109 replies to this topic

[LeSellers]

Rob Bowman, on 21 October 2010 - 08:10 PM, said:

I see no point in trying to reason with a man who complains that he is being "persecuted" merely because I disagree with him.

CFR that I claimed you (or anyone else) is persecuting me in this matter.

The ones being persecuted are the modern apostles.

Lehi

[Rob Bowman]

Vance,

You wrote:

Vance, on 22 October 2010 - 04:36 PM, said:

As usual, Rob gets it wrong.

Not at all. "As usual," you twist what I said.

You wrote:

Quote

The CFR was for this statement.

"That is, in the NT Jesus Christ handpicked his apostles and prophets,  and each apostle had to be an eyewitness of the risen Jesus. That isn't the case with your LDS apostles."

To address this CFR and support this statement Rob has to prove that not a single LDS apostle has seen Christ. Which he cannot do.

That is a ridiculous distortion of my meaning. "That" in the sentence you put in bold type refers back to the previous sentence, which asserts not that some apostles might have been eyewitnesses of the risen Jesus but that "each apostle had to be an eyewitness of the risen Jesus."

I hope you're not going to try to get this thread shut down by claiming once again that I refused to answer a CFR. I answered it in the other thread, and I answered it again, thoroughly and definitively, in this thread. You can issue CFRs all week long for something I didn't say but doing so won't change the facts as to what I have been clearly saying all along.

You wrote:

Quote

And to repeat the point Lehi made, there is no record of either Barnabus, or James the Lord brother being "an eyewitness of the risen Jesus".

Doesn't matter. My argument was not that we lack explicit records of every LDS apostle having an encounter with the risen Jesus and therefore they didn't all have such experiences (much less than none of them did). My argument was that we lack records of any living LDS apostle having such an encounter and we have multiple statements indicating that such is not a requirement to be an apostle in the LDS Church.

Just for fun and a change of pace, how about addressing the actual argument?

[Rob Bowman]

Lehi,

Okay, you got me on that one. You're right, you claimed that I was persecuting LDS apostles, not that I was persecuting you.

Now, I issue you a CFR: Please provide a reference documenting that I am "persecuting" LDS apostles.

LeSellers, on 22 October 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

CFR that I claimed you (or anyone else) is persecuting me in this matter.

The ones being persecuted are the modern apostles.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Rob Bowman, on 22 October 2010 - 06:44 PM, said:

Okay, you got me on that one. You're right, you claimed that I was persecuting LDS apostles, not that I was persecuting you.

Actually, I didn't even do that. What I said was that your approach reminded me of Jesus' words.

Rob Bowman said:

Now, I issue you a CFR: Please provide a reference documenting that I am "persecuting" LDS apostles.

That kind of depends on what one means by "persecution". Attacking them for not being what they claim to be, i.e., Apostles of the Lord, Jesus Christ, is, in my view, a subtle form of persecution. As this whole topic focuses on that very thing, I believe I have met your Call for Reference.

Lehi

[DeepThinker]

Sevenbak, on 22 October 2010 - 12:22 PM, said:

Thanks for that Randy! Elder Haight's sacred experience was given as promoted by the sprit, among believers, at a small level, in a sacrament meeting, as opposed to a General Conference or published in the Ensign.  These sacred things aren't shared with the world at large, as they mock and set at naught.

I feel the same way about the very specific warnings given by Elder Packer in his own ward. (the controversial talk)  It was not to go out to the world at large.  I think we can also liken apostolic warnings to this conversation.  Even at the Regional Conference the week before GC, which is not published, the warnings tended to be more spelled out than at GC, about what is to come.  It's not going to be pretty.

Actually, Elder Haight has seen the Savior and told about it in General Conference. It was 21 years ago, it was amazing and ranks as my #1 General Conference of all time. I could hardly believe he was sharing the vision he had.
It was reprinted in the April 2007 Ensign. The link is below, if I copied it correctly.



http://lds.org/ldsor...0004d82620aRCRD

[Rob Bowman]

Lehi,

You wrote:

Quote

The ones being persecuted are the modern apostles.

I conceded that this was what you accused me of doing. Now you say:

LeSellers, on 22 October 2010 - 06:57 PM, said:

Actually, I didn't even do that. What I said was that your approach reminded me of Jesus' words.

No, that's not what you said. Here is what you wrote (underlining emphasis mine):

Quote

In this, I can discern no difference between your stance and that of those of whom Christ said this:Luke 11:49, 52 said:

49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:

If you claimed there is no difference between my "stance" and that of those mentioned in Luke 11:49, in which you put the word "persecute" in bold italics for strong emphasis, I can only conclude that you were accusing me of persecuting your apostles.

