Universal Apostasy Or Not?

[Bob Betts]

After reading Paul Rayâ??s long post # 1208283432 I thought it worth mentioning a couple things

First that the Apostacy occurred at a time of persecution and difficulty of travel. It is easy to see how it might have been impossible for the apostles, who were traveling to farflung areas and who were having to hide from persecution, to meet together often enough to replentish their numbers.

Okay, this isn't the first time this explanation has been given. So, then, the cause of the apostasy was merely a practical one...the Apostles simply couldn't get together to form a quorum and pick replacement Apostles. PacMan told me that John could have appointed Apostles himself, but God didn't authorize him.

[Bob Betts]

Good! Then we are in agreement. There is no predestination.

Then we're NOT in agreement, because Paul definitely taught predestination. I have no idea how you reached your conclusion. But, it appears to simply be a sarcastic 'gotcha' that you felt you had to interject for your own amusement, rather than a serious discussion of my comments.

Rom. 8: 29-30

29 aFor whom he did bforeknow, he also cdid predestinate dto be conformed to the eimage of his Son, that he might be the ffirstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he adid predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Eph. 1: 5, 11

5 Having apredestinated us unto the badoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

â?¢ â?¢ â?¢

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being apredestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

True that God can override our choices forcefully,

This is what I've been saying. But you just contradicted PacMan who earlier told me that God cannot infringe on our agency.

Pacman is right and there was no contradiction. Overriding our choices does not remove our original choice by agency by extension.

So, God CAN override our choices forcefully, but God canNOT infringe on man's agency, and that's not a contradiction? Could you elaborate on your statement, "Overriding our choices does not remove our original choice by agency by extension." I don't understand.

but that does not change the fact that we still chose to do it in the first place.

If God did not choose to lovingly entice me, making Himself appealing to me in ways I would accept, then I would not have chosen Him "in the first place." He chose ME in the first place, evident by the wooing and appealing. John 15:16 (Jesus said) "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."

He chose you, but you also had to accept. God will not and cannot override your agency. Instead, He entices and draws and foreordains.

yes, He did indeed choose me first, like a man courts a woman. And, yes, He foreordains. Choosing first, and foreordaining...both are aspects of predestination.

[captain-jack]

Then we're NOT in agreement, because Paul definitely taught predestination. I have no idea how you reached your conclusion. But, it appears to simply be a sarcastic 'gotcha' that you felt you had to interject for your own amusement, rather than a serious discussion of my comments.

Rom. 8: 29-30

29 aFor whom he did bforeknow, he also cdid predestinate dto be conformed to the eimage of his Son, that he might be the ffirstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he adid predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Eph. 1: 5, 11

5 Having apredestinated us unto the badoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

• • •

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being apredestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Pacman is right and there was no contradiction. Overriding our choices does not remove our original choice by agency by extension. So, God CAN override our choices forcefully, but God canNOT infringe on man's agency, and that's not a contradiction? Could you elaborate on your statement, "Overriding our choices does not remove our original choice by agency by extension." I don't understand.

He chose you, but you also had to accept. God will not and cannot override your agency. Instead, He entices and draws and foreordains.yes, He did indeed choose me first, like a man courts a woman. And, yes, He foreordains. Choosing first, and foreordaining...both are aspects of predestination.

Cherry picking scriptures?

Romans:

29 For whom he did foreknow

-

He knew beforehand, that gives the impression of a pre-existance that He knew before we even came here.

-

He would predestinate to be conformed to the image of Christ, so does that mean either we are joint heirs as for what He has earned? In His image to me means that we would have an drive to be like Him.

-

he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Ephesians: (I do like how you skipped 6 verses, but not cherry picking?)

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

-

We are predestined to be adopted by Christ, that doesn't say squat as to whether we are going to choose it. Just like Christ dying for our sins, He did it for everyone, whether or not they accept it.

-

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one call things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

-

Inheritance being the gift of Grace, Christ's sacrifice for sin? It speaks nothing of Heaven or the afterlife, read verse seven.

Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McKonkie

Predestination:

Predestination is a sectarian substitute for the true doctrine of foreordination. Just as Lucifer "sought to destroy the agency of man" in pre-existence (Moses 4:3) so through his ministers here has taught a doctrine, base on scriptural distortions, of salvation and damnation without choice on the part of the individual.

Foreordination:

See] Agency, Election of Grace, Predestination (so a synonym), Pre-existance, Races of Men. To carry forward in his own purposes among men and nations, the Lord foreordained chosen spirit children in pre-existence and assigned them to come to earth at particular times and places so that they might aid in furthering the divine will. The pre-existence appointments, made "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" (1 Pet. 1:2), simply designated certain individuals to perform missions which the Lord in his wisdom knew they had teh talents and capacities to do.

There is plenty more but I think that is good. Some are predestined to do good, it says nothing about sin or where in heaven they will go, just that they are put in the right place at the right time, should they choose the right.

A Marvelous work and a wonder by LeGrand Richards

In his(satan) effort to destroy truth, Satan could hardly have hoped to deceive men more effectively and completely than to take from them, through the teachings of such doctrines, a consciousness of their responsibilities.

That rings so true, what better way to lead men away from Christ. Make them think they have no power to change or give say in how they live their lives.

[PacMan]

Bob,

Thanks for working on the quote brackets! You have no idea how helpful they are. I'll try and get back to you, but it might be a bit...FYI. Not like you don't have enough on your hands already...

PacMan

[Bob Betts]

I think you're confused by my playing Devil's Advocate in my responses. I'm not saying God did anything of the sort. I don't believe there was such a great or universal or complete (or whatever you want to call it) apostasy as Mormonism claims. But, as long as you LDS are going to believe there WAS an apostasy, because God didn't authorize John to call replacement Apostles for those who were martyred (according to PacMan's argument), then obviously God must ultimately bear the responsibility for the alleged apostasy.

Making God responsible for people who apostasized from God isn't the only option, Bob.

... and it isn't even one of the good ones, IMHO.

In REALITY, I don't think it's a good one either. Because, in REALITY, there's no evidence of the kind of apostasy your church alleges.

Maybe God "wooed" the people who received the teachings of our Lord's apostles and the people who listened just weren't interested in what they were hearing.

Maybe those people thought God himself should come down and do some "wooing".

You're speculating. I can't reach any logical conclusions based on speculation.

You do realize we are saying the Church apostasized from our Lord and his apostles, don't you?

Based on the greetings at the beginning of the Apostles letters, this is not a viable view of early Church history. Did many fall away from their faith in Christ? We don't know. Was there a complete apostasy of priesthood authority and keys. None that any LDS can prove, biblically or historically.

