated ministriesâ?¦never intending to reestablish the organization of the church.

In D&C 7:7, Jesus is alleged to have given to John, the power and keys of Christ's ministry. Isn't it your belief that your presidency has the power and keys of Christ's ministry? Or, does your presidency have something even more that the power and keys of Christ's ministry? When you think about Christ's ministry, doesn't that cover all the bases of ministry?

Yes, Jesus DID give those keys to Johnâ?¦but the real evidence is in Matthew 16, and 18; but thatâ??s semantics). Againâ?¦and Iâ??ll type it slowly (although it doesnâ??t give the dramatic effect that Iâ??d hope), because one has keys does not mean they need be used. The priesthood was take from the earthâ??not to be again perpetuated and used for the organization of the church. But it was not taken OFF the earth, for through it was John able to continue to minister, bless, and prepare.

NOWâ?¦please explain what part of that is incomprehensible.

PacMan

P.S.

Would it be against the rules to teach people how to practice occultism?

YES!!

Share this post


Link to post

YES!!

I'll wait for Bob's answer.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll wait for Bob's answer.

He will probably give a one worder :P<_<:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post

He will probably give a one worder :P<_<:unsure:

He cant, he claimed in another thread that that would probably be the shortest answer he would ever give to LDS. Since Tsuzuki is LDS, Bob would now be a liar. HA :ph34r: Im just toying with you Bob.

Share this post


Link to post

Would it be against the rules to teach people how to practice occultism?

Thank you, I needed a good laugh. :P

Share this post


Link to post

He cant, he claimed in another thread that that would probably be the shortest answer he would ever give to LDS. Since Tsuzuki is LDS, Bob would now be a liar. HA :P Im just toying with you Bob.

I choose to interpet Bob's statement to me as not set in stone and can be modified to mean anything he wants to be <_<:unsure::ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

If Bob were able to find evidence that John or the three Nephites kept the Church going, he might have a point. Lazy research; all antiMormons are guilty of it.

The Lord bless you, too.

But, if you could make sense out the difference between the claim to a complete apostasy of authority (it allegedly having been taken from the earth), and the fact that four priesthood holders were granted permission to do priesthood work until Christ's return, with the BoM evidence that they were doing just that, you would. But, you can't. Now the research that I did, as a lazy antiMormon, resulted in knowing that what Christ granted and promised the four, required priesthood authority to accomplish, by Mormon standards, and they were to do so until the return of Christ. THAT is the evidence that they kept bringing souls to Christ as Christ granted they could do, until His return. I don't have to pull out any further historical evidence than the promise that Christ made to the four priesthood holders. Therefore, the priesthood authority was NOT taken from the earth. Those four were involved in church ministry, salvation, baptism, conferring the HG. That's what your scriptures teach. Deny it or not.

The universal apostasy is already foretold in the Bible. For example....
Rev. 13:7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Out of context. Look at the preceding verses. Note what's happening, and that it was allowed for forty two months. That's half of the seven-year tribulation period in the last days. Could that be what it's talking about?

Note verse 8:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Does your church claim that this is what people were doing after the universal apostasy? From that time until the calling of Joseph Smith, was everyone whose name was not written in the Lamb's book of life, worshipping the beast? Does your church teach that this last days description in Revelation also applies to the period following the death of the last Apostle?
Tracing the wholesale changes in early orthodox Christian doctrine from something very LDS-like to the heresies extant today among all nonLDS Christians also bears this out.
Not so. But, you'll believe whatever they tell you. You cannot verify that with any actual histrorical facts. These speculative musings are not provable, anymore than a universal apostasy.

Share this post


Link to post

Lets see if you will answer this arguement. There was a universal apostacy just as Preach my Gospel indicates. As for John and the three nephites I refer to this statement:

(Mormon 1:13-14) "But wickedness did prevail upon the face of the whole land, insomuch that the Lord did take away his beloved disciples, and the work of miracles and of healing did cease because of the iniquity of the people. And there were no gifts from the Lord, and the Holy Ghost did not come upon any, because of their wickedness and unbelief."

This state of affairs was worldwide,

No, it was not. It says "the face of the whole land," not the whole world. What land were they in? Zarahemla (vs. 6). How far did Christ extend the callings of the four? 3 Nephi 28:29 "unto all the ascattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them."
so in addition to the loss of priesthood authority the apostacy was caused by something much worse: WICKEDNESS and UNBELIEF. That is why the Church became corrupt and that is why the priesthood authority was withdrawn. It had to await a day when religious freedom was protected by a government that would become a world power, and had to await a faithful generation to uphold the pure teachings of the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
No, your premise is wrong, so the rest of this is, also. It wasn't worldwide. But the priesthood holders authority and calling was. There was no loss of priesthood authority, according to the LDS scriptures. There was no apostasy according to those LDS scriptures.

Share this post


Link to post

No, your premise is wrong, so the rest of this is, also. It wasn't worldwide. But the priesthood holders authority and calling was. There was no loss of priesthood authority, according to the LDS scriptures. There was no apostasy according to those LDS scriptures.