You wrote:

Quote

That kind of depends on what one means by "persecution". Attacking them for not being what they claim to be, i.e., Apostles of the Lord, Jesus Christ, is, in my view, a subtle form of persecution. As this whole topic focuses on that very thing, I believe I have met your Call for Reference.

I see. Would you agree, then, that you and several others in this group have been engaged in a subtle form of persecution against me?

[randy]

Tarski, on 22 October 2010 - 04:49 PM, said:

He did not say he had seen did he now.
I bet he had said hundreds of times before that he knew this or that based on the same twinkly feelings that drives hundrds of Bishops and missionaries to say similar things.

He said to me and all that were there and paying attention that he had not seen. I'll take his word on that.
If he wants to say that nevertheless he somehow knows anyway then fine. He can say it.
I don't think he does any better than I did as a young big mouthed emotional missionary.

Tarski,

I was just sharing with you what I knew at that moment then as a 19yr old, just as I know now as a 53yr old....that the Holy Ghost bore witness to me of exactly what it was that Elder Haight was bearing witness of..and yes, even the "unspoken" yet very obvious direct implications.  As far as the "twinkly feelings"...I find that comment of yours crass, however, as I mentioned...I have not had a voluminous amount of "mountain top" spiritual experiences.....yet, at that moment in time, the Holy Ghost bore a most powerful witness...and I knew it, and I knew that God knew it...and I will not deny it.

[LeSellers]

Rob Bowman, on 22 October 2010 - 07:15 PM, said:

Would you agree, then, that you and several others in this group have been engaged in a subtle form of persecution against me?

Have I ever claimed you were not what you presented yourself to be? I cannot recall such a message.

Whether others have is not my responsibility.

Lehi

[Sky]

I wonder if the current Apostles would just come right out and say that they have seen the Risen Lord if that would suddenly convince the unbelievers?  Somehow I doubt it.

I think we would all do well to remember the story of the doubting Thomas in the New Testament.  I find it interesting to note that he doubted, but yet he was still an Apostle.
  
From John 20: 25-29:

Quote

The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

[Rob Bowman]

Lehi,

I'll make this simple for you. Do you consider me a validly baptized member of the true church of Jesus Christ?

LeSellers, on 22 October 2010 - 07:23 PM, said:

Have I ever claimed you were not what you presented yourself to be? I cannot recall such a message.

Whether others have is not my responsibility.

Lehi

[Rob Bowman]

Sky,

This has nothing to do with "convincing the unbelievers." My point, which I have documented from LDS leaders, is that they don't even claim that all LDS apostles have seen the risen Lord, and in fact make statements that indicate that not all of them have seen him. The issue I am raising here is what the LDS Church teaches about this, not whether it is true.

Sky, on 22 October 2010 - 07:38 PM, said:

I wonder if the current Apostles would just come right out and say that they have seen the Risen Lord if that would suddenly convince the unbelievers?  Somehow I doubt it.

I think we would all do well to remember the story of the doubting Thomas in the New Testament.  I find it interesting to note that he doubted, but yet he was still an Apostle.
  
From John 20: 25-29:

[Mark Beesley]

Rob Bowman, on 23 October 2010 - 06:51 AM, said:

The issue I am raising here is what the LDS Church teaches about this, not whether it is true.

The LDS Church does not teach anything with regard to this topic.  Individual members may have made statements, some of which you have quoted, and all of which are subject to interpretation.  But The Church has not canonized any statement with regard to this issue.  Hope that helps.

[mrmendoza]

Rob Bowman, on 21 October 2010 - 06:38 PM, said:

My claim was not that there needs to be "a record," currently available, of every apostle having seen the risen Christ. My claim was that in the NT period the principle was enunciated and understood that all apostles had in fact seen the risen Jesus, whereas in the LDS Church no living apostle need claim, and none does claim, that he has seen the risen Jesus.

It seems to me that you are using the same type of reasoning that most EVs use, in that if it was said in the NT or anywhere else in the Bible, that it becomes the last word for all time. IMO is that in the New Testement times there was a large body of men who had been with them for some time, whom the Apostles knew and trusted, and had been with them when the risen Saviour appeared to them. It would only be natural for them to call a replacement for Judas from that group. I don't think that just because they used that critera for their selection, that they were making that a rule for all time. That was then, this is now! The apostles today are called from men who have proven themselves true to the gosple in every way. and are known by the President of the Church to be be worthy of his calling, and is called through revelation by the presidency of the Church! It is not as importent to see something with your visible eye, as with your spiritual eyes!
Mike

[Obiwan]

Rob Bowman, on 23 October 2010 - 06:51 AM, said:

Sky,

This has nothing to do with "convincing the unbelievers." My point, which I have documented from LDS leaders, is that they don't even claim that all LDS apostles have seen the risen Lord, and in fact make statements that indicate that not all of them have seen him. The issue I am raising here is what the LDS Church teaches about this, not whether it is true.