... much like how the children of Israel apostasized after leaving the land of Egypt.

As I've already pointed out to PacMan, the falling away from the faith by the first round of Israelites out of Egypt, did not cause the organization which God formed under Moses, to cease. According to your LDS doctrine, the Church organization under the authority of Christ and His Apostels, DID cease after the deaths of the Apostles. So, your argument here is not a parallel between the events surrounding Moses, and the events surrounding Christ and His Apostles.

These weren't people who had never heard from our Lord through his apostles, Bob.

They received the teachings of our Lord's apostles and weren't all that impressed with what they heard.

Are you still talking about the Israelites? I'm not understanding the relevance of these two sentences.

What would it take for you to know that we are trying to "woo" you into following our Lord?

If you're thinking that your Lord is the same one as in the Bible, then I've already been wooed by Him, and have been following Him for 37 years.

What was it that made you decide to become a Christian, yourself, in the first place, Bob?

That's kind of a long story.

I first heard someone preach and then I asked God if what they told me was true.

I didn't even believe the Holy Bible was written by the inspiration of God until God personally assured me that it was.

What is it going to take before you simply ask God to let you know what is true?

I listened to the Apostle of Christ, who taught, (2 Timothy 2:15) "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." I've studied. I know the truth that has long set me free, from studying God's Word. I've studied the history of your church, the teachings of your "prophet(s)," read your scriptures, studied your doctrines, and observed your lifestyle. I've talked to, listend to, and discussed our differences in theology ad nauseum. What I have learned in the past 13 years of studying your religion, and continue to study and learn about your religion, and observe about your way of life from the inside, has long convinced me that I would never be free again, if I joined your church. If you want me to go into more detail, ask and I will.

In short, I would never ask God if your religion is true, because God has already shown me through study in His Word, and through study of your religion, that it is not true.

How much "wooing" are we going to have to do before you actually listen and ask God for his assurance?

None. I'm already 100% assured, both that the bible is true, and Mormonism is not.

Bob: Oh, I've been listening. But, again, different people are saying different things, giving different explanations. Depending on whom I'm responding to, I could see how you might THINK I'm not listening. But I think it's a matter of different responses to different LDS, depending on their response. No doubt, this IS confusing. I struggle with following some of this thread myself, with all the different ideas and opinions being tossed around. Good luck keeping up.

I think it would help you if you simply clarify how you really feel about things, while being nice about it.

Feelings are subjective, and irrelevant in the determination of objective truth. But, above I have shared a very brief explanation of what I think, and done so as nicely as possible, IMHO.

You don't have to impress us, Bob, and you don't even have to agree with us.

I'm sure, from the way I'm usually responded to, I impress no one.

... even if what we are telling you is the absolute gospel truth.

I have absolute confidence in the Bible, that the LDS gospel is extremely different from the gospel of Christ and His Apostles.

Bob: In response to YOU, I take you to the PMG manual: Let me try a different tact.

You (and your church) say all authority (priesthood keys) were taken from the earth with the deaths of the Apostles. What about Jesus Christ, Who is the one Who gave the authority and keys to the Apostles in the first place. Was He just sitting at the right hand of the Father while this alleged apostasy was going on? NO! What did Jesus say to the disciples before he ascended? Matt. 28:20 "...and, lo, I am with you alway, even onto the end of the world."

No, our Lord was not just sitting there after he ascended to heaven.

I'm sure he was busy doing a whole lot of "wooing".

... but all the "wooing" in the world can't make somebody choose to listen to him and accept that what he is saying is true... even if/when he speaks to people personally.

From reading the one history book which I have absolute confidence in, the book of The Acts of the Apostles, the Church was growing by leaps and bounds, thousands in single days. The Church was growing quickly and spreading everywhere. It is apparent to me, that the Church was very large, planted in many cities and towns, consisting of both Jews and Gentiles, slave and free, active and vibrant.

Nothing is taught by anyone in the NT about some impending doom of the Church, as the Apostles would die off. None.

I believe you may be hearing from God now while you listen to us talk with you and you are simply brushing it all aside as only our own opinion/belief, without checking with God to see if it may also be God's opinion.

No, as I've said, I've checked out Mormonism for many, many years. I've not only tried to understand your beliefs, but your culture and way of life. I've listened, not just with my head, but with my heart. But, biblical truth has long changed my heart, and I am in no way drawn to Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, your church, or your lifestyle.

I think you think you are right about everything you now believe to be true, and there is very little anyone can do to make you believe what we are telling you. Even God will not force you to believe what is true, because that would violate your agency. You must choose, for yourself, who it is that you will follow this day.

I made that choice a long time ago. I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, and Him alone. The Bible does not tell me, nor show me by example, that I am to follow any man, prophets, apostles or anyone else. It tells me and shows me by example that I am to follow Christ alone. I will continue to do so, until my last breath.

Time for my morning cup of coffee with my wife, and our usual quality time. Back later.

[consiglieri]

... and it isn't even one of the good ones, IMHO.In REALITY, I don't think it's a good one either. Because, in REALITY, there's no evidence of the kind of apostasy your church alleges.

Wil and Ariel Durant would disagree. As they described what LDS would call the apostasy:

"Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated life in the rituals and liturgy of the Church."

Evidence enough for you, Bob?

All the Best!

--Cognoscente

[Lightbearer]

I made that choice a long time ago. I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, and Him alone. The Bible does not tell me, nor show me by example, that I am to follow any man, prophets, apostles or anyone else. It tells me and shows me by example that I am to follow Christ alone.

This is simply untrue, the Bible does tell you to follow true apostles and prophets which I repeat for the third time, the post you have either overlooked or ignored, but here it is again: Just in case you overlooked post #614 (I realize that you have many questions that you are attempting to answer) I post it again for you:

Adhereing to following the message from God, is entirely different than following the prophet who delivered the message. There is nothing in the Bible about following prophets or anyone else, save the Prophet, Jesus Christ.

Actually the Bible says otherwise:

(Philippians 3:17) "Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample."

And also this:

2 Thessalonians 3:7-10) "For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any manâ??s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us."

And yet another:

(1 Corinthians 4:15-16) "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me."

So here are three quotes from the Apostle Paul that disputes what you said about following prophets. So I do not think you can deny the fact that at least Paul admonishes the Saints to follow him as he follows Christ. That is the duty of all true prophets, to be an example to those whom they are called to minister to. I also would like a CFR for a reference in the Bible that says that we are not to "follow the prophet and apostles" because that would contradict what Paul said in the above quotes. Thank you.