So In other words. Lightbearer, your just wrong, Im totaly going to ignor the qualifiers here. It just says upon the land and thats all I care about. Nothing you say Lightbearer will make me see your points.

Bob, You seem to equate some one holding the Priesthood keys to some one being able to exersis all of the keys. That is not the same thing. I hold the highets priesthood. It is the same priesthood Christ holds and our current prophet, now I do not have the keys to do what the prophet does. Why is this Bob. Do you know? Are you starting to see the points now?

Share this post


Link to post

Of course it is Bob, Its all of us, were to stoopid to understand. We are like sheep. Just mindless brainless pond scum merman type. Bob, do you not think that we the member of the LDS are more the authority on the topic of our faith than "YOU". Did that thought ever cross your mind. We are telling you how it works and you are not listening to it.

I asked a question based on what appears to stand out to me as a contradiction. Your claim is that all priesthood authority was taken from the earth, when the last Apostle died. But then I find out the last Apostle DIDN'T die. And, neither did three other priesthood holders, granted the ability remain on earth to use their Christ-given "power and keys" to bring souls to Christ, until Christ returns. Everyone can tell me I'm spiritually blind, but I know what I see printed on the pages of your books.

Share this post


Link to post

Lightbearer, has come to the rescue. I think this sums it up. Bob, you have no argument any more. Case closed.

As I've already responded his/her post, hold off on claiming victory.

Share this post


Link to post

As I've already responded his/her post, hold off on claiming victory.

Bob I added more to my post. Sorry for the way Ive been posting I shouldnt have posted that way.

Share this post


Link to post

I asked a question based on what appears to stand out to me as a contradiction. Your claim is that all priesthood authority was taken from the earth, when the last Apostle died. But then I find out the last Apostle DIDN'T die. And, neither did three other priesthood holders, granted the ability remain on earth to use their Christ-given "power and keys" to bring souls to Christ, until Christ returns. Everyone can tell me I'm spiritually blind, but I know what I see printed on the pages of your books.

Here is the deal. What has everyone been telling you? Please summerize it. You are correct that it is possible that 4 priesthood holders could have been physically on the earth. I see your point. I have stated at least 2 time that it is pure speculation to say weather they were still on this earth or not. IT doesnt say one way or another. Also even if they were preaching and teaching and baptizing thwy would have not had the keys to organize a church. If I was one of the 4 priesthood holders I would not have the keys or the aurthority to do so. Does this make sence?

Share this post


Link to post

but I know what I see printed on the pages of your books.

It is very obvious that you don't. You keep harping on 3 Nephi 28:29 but you completely ignore the preceeding passages, and more importantly, you ignore the first 15 words of verse 29. What do you think those 15 words mean, Bob?

T-Shirt

Share this post


Link to post

Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. First of all Universal has some nuances of meaning. According to the dictionary it can also mean pertaining to the whole (Not necessarily ALL) or general (as in widespread) or "characterizing all or most members of a class; generic. "

Other than that this has been explained clearly in great detail for those who have eyes to see.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the compliment Mola, yes I suppose you are right- case closed. But that seems to be Bob's M.O. once someone answers his arguement he slinks off...He did the same to me on another thread.

What an unkind thing to say.

A Latter-day Saint suggested I start my own thread about anything I have questions about. I took that advice. I'm quite busy, and can't be everywhere at once. I can't seem to get caught up with even responding to my OWN thread, so I decided to plant myself here for a while. If I've neglected to respond to something you said to me, I'm sorry. But, to suggest I slinked off, is more than slightly mean-spirited.

Share this post


Link to post

Bob, this has been asked and answered. Simply repeating your charges does not make your interpretation any more credible, nor does it make the answers you've received any less so.

I'm only responding to the questions I'm asked and comments made. If people want me to stop repeating myself, they could stop asking me questions. I'm trying to be as clear, concise, and comprehensive in my responses as possible.

Lightbearer accused me of "slinking" away from another thread. If I stopped answering questions here, would I again be accused of slinking away because I supposedly couldn't repond?

If I thought I'd heard a credible answer to MY question, then I'd give up. That hasn't happened.

Share this post


Link to post

You need a min of 12...a quorum.

For what? The four priesthood holders in question got special permission from Christ. Did Christ disobey some quorum rule the Bible never talks about?
I have seen a lot of post talking about what "you" said. Who are you?
I'm the lead moderator at the Concerned Christians Discussion Board.

Share this post


Link to post

If I thought I'd heard a credible answer to MY question, then I'd give up. That hasn't happened.

What sort of answer would you accept as "credible"?

"Your lordship Betts, we surrender all our rights to intelligent thought because you are the sole arbiter of truth. We succumb to your superior ability to interpret traditions and religions that you are not a part of, and of which we are. We, as Mormons, are incapable of approaching you with anything resembling a logical argument, and therefore we retreat and wish you well."

Is this the kind of credible answer that would satisfy you?