The "LDS Church" nor it's members teach NOT A THING about this......

Other than members sometimes mentioning that some have apparently seen Christ and the rest we don't know.  Period!  Making molehills out of nothing.  

Edited by Obiwan, 23 October 2010 - 04:32 PM.

[Rob Bowman]

Mark,

You have inadvertently confirmed my point. Let me explain why. What you say may be put this way:

P. The LDS Church does not teach anything with regard to whether men must have seen the risen Lord to qualify to serve as apostles.

From P, we may infer:

Q. The LDS Church does not teach that men must have seen the risen Lord to qualify to serve as apostles

Now simply accept the following reasonable premise:

R. What the LDS Church does not teach is required, the LDS Church does not require.

From Q and R, we may safely draw the following conclusion:

S. The LDS Church does not require that men must have seen the risen Lord to qualify as apostles.

So far as I can see, the only escape from the above argument for you is to deny R by asserting that the LDS Church may be secretly requiring things of its prospective apostles that it does not teach its members are requirements. But so far no one seems to be making that claim.

Mark Beesley, on 23 October 2010 - 07:57 AM, said:

The LDS Church does not teach anything with regard to this topic.  Individual members may have made statements, some of which you have quoted, and all of which are subject to interpretation.  But The Church has not canonized any statement with regard to this issue.  Hope that helps.

[Rob Bowman]

Mike,

So, you agree with my point, then, that the LDS apostles are not required to have seen the risen Jesus with their physical eyes. Is that correct?

mrmendoza, on 23 October 2010 - 04:12 PM, said:

It seems to me that you are using the same type of reasoning that most EVs use, in that if it was said in the NT or anywhere else in the Bible, that it becomes the last word for all time. IMO is that in the New Testement times there was a large body of men who had been with them for some time, whom the Apostles knew and trusted, and had been with them when the risen Saviour appeared to them. It would only be natural for them to call a replacement for Judas from that group. I don't think that just because they used that critera for their selection, that they were making that a rule for all time. That was then, this is now! The apostles today are called from men who have proven themselves true to the gosple in every way. and are known by the President of the Church to be be worthy of his calling, and is called through revelation by the presidency of the Church! It is not as importent to see something with your visible eye, as with your spiritual eyes!
Mike

[Rob Bowman]

Obiwan,

See my reply to Mark. Help you understand my position, it will.

Obiwan, on 23 October 2010 - 04:31 PM, said:

The "LDS Church" nor it's members teach NOT A THING about this......

Other than members sometimes mentioning that some have apparently seen Christ and the rest we don't know.  Period!  Making molehills out of nothing.  

[David T]

My $0.02?

The original CFR was dumb. This thread is so lost, I'm not even sure who is trying to prove what.

It can be summed up like this:

1. Some modern apostles/prophets have gone on record saying they saw the risen Lord.
2. Most haven't made such a claim.
3. There is nothing in published Church documents that state a vision of the Risen Lord is required for a call to the Apostleship today.
4. Notwithstanding, many members still like to think the prophet (and even some if not all of the apostles) has regular face-to-face time with Jesus.

What is still being argued about? Really?

Edited by nackhadlow, 23 October 2010 - 06:16 PM.

[Sevenbak]

nackhadlow, on 23 October 2010 - 06:14 PM, said:

My $0.02?

The original CFR was dumb. This thread is so lost, I'm not even sure who is trying to prove what.

It can be summed up like this:

1. Some modern apostles/prophets have gone on record saying they saw the risen Lord.
2. Most haven't made such a claim.
3. There is nothing in published Church documents that state a vision of the Risen Lord is required for a call to the Apostleship today.
4. Notwithstanding, many members still like to think the prophet (and even some if not all of the apostles) has regular face-to-face time with Jesus.

What is still being argued about? Really?

From his point of view, perhaps a better question Rob should be asking is... "Do those Apostles and Prophets who have written or said they have seen the Lord, lie on purpose or are they deceived?"

Edited by Sevenbak, 23 October 2010 - 07:10 PM.

[Sevenbak]

DeepThinker, on 22 October 2010 - 07:14 PM, said:

Actually, Elder Haight has seen the Savior and told about it in General Conference. It was 21 years ago, it was amazing and ranks as my #1 General Conference of all time. I could hardly believe he was sharing the vision he had.
It was reprinted in the April 2007 Ensign. The link is below, if I copied it correctly.



http://lds.org/ldsor...0004d82620aRCRD

That was amazing.  Although there are those who would think he was just delirious as he was so close to death.

Close to the veil in all actuality.  The tender mercies of the Lord, and the prophets who share them!