[PacMan]

Bob,

No, I haven't, and you're about to see that it's not so riveting an example. You have missed one of the obvious parallels. It was because of God's determination to get the Israelites to the promised land, that He ordained an organization which would continue and be maintained as Joshua would finally take the Israelites to their new home. The LDS doctrine of an apostasy of authority, ceasing the function of the Church organization for 1,700 years, does NOT parallel that OT story. The organization which God ordained under Moses never ceased. LDS doctrine teaches that the Church organization DID cease...for a very long time. Your parallel of the two stories just fell apart. Even WITH a certain amount of apostasy within the camp of Israel, the organization of God never stopped functioning. Think about it.

Youâ??re missing itâ?¦the parallel is that the Lord prevailed after His will was side-tracked. He never wanted the children of Israel to worship the calf, nor Moses to strike the stoneâ?¦but it happened. And the Lord prepared for it. Be it 40 years or 1,700, the Lord will have His will done. His plan can get interrupted due to the agency of wicked men, but it canâ??t be frustratedâ?¦the Lordâ??s smart like that. As you noted, the parallels are quite similar. The Lord gave the children of Israel commandments, which he later retracted as a consequence of wicked menâ??s actions. Same with the apostasy.

Textually, there is no basis for an apostasy of priesthood authority and the organization of the Church to cease. Why you (LDS) believe that Christ organized His Church with the knowledge that it would cease to function in just a few decades, is beyond my comprehension. And, certainly is unprecedented in God's history of the world.

Letâ??s take it to one more level. In trying to characterize you correctly, I believe your take is that it doesnâ??t make sense that God would tell John to organize the church if it were to all be for naught? What about the command to be perfect? Are you or I perfect? Will we ever be perfect in this life? If there is a commandment for naught, itâ??s thatâ?¦.but the â??endâ? isnâ??t necessarily the pointâ?¦itâ??s the means to the end: the trying, the repenting, the perfecting process. Why in the world would God give us a commandment that we canâ??t fulfill in this life? Just because something isnâ??t to be done, doesnâ??t mean the effort shouldnâ??t be expended. Moreover, thereâ??s plenty of reason textuallyâ?¦you just reject it. Start another thread just on textual analysisâ?¦I think itâ??d be informative.

Sorry, but they don't go around wearing their titles on name tags.

Thatâ??s rightâ?¦Paul and the sons of thunder were quite and reserved, embarrassed to call themselves apostles of the Lord. Youâ??re rightâ?¦better for such apostles to keep quite.

NOTE: Christ called 12 disciples, He chose 11. One was the prophesied son of perdition.

The underlying logic here is actually very LDS, believe it or not.

I won't pick at those numbers. There was significance to the them. Thouhg much more significance to your church then mine. All the more reason to question, in my mind, why your church would believe that as each of them was martyred, God didn't allow John to appoint replacements, and allowed the organization to become ineffectual for 1,700 years. Your doctrine defies both the Moses/Exodus model of an ongoing organization, and the LDS belief in maintaining a quorum of 12. You (LDS) make it hard to believe your church is true. Lack of consistency.

Iâ??m not asking you to pick, but distinguish the 70 from the 12. Youâ??re confounding positions. Moreover, there is no logically tenable association between your beating around the bush and Johnâ??s replacements. Again, your red herrings leave me dumbified, because thereâ??s not tenable connection between your points. The 12 are needed until weâ??re at a unity of the faithâ?¦weâ??ll talk of that later.

You made the point that the foundation had to be on living Apostles, did you not? You used that point to make the next point that when an Apostles died, it was imperative that another living Apostle be appointed. this creates a picture in MY mind of a building foundation made up of 12 flat stones (with Christ as the Cornerstone, of course)â?¦

What are you talking about? I donâ??t care what pictureâ??s created in your mind. You can be chasing after flying ponies for all I care. YOUR â??picturesâ? are completely illogical and make no sense.

The issue is what YOU are reading into the scriptures. Paul would have never considered the foundation to be those dead apostlesâ?¦for the 12 were to continue. He said it himselfâ?¦. Any indication that the foundation of a living church was stagnateâ?¦lacks consistency.

I see nothing insufficient about the teachings and doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles, requiring a succession of additional living Apostles to take their place.

And assuming the apostasy DID happen, OF COURSE thatâ??s what you would say!

I gotta tell ya, I choose the teachings of Paul over Joseph, without blinking.

If that was true, then youâ??d accept Joseph. Twisting and wracking Paulâ??s words, however, seems all the more convenient.

Stay tuned for part twoâ?¦

[Paul Ray]

... in REALITY, there's no evidence of the kind of apostasy your church alleges.

Please tell me what you think the word "apostasy" refers to, generally.

I'm not even sure now that you understand what we mean.

The Bible gives many examples of people who were apostasizing from the true Church and true faith and true gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Bible gives many examples and warnings about people who would presume to have authority from God and lead other members away from the true faith.

Maybe you simply don't understand what we are referring to when we refer to the apostasy and how the true priesthood authority of the apostles was lost once the apostles were no longer living among mortals.

You may be listening, but you don't seem to really hear what we are saying.

Bob: You're speculating. I can't reach any logical conclusions based on speculation.

You're right. I was simply giving you possible scenarios because the Bible doesn't fill in all the holes.

You do realize you sometimes do the same thing, don't you?

I recommend that you take any and all ideas you can think of and then ask God to tell you what is true.

Bob: Based on the greetings at the beginning of the Apostles letters, this is not a viable view of early Church history. Did many fall away from their faith in Christ? We don't know. Was there a complete apostasy of priesthood authority and keys. None that any LDS can prove, biblically or historically.

What we can prove is that at some point there were no more apostles living among the mortal Church members to guide them all into unity, and that because of the lack of apostles people came up with alternative approaches based on their own reasoning.

And since there is actually no, nada, zilch scriptural basis for the true church of Christ to exist without living apostles to unite the true church of Christ as a whole, any church without apostles is not in harmony with Church that we see represented in the scriptures.

You're basically trying to come up with reasoning to support the idea that we no longer need any more living apostles to guide the true church of Christ, other than the ones who are now deceased, and you have no Biblical basis for that reasoning or belief.

Bob: As I've already pointed out to PacMan, the falling away from the faith by the first round of Israelites out of Egypt, did not cause the organization which God formed under Moses, to cease. According to your LDS doctrine, the Church organization under the authority of Christ and His Apostels, DID cease after the deaths of the Apostles.

Yes, we are saying the Church organization under the authority of Christ and his living (while mortal) apostles DID cease among those of us who are now living as mortals after Christ and his apostles were removed (at least from our sight) from off of the face of this Earth.