Sargon

Share this post


Link to post

The bottom line is that Mr. Betts cannot move beyond the absolutist outlook that plagues fundamentalists of all stripes. There is black and there is white, with nothing in between. There is is right answer and a wrong answer, and no room for nuance. Mr. Betts' original premise and his subsequent comments betray his inability to see anything beyond the literal. According to this logic, the presence of 4 priesthood holders = no apostasy, despite the fact that 99.99999999+% of the world, millions of God's children, remained in spiritual dakrness.

If we can't trust the written word of your religion, which IS in black and white, then we have a fundamental communication problem. If your religion puts it in print for investigators, and tells us an apostasy happened after Christ and His Apostles died, taking the priesthood authority from the earth, but your religion also says that one of those Apostles, along with three Nephites didn't actually die, but instead, went on a mission "unto all the ascattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls," then you can accuse me of anything you want, But it still won't make sense out of that glaring contradiction. If one Apostle and three Nephite priesthood holders were still on the earth, doing their calling until Christ returns, then there was no apostasy as claimed.

Share this post


Link to post

Bible Errors and Contradictions - P. Wesley Edwards

(updated 1-Sept-2004)

Bible debates, perhaps more than any other debate topic, can become lost in endless details of interpretation and subtle questions of translation. It can easily seem that to get into the debate at all requires one to be a Biblical scholar. Fortunately, this is not the case, particularly when dealing with fundamentalists who claim that the Bible is free of error and contradiction.

The claim of Biblical inerrancy puts the Christian in the position of not just claiming that the original Bible was free of error (and, remember, none of the original autograph manuscripts exist) but that their modern version of the Bible is the end result of an error-free history of copying and translation beginning with the originals. Such a position is so specific that it allows one to falsify it simply by reference to the Bible itself. For example, Gen 32:30 states, "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." However, John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..." Both statements cannot be true. Either there is an error of fact, or an error of translation. In either case, there is an error. And if there is an error, then infallibility of the Bible (in this case the King James Version) is falsified. A typical defense used here is to look up the meaning of the original Hebrew / Greek, read that one of the words can have multiple meanings, and then pick the meaning that seems to break the contradiction. For example, the Christian might argue that "seen" or "face" means one thing in the first scripture, and something completely different in the second. The logical flaw in this approach is that it amounts to saying that the translator should have chosen to use a different word in one of the two scriptures in order to avoid the resulting logical contradiction that now appears in Englishâ??that is, the translator made an error. If no translation error occurred, then an error of fact exists in at least one of the two scriptures. Appeals to "context" are irrelevant in cases like this where simple declarative statements are involved such as "no one has seen God" and "I have seen God." Simply put, no "context" makes a contradiction or a false statement, like 2 = 3, true.

If one is prepared to allow for the possibility of translator or transcriber errors, then the claim of Biblical inerrancy is completely undermined since no originals exist to serve as a benchmark against which to identify the errors. Left only with our error-prone copies of the originals, the claim of infallibility becomes completely vacuous. Pandora's Box would truly be open: You could have the Bible say whatever you want it to say by simply claiming that words to the contrary are the result of copying or translation/interpretation errors, and nothing could prove you wrong.

Let's look at several more of these context-independent contradictions and errors of fact.1

Contradictions

2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..." 2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."

2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death" 2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"

2 Samuel 8:3-4 says "David smote also Hadadezer...and took from him...seven hundred horsemen..." 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says "David smote Hadarezer...and took from him...seven thousand horsemen..."

1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..." 2 Chronicles 9:25 says "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots..."

2 Kings 25:8 says "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month...Nebuzaradan...came...unto Jerusalem" Jeremiah 52:12 says "...in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month...came Nebuzaradan...into Jerusalem"

1 Samuel 31:4-6 says "...Saul took a sword and fell upon it. And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead and...died with him. So Saul died..." 2 Samuel 21:12 says "...the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa."

Gen 2:17 says "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die [note: it doesn't say 'spiritual' death] Gen 5:5 says "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."

Matt 1:16 says, "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus..." Luke 3:23 says "And Jesus...the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli"

James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."

Gen 6:20 says "Of fowls after their kind and of cattle [etc.]...two of every sort shall come unto thee..." Gen 7:2,3 says "Of every clean beast thou shall take to thee by sevens...Of fowls also of the air by sevens..."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." John 19:30 "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Gen 32:30 states "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."

Factual Errors

1 Kings 7:23 "He made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." Circumference = Pi() x Diameter, which means the line would have to have been over 31 cubits. In order for this to be rounding, it would have had to overstate the amount to ensure that the line did "compass it round about."

Lev 11:20-21: "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you." Fowl do not go upon all four.

Lev 11:6: "And the hare, because he cheweth the cud..." Hare do not chew the cud.

Deut 14:7: " "...as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof." For the hare this is wrong on both counts: Hare donâ??t chew the cud and they do divide the "hoof."

Jonah 1:17 says, "...Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights" Matt 12:40 says "...Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly..." whales and fish are not related

Matt 13:31-32: " "the kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed whichâ?¦is the least of all seeds, but when it is grown is the greatest among herbs and becometh a tree." There are 2 significant errors here: first, there are many smaller seeds, like the orchid seed; and second, mustard plants don't grow into trees.

Matt 4:8: " Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world,

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...