I think you're trying to say that since we still have some of the words of Christ and his apostles, and since Christ and his apostles are still living in heaven, or wherever else they may be other than living here among us mortals on Earth, that we STILL have the true church of Christ in all of it's glory here on this Earth among us mortals just as the Church once was when Christ and his apostles were once living among us as mortals... which we (LDS) agree with, somewhat, but only because we accept additional words from Christ and his apostles from his apostles who are now living among us as mortals.

Bob: So, your argument here is not a parallel between the events surrounding Moses, and the events surrounding Christ and His Apostles.

There are some similarities. I'll let someone else expand on that thought if he/she wants to do that.

Bob: If you're thinking that your Lord is the same one as in the Bible, then I've already been wooed by Him, and have been following Him for 37 years.

Good. Keep following him. We (LDS) know of more that he wants to share with you.

Bob: I listened to the Apostle of Christ, who taught, (2 Timothy 2:15) "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." I've studied. I know the truth that has long set me free, from studying God's Word. I've studied the history of your church, the teachings of your "prophet(s)," read your scriptures, studied your doctrines, and observed your lifestyle. I've talked to, listend to, and discussed our differences in theology ad nauseum. What I have learned in the past 13 years of studying your religion, and continue to study and learn about your religion, and observe about your way of life from the inside, has long convinced me that I would never be free again, if I joined your church. If you want me to go into more detail, ask and I will.

Prepare to be enlightened in the future.

Bob: In short, I would never ask God if your religion is true, because God has already shown me through study in His Word, and through study of your religion, that it is not true.

So you are completely satisified with all that you have and you don't want any more, ever?

Hmm. Okay, I'm fine with that, if you are.

Bob: I'm already 100% assured, both that the bible is true, and Mormonism is not.

Prepare to be enlighted in the future, if you want to be.

Bob: Feelings are subjective, and irrelevant in the determination of objective truth. But, above I have shared a very brief explanation of what I think, and done so as nicely as possible, IMHO.

Yes, that was a nice way of putting it. I appreciate that.

Bob: I'm sure, from the way I'm usually responded to, I impress no one.

You impress me as someone who doesn't want to know any more truth right now because you believe you have enough truth already.

If I am wrong about that, I apologize, but that is the way you come across to me, personally.

Bob: I have absolute confidence in the Bible, that the LDS gospel is extremely different from the gospel of Christ and His Apostles.

I have absolute confidence that I know more than you do about the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Bob: From reading the one history book which I have absolute confidence in, the book of The Acts of the Apostles, the Church was growing by leaps and bounds, thousands in single days. The Church was growing quickly and spreading everywhere. It is apparent to me, that the Church was very large, planted in many cities and towns, consisting of both Jews and Gentiles, slave and free, active and vibrant.

Yes, that is the Church as it once was, but do you realize that the apostles were the ones who did all of the planting? I'm sure other members of the true Church shared the gospel message with other people, but the apostles were the ones who established... and corrected... ALL of the local leaders of all the true church(es) of Christ. The apostles where the ones who appointed... and corrected... the local leaders of the true church of Christ.

I'll let you figure out what happened when the apostles were no longer living among us to establish... and correct... all of us, Christians.

Bob: Nothing is taught by anyone in the NT about some impending doom of the Church, as the Apostles would die off. None.

It's there, if you have eyes and hears to receive it.

Try reading what John said in Revelation concerning our Lord's warning(s) to the church(es).

... and an angel who would later fly through the midst of heaven declaring the true gospel message.

Bob: No, as I've said, I've checked out Mormonism for many, many years. I've not only tried to understand your beliefs, but your culture and way of life. I've listened, not just with my head, but with my heart. But, biblical truth has long changed my heart, and I am in no way drawn to Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, your church, or your lifestyle.

I hope you'll keep working on the puzzle. If you will, I think you'll figure it out, eventually.

Bob: I made that choice a long time ago. I'm a follower of Jesus Christ, and Him alone. The Bible does not tell me, nor show me by example, that I am to follow any man, prophets, apostles or anyone else. It tells me and shows me by example that I am to follow Christ alone. I will continue to do so, until my last breath.

You're saying that while realizing that by following our Lord's messengers you are actually following him, right?

I think what you mainly need now is a realization that Joseph Smith was one of God's true prophets.

Hmm. How will you ever know that, I wonder.

Bob: Time for my morning cup of coffee with my wife, and our usual quality time. Back later.

I enjoy the same thing but with Postum and my own wife.

Take care.

[Dale]

If the Reformation is true then we should be able to find a portion of the church that survived with their exact characteristics. I am less interested in talking Mormonism with Bob than seeing if he can show me a portion of the church survived with his belief's until Martin Luther reformed the church. Show me through early Christian quotation's that individual's existed that never mixed heresy with the ideas he believe's in. Where all all these non-apostate individual's through which the church survived? What are some of their name's?

[Paul Ray]

If the Reformation is true then we should be able to find a portion of the church that survived with their exact characteristics. I am less interested in talking Mormonism with Bob than seeing if he can show me a portion of the church survived with his belief's until Martin Luther reformed the church. Show me through early Christian quotation's that individual's existed that never mixed heresy with the ideas he believe's in. Where all all these non-apostate individual's through which the church survived? What are some of their name's?

I've asked him to do that before too, with the understanding that the "exact characteristics" of the early church included apostles doing what apostles did while living among Church members as mortals.

The apostles hold the keys to the kingdom for all of us.

[Bob Betts]

Bob: Paul confirmed that Christ is the Head of His Church, and the Chief Cornerstone of its foundation. Did Christ stop being the Head and Cornerstone of His Church as He sits next to the Father? NO! But, how could Christ be with us, even onto the end of the world? I don't know exactly what YOUR response would be, but mine would be, by His Spirit.

I agree that our Lord was and is now with us by his spirit, but when we choose to believe him, by believing the Spirit of God, we should be coming together in agreement and be able to see that we are being led by our Lord through our Lord's authorized servants knowing for ourselves who our Lord's authorized servants really are.

I agree with you on this. I just don't agree that the leadership of the CoJCOLDS are His authorized servants, due do the entirely different doctrines, practices, interpretations of the Bible, claims of Joseph Smith, contradictions in the BoM with the Bible (where the Bible isn't plag...copied), lack of definitive support in the Western Hemisphere for the alleged stories and people in the BoM, etc., etc., etc.

As far as coming together is concerned: when all the dozens of LDS denominations come together, then you you'll have a literal platform on which to encourage such a coming together. You all believe in the same Smith, the same BoM, most of the same doctrines, but all claim to be the true church on earth to the exclusion of the others, all with true prophets who don't recognize each other's authority. You LDS need to start with your OWN house, and quit taking jabs at the Protestant's numerous denominations. At least most of us get along with each other, in unity of faith and Spirit. That's a claim your multiple LDS denominations can't make. You all claim that all the other LDS denominations are apostate. As I jokingly said before, at the rate you Smithites are going after 175 years, after YOUR church has been around for 2,000 years, you'll have as many denominations then, as we have now.

But you don't see me as one of Lord's authorized servants, do you? And I don't see you as one either. Maybe, just maybe, it's because neither one of us really is at this time.

You'll have to speak for yourself. I am definitely being used of God in full-time ministry. God has changed many people's lives through this unworthy servant. And, I am also in ministry outside the full-time ministry of CC. I "shepherd" people through the local Church that I attend.

Maybe the Spirit testifies only when someone is hearing from one of our Lord's authorized servants who is acting in harmony with his instructions. And my Lord hasn't instructed me to talk to you on this website.

Through the Word, the Lord has instructed me to preach:

2 Tim 4:1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourageâ??with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. (NIV)

I am doing this on my own time, for my own enjoyment.

I am doing this out of love for my Mormon neighbors, and not for the purpose of personal gain. When I'm working at CC as the Office Administrator, I'm financially supported. When I'm posting nights or weekends, I'm not. Either way, I take the condition of the souls to which I'm speaking, very seriously. My own enjoyment comes when I'm fellowshipping with God and/or my fellow believers.

I'm a member of this church I'm in now because God assured me Joseph Smith was one of his prophet, and I also know Gordon Hinckley is one of God's prophets. But to know that they were I had to hear from them, personally, or at least in their own words in writing.

I have tested the words of your "prophets," mostly Smith and Young. I have no reason to believe they are true. I have much reason to believe they were not. I have listened closely to he arguments, pro and con, from current LDS and former LDS. I have no reason to believe Mormonism is of God. I have much reason to believe it is not.

Maybe you won't be able to make any more progress until you listen to one of our Lord's authorized servants who is officially representing our Lord and his church.

You might be surprised at how much I've listened to your "authorized servants." But, I've been spoiled by the quality and honesty of the writings of Christ's Apostles in their letters, on both personal and doctrinal issues. With all due respect, Paul, your "authorized servants" don't hold a candle.

But I don't know, maybe not. Maybe that's not the reason you're not believing me or I am not believing what you tell me. It was just an idea that came to me, for some reason.

Okay.

I think you should simply brace yourself for a major paradigm shift so you'll be ready when you actually see one is warranted, however and whenever God actually does some more work in your life.

If you're referring to me, somehow coming around to believe that Mormonism is true, it cannot and will not happen. The more I read and study Mormonism, and I still do, the more I find unbiblical about it.

Bob: So, Christ has been here all along, being the Head and Cornerstone of His Church, and He is the giver of authority and keys which he himself holds, being of the Melchizedek priesthood. Therefore, He has always BEEN here, holding the Melchizedek priesthood authority and keys. So, NOW tell me how it's possible that, quoting the PMG, With the death of the Apostles, priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth.

By the fact that the apostles held priesthood keys and were presiding priesthood authority figures.

So did Christ, and so was Christ.

With the death of the apostles, the priesthood keys and authority those apostles held was taken from the Earth at least as far as we mortals go.

From what we can read in the Bible, 1) Christ was the only one Who ever had the authority to pass out the authority and keys which He possessed; 2) there is no evidence that any of the Apostles EVER passed on that authority and those keys to anyone else. There is not one verse about it. You believe they did, solely on the word of Joseph Smith.

They're not here among us now, are they? If they are, where are they? Please point to one.

Now, here is where we could get into an area we have yet to go. What ARE the keys. Someone said, I think PacMan, when I asked what the keys were in Mormonism, I was never told WHAT they are, but that there are millions of them (if I remember correctly, maybe it was thousands). So, no one has defined to me what the LDS think the keys are. The question has always been, not what they are, but whether they were taken from the earth.

You dont' seem to realize there is another way to interpret that statement, and correcty interpreting the scriptures is one of the keys to knowing the truth when you can see it.

I agree with you, that correcty interpreting the scriptures is one of the keys to knowing the truth when you can see it. I believe LDS interpret them all wrong. But, no one here gives a rip about MY belief, and view MY interpretations of the scriptures, indeed the interpretations of the scriptures by Christians, to be ALL wrong ("all their creeds an abomination"). Stalemate on THIS subject.

Bob: Based on a site I read, produced by a LDS, tens of thousands of LDS are resigning annually, and over half of the remaining members are inactive. (The site name has "cumorah" in it.)

Even if those figures are true, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is still being led by our Lord and his authorized servants. And even if the whole Church someday apostasizes, again, in the future, I am now here to say that I know this Church is our Lord's church and we are now being led by our Lord through his apostles.

Yes, with all due respect, I'm all too familiar with your "testimony," having had it born to me many times over the years.

Bob: Well, Paul, this should be obvious, I would think. I believe Joseph Smith was a false prophet for starters. Therefore, I don't recognize your church as true, and therefore I don't recognize your "apostles" as apostles.

Imagine what would happen if your found out Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God.

That would change your whole world, wouldn't it?

First, I would have to UNfind out what I already know, which convinces me that there's as much of a chance of my finding out that he was a true prophet, as there is of you finding out that Harry Reid is a conservative Republican.

I didn't know he truly was until I found out that he was and the way I found out was by asking God to tell me.

As I've stated, I don't have to ask God. I know God's Word, and I've studied Smith's teachings and doctrines. No match. Unless, of course, you go back to some of Smith's earliest original teachings, which were canon at the time. The one who was supposed to restore the true gospel, made a few significant changes in his theology over his 14-year tenure.

You can disagree, of course, but I don't follow God based on anything you, or anyone else, has to tell me... unless God also tells me that you are one of God's authorized servants... and he hasn't.

I DO disagree. You certainly HAVE followed God, at least in part, based on the teachings of those who you believe to be the "authorized servants" in your church. And, whether you view me as one or not is irrelevant. Ultimately, you and I are only answerable to Jesus Christ. He and His Words and the words of His Apostles, are what count. If the words of those so-called "authorized servants" from Smith to the present, or even an angel from heaven, have taught anything differently than what Christ and His Apostles taught, they are accursed (Gal. 1:6-9).

Splitting this post off again, at this point. Coming back later with the rest, answered.

[Mark Beesley]

Why would a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Mormon who has their own personal forum for expousing their opinions come to MADB to rehash the same topics they have discussed ad nauseum in their own theatre of operations? Why exactly are you here Bob?

The topic of the Great Apostacy has been thoroughly addressed at Concerned Christians, as has the issue of salvation by grace. The fact that there are very few Mormons available at Concerned Christians to discuss these matters further is a result of the banning policies of Concerned Christians. So, why would the very person who is responsible for the drought of available discourse on their own Board invade this Board to carry on the same discussions that he could have had back home?

Is it arrogance Bob? I know you don't like the suggestion that you are arrogant, but what other reason could there be for you to come here? Maybe pride? Maybe you've realized that you've all but killed the discussion Board at CC by banning so many LDS Christians, but you're too proud to admit it and invite any of them back? Boredom? Well, that's understandable, but are you really paid by Concerned Christians to post at MADB? You're the assistant to the director, right, Jim Robertson? How exactly does posting here assist Robertson?

Really Bob, what is your motivation for being here? You've said nothing new. The only difference between here and CC is that you are nicer here, 'cause if you acted on this Board like you acted at CC, you'd have been banned.

[Paul Ray]

I agree with you on this (that all true believers should be in agreement, basically). I just don't agree that the leadership of the CoJCOLDS are His authorized servants, due do the entirely different doctrines, practices, interpretations of the Bible, claims of Joseph Smith, contradictions in the BoM with the Bible (where the Bible isn't plag...copied), lack of definitive support in the Western Hemisphere for the alleged stories and people in the BoM, etc., etc., etc.

I think it all basically boils down to interpretation of what the apostles of God tell us and/or told us.

If we interpret the scriptures the same way(s) we will agree on our doctrine, practices, and the claims of Joseph Smith, and there will be no contradictions between our interpretations of the Bible and/or the Book of Mormon or anything else that lends support for what is really the truth.

I have found a way for the Book of Mormon and the Holy Bible to be in complete agreement with each other, and that way is by allowing God to tell me how to interpret the scriptures.

Bob: As far as coming together is concerned: when all the dozens of LDS denominations come together, then you you'll have a literal platform on which to encourage such a coming together.

All LDS are in the same church, Bob. We are all part of the one true Church and the one true faith in God.

The fact that we're not in agreeement with those who apostasized from us or the earlier church doesn't mean we are not united as the true Church and/or the true people of God.

Bob: You all believe in the same Smith, the same BoM, most of the same doctrines, but all claim to be the true church on earth to the exclusion of the others, all with true prophets who don't recognize each other's authority.

I don't know where you got the idea that we don't recognize the authority of all true prophets of God.

We are all united on where their authority comes from, if they have it.

Bob: You LDS need to start with your OWN house, and quit taking jabs at the Protestant's numerous denominations.

I'm not taking jabs at anyone. I'm simply stating facts as they are.

All of Christendom isn't in the same church, all together, the way we are in the true church of Jesus Christ.

There can be only one.

Bob: At least most of us get along with each other, in unity of faith and Spirit.

Yeah, most of you do get along, but that's not the same thing as being members of the same church as everyone else.

Bob: That's a claim your multiple LDS denominations can't make.

Hmm. I don't know. I think we all get along with each other at least as well as y'all do.

Bob: You all claim that all the other LDS denominations are apostate.

They aren't "LDS" denominations, Bob, at least not in the sense of being members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true church of Christ on this Earth, and every other church on the Earth is an apostate organization.

Bob: As I jokingly said before, at the rate you Smithites are going after 175 years, after YOUR church has been around for 2,000 years, you'll have as many denominations then, as we have now.

I'm content knowing I'm in the only true church of Jesus Christ that is on this Earth, among mortals.

Bob: I have tested the words of your "prophets," mostly Smith and Young. I have no reason to believe they are true.

Try to focus on understanding the way we (LDS) interpret their words and find them to be in harmony with any and all words from all other prophets of God. If you can find any way for all the words of all prophets to be in complete harmony with each other, you will then know they at least might be true, if you can then harmonize all of them with any one truth.

It works for me.

Bob: I have much reason to believe they were not. I have listened closely to he arguments, pro and con, from current LDS and former LDS. I have no reason to believe Mormonism is of God. I have much reason to believe it is not.

Of course you can find reasons to not believe it, or think that it might not be true.

But if you look for truth, instead of looking for errors, you are more likely to find what is true.

Bob: You might be surprised at how much I've listened to your "authorized servants." But, I've been spoiled by the quality and honesty of the writings of Christ's Apostles in their letters, on both personal and doctrinal issues. With all due respect, Paul, your "authorized servants" don't hold a candle.

Our authorized servants include "yours", you know... at least as far as the true apostles of our Lord go.

We (LDS) believe the apostles of the early church were the true apostles of our Lord, Jesus Christ, and all of the teachings from modern apostles are in complete agreement with all that they told us.

... even though you may not believe that is true.

Bob: If you're referring to me, somehow coming around to believe that Mormonism is true, it cannot and will not happen. The more I read and study Mormonism, and I still do, the more I find unbiblical about it.

I find the complete opposite. I find more and more harmony with the truth, personally.

Bob: From what we can read in the Bible, 1) Christ was the only one Who ever had the authority to pass out the authority and keys which He possessed; 2) there is no evidence that any of the Apostles EVER passed on that authority and those keys to anyone else. There is not one verse about it.

It looks like some of what we are telling you is sinking in a little bit.

The Bible is completely silent on that issue, isn't it.

... so much for thinking you have a Biblical basis to claim them from the apostles.

Bob: You believe they did, solely on the word of Joseph Smith.

No, not solely on what Joseph told us.

When I first found out that Joseph had said that, I didn't just automatically believe Joseph's words. I was a preacher in another church at that time and I had heard a lot of reasons which wouldn't even allow that to be a possiblity.

It took God to convince me that Joseph Smith was one of God's true prophets.

Bob: Now, here is where we could get into an area we have yet to go. What ARE the keys. Someone said, I think PacMan, when I asked what the keys were in Mormonism, I was never told WHAT they are, but that there are millions of them (if I remember correctly, maybe it was thousands). So, no one has defined to me what the LDS think the keys are. The question has always been, not what they are, but whether they were taken from the earth.

At this point, I think you and I agree the keys are what our Lord has and what his apostles had/have.

At this point, I think you and I agree the keys are keys of the kingdom of God.

At this point, I think you and I agree the keys give the keyholders the authority to bind and/or loose whatever they bound and/or loose on Earth so that whatever is bound and/or loosed on Earth is also bound in Heaven.

The keys basically convey the power of God to man while on this Earth.

Those keys convey a LOT of power, IMO. Don't you agree?

I think our goal should be to agree with anyone/everyone who has the keys of the kingdom.

Bob: I agree with you, that correcty interpreting the scriptures is one of the keys to knowing the truth when you can see it. I believe LDS interpret them all wrong. But, no one here gives a rip about MY belief, and view MY interpretations of the scriptures, indeed the interpretations of the scriptures by Christians, to be ALL wrong ("all their creeds an abomination"). Stalemate on THIS subject.

We don't care about your interpretation, if in fact we don't, only because we care more about God's interpretation.

My interpretation of the scriptures isn't just what makes sense to me, personally.

My interpretation of the scriptures is also the interpretation God has given to me, personally.

Why on Earth would I value the opinion(s) of anyone more than the opinion of God, or myself ???

My only real concern is in telling the difference between my own opinion and God's opinion.

Bob: Yes, with all due respect, I'm all too familiar with your "testimony," having had it born to me many times over the years.

Yeah, I know. Yada yada yada. That's just what that you, or that person, believes.

I got that.

Bob: First, I would have to UNfind out what I already know, which convinces me that there's as much of a chance of my finding out that he was a true prophet, as there is of you finding out that Harry Reid is a conservative Republican.

He's really not that far out there, IMO.

Bob: As I've stated, I don't have to ask God. I know God's Word, and I've studied Smith's teachings and doctrines. No match. Unless, of course, you go back to some of Smith's earliest original teachings, which were canon at the time. The one who was supposed to restore the true gospel, made a few significant changes in his theology over his 14-year tenure.

Yeah, I'd say so too. He worked with what he was given until he was given more to work with.

Bob: You certainly HAVE followed God, at least in part, based on the teachings of those who you believe to be the "authorized servants" in your church. And, whether you view me as one or not is irrelevant.

I'm glad we agree on that point.

Bob: Ultimately, you and I are only answerable to Jesus Christ. He and His Words and the words of His Apostles, are what count. If the words of those so-called "authorized servants" from Smith to the present, or even an angel from heaven, have taught anything differently than what Christ and His Apostles taught, they are accursed (Gal. 1:6-9).

I agree with that, totally, if by "differently" you mean anything opposed to the earlier teachings of the apostles..., not including additional information.

Bob: Splitting this post off again, at this point. Coming back later with the rest, answered.

Oh my, er, Oh goodie! Yeah, that's what I meant. I can hardly wait to hear from you again.

[HiJolly]

Why would a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Mormon who has their own personal forum for expousing their opinions come to MADB to rehash the same topics they have discussed ad nauseum in their own theatre of operations? Why exactly are you here Bob?

<snip> The only difference between here and CC is that you are nicer here, 'cause if you acted on this Board like you acted at CC, you'd have been banned.

I like the 'nicer' Bob. Maybe he should shut down the other site, and re-direct everything over here...

HiJolly

[Bob Betts]

Bob: Even if I thought there were Apostles today (which I don't), in the succession of the early Church, they wouldn't be the apostles of your church.

Even if you found out that the succession came from our Lord through Peter, James, and John, themselves?

Come now, Bob.

When you say things like that I get the feeling that you really haven't been listening, again.

This has nothing to do with my feelings, or not listening to what you say, but on my ever-present view of Christ as the same Head and Chief Cornerstone of His Church today, as 2,000 years ago. You all focus on the Apostles as the leaders of Christ's Church, but I focus on Christ as the most important authority over and under His Church (the universal body of all true believers), from then until now. I try to view all of history, Church or otherwise, whether accurately portrayed in books or not, from the perspective of Christ, the Head and Chief Cornerstone. I am in wonder and amazement at God, for how He has preserved His Word and a remnant of His Church (the universal body of all true believers), for over 2,000 years. Despite ALL the MANY religious tares and wolves throughout history. What an incredible survival of Christ's Church despite so many odds against it. Christ is amazing to me. What amazing Headship. What an amazing Chief Cornerstone, top bring His Church through everything the world, including the false religious world, could throw at it. Yet, there are about a billion professing born-again Christians in the world today, and hardly a single corner of the planet, where the gospel hasn't been preached in the past century or two, through Christian missionaries and evangelists.

Paul: I assume you must be counting the apostate groups as being among the true church of Christ. I don't...

Bob: Aaaah, they all think YOUR church is the apostate one. Even your own founding prophet's wife never recognized the Brighamite church as true, but apostate.

And that matters to me... how?

Well, apparently it doesn't. I would think the founding "prophet's wife's actions WOULD mean something, but I must be wrong. It means something to me, as there was no closer witness to Smith's tenure, than his own wife. That makes her opinion rather significant, IMO.

I do feel kinda sad that other people aren't really members of what I know is God's church, but then again, I know they would be if they simply accepted God and his true teachings from his servants.

I wonder what Emma would have thought or said, if someone had said what you just said, to HER. She obviously wanted nothing to do with your church, and helped found what she believed was the true LDS church. That's a fact you cannot argue. Who is a closer witness of Joseph Smith than Emma?

In the end, I think we'll get what God wants to give us based on our choices to either follow or not follow our Lord.

I don't know what you mean, exactly, but I know from the Bible that He wants us to walk in the Truth of His Word. I fail to see how the "truth" of Mormonism can set anyone free, in light of all of it's extra-biblical complexity of rules, laws, commandments, and expectations. The simple gospel I find in the Bible is what has set me free. What your church offers me, IMHO, would feel like bondage to the rules of men, compared to the freedom in Christ to follow and serve Him without all the unnecessary, time-consuming restraints and responsibilities. And, I KNOW Mormons FEEL those pressures, because I've ministered to so many of them, and I also know the stats on anti-depressants and suicides in Utah.

Bob: Of course you don't. But, their feeling is mutual. There are dozens of churches all claiming to be the only true Mormon church on the face of the earth. Yours just happens to be the largest of all of them combined,... if size matters.

It's more than size, Bob.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the original church that God established through Joseph Smith,

The one person closest to your "prophet" by far, would whole-heartedly disagree with you, Paul. She made the loudest statement when she dissed the Brighamites, and founded her own LDS church.

which itself is a restoration of the early church that apostasized.

According to J. Smith, whom I have no reason to believe was credible, and lots of reasons why he wasn't.

Every other church is an apostate group of the true church of Jesus Christ.

What do you think Emma would say to that?

Bob: There's nothing for me to think about. I'm going by the Bible, not my opinion. And I've previously proved my point from those scriptures.

I think you're simply giving your opinion concerning how the words in the Bible should be understood, or interpreted. Everybody does that. Why should I think your interpretation of the Bible is the correct interpretation? I have God to tell me how to intepret his words, and I know how to see who is in agreement with God.

There's three ways to look at this stalemate: 1) you're interpretation of the scriptures is right, and mine is wrong; 2) my interpretation of the scriptures is right, and yours is wrong; 3) we're both wrong.

Bob: God is ultimately in control, and is fully within His right to infringe on our God-given, limited agency, at will.

The only way God "infringes" (if you want to call it that, I would rather say "gets involved") with our God-given agency is by giving us choices to choose from which then result in certain consequences.

PacMan originally used the word "infringe" in his statement, "God cannot infringe on man's agency," not I. So, now, YOU'RE redefining agency in disagreement with PacMan. And, YOU prefer to call it "getting involved." Does God "get involved" in such a way that He infringes opn man's agency. It sounds like you think so, since you said "the ONLY way God 'infringes'..." Therfore, there is a way which God infringes, IYO.

I've learned a lot by God's method. How about you, Bob?

Yes. I've read the Bible to learn about God's methods. He defintely infringes on man's agency. We cannot stop God from doing what He chooses to do to us, or for us. Jonah was a prime example, trying to avoid God's calling on Him, and failing to enforce his own agency against God's. Job was another, who was guilty of nothing, but God gave the devil permission to ruin every aspect of Job's life, in order to make a God-glorifying point in the end.

Bob: Of course it wasn't God Who caused them to make unrighteous choices. Nevertheless, it wasn't the unrighteous people's choice to be destroyed. If they'd had the power of agency to live on in their unrighteousness, they certainly would have.

They did have the agency to live on in their unrighteous choices. They did, and God simply removed them from this Earth. Choice followed by consequences.

God directly and deliberately snuffed out their very mortal existence, with the expressed purpose of ending their wickedness. And, you conclude that they never had their agency infringed upon by God?

Now, logically explain to me how Jonah and Job never had their agency infringed upon by God.

Bob: But, God infringed on their agency, and destroyed them. God can, does and will infringe on man's agency, AT will, if and when it's His will.

But it never will be God's will to infringe on our agency. He simply expects us to face the resulting consequences.

I cannot understand your way of thinking, at all. And, apparently, you're not alone in this type of rationalizing.

Bob: PacMan claimed that God never infringes on man's agency. Biblically, that's absolutely false.

Think again, please. Please, please, please keep thinking. I hope my "wooing" skills are improving.

I never stop thinking.

Next installment to follow.

[Mark Beesley]

Bob,

You might want to minimize your use of the word absolutely. It might help you to appear a little less arrogant.

Very truly yours,

LDSNinja

[consiglieri]

Bob,

You may want to respond to some of the issues I have raised, as well.

It is becoming apparent that your vow to not respond to me has not only already been broken by you, but that it is serving as something of a shield behind which you are hiding from the points I bring up.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (aka Maggie Maelstrom )

[Paul Ray]

I am in wonder and amazement at God, for how He has preserved His Word and a remnant of His Church (the universal body of all true believers), for over 2,000 years.

I am in wonder about how you could honestly make such a statement.

Who are all of the true believers, in your opinion?

Do you consider anybody to be a true believer as long as they believe anything that is true?

I believe LDS, generally, believe everything other Christians believe, generally, concerning what our Lord and his apostles and prophets actually taught.

We (LDS) simply believe that some beliefs of other Christian do not come from the actual scriptures, but instead on personal interpretation(s) of scriptures.

... and we believe more than you do about what some other apostles of our Lord have taught us that you do not accept as the word(s) of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

Bob: Who is a closer witness of Joseph Smith than Emma?

God... as well as all the people who believe what God has told them about Joseph Smith.

Bob: I fail to see how the "truth" of Mormonism can set anyone free, in light of all of it's extra-biblical complexity of rules, laws, commandments, and expectations.

I think your failure to see is a big part of your problem.

It does set me free, personally... in the sense that I know I don't need anyone but God to save me.

Bob: What do you think Emma would say to that?

Not my concern.

She will stand accountable to God for her beliefs, as will you, and me, and everybody else, personally.

Bob: There's three ways to look at this stalemate: 1) you're interpretation of the scriptures is right, and mine is wrong; 2) my interpretation of the scriptures is right, and yours is wrong; 3) we're both wrong.

There is at least one more option that you don't seem to be aware of.

4) We're both right about at least some things, and at least one of us is wrong about some things.

I never have believed that you and/or other Christians don't know some things that are true.

And btw, if you're curious about how I can believe you can be a Christian while not believing you are a member of the true church of Jesus Christ, it basically boils down to what I am referring to as a Christian as well as what I am referring to as the true church of Jesus Christ.

Bob: PacMan originally used the word "infringe" in his statement, "God cannot infringe on man's agency," not I. So, now, YOU'RE redefining agency in disagreement with PacMan. And, YOU prefer to call it "getting involved." Does God "get involved" in such a way that He infringes opn man's agency. It sounds like you think so, since you said "the ONLY way God 'infringes'..." Therfore, there is a way which God infringes, IYO.

If you consider God to be "infringing" on our agency by not allowing us to determine what God's choices will be, then yes, I can agree that God actually does limit our ability to determine what God's choices will be.

... I just wouldn't refer to it as infringing upon or taking away our own agency.

Take the flood in Noah's day, for instance.

God told everybody, through Noah, that he was going to flood the Earth.

No man could use his agency to say something like:

No, God, you will not flood the Earth. I forbid it.

... at least not with any power to affect what God would actually do, or not do.

Those people were given only two choices:

Repent, and get on the ark

or

Get drowned by the flood.

Bob: I never stop thinking.

Me neither.

[Bob Betts]

Bob: As I've already testified, God chose me and wooed me (enticed me), making Himself appealing to me, to bring me to the point in my life when I consented and chose Him (John 15:16). It was initiated by Him. Like a "lover" of my soul, he won me over.

Paul: Hmm. I wonder if our Lord will now woo you through our Lord's apostles?

The Lord's earliest Apostles were not involved in my conversion to Christ. Only God was courting me.

Have you ever seriously tried to learn what they teach, based on what they say, themselves?

I have read extensively, the teachings of Smith. I've read the BoM most of the way through, and refer to it often in counseling. I've read almost all of the D&C, and some of the BoC. I've read some of the PoGP. I've read much of HotC, JoDs and portions of several other books, like Miracle of Forgiveness, A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Gospel Principles, Articles of Faith, True to the Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, etc.

I suppose it still might not matter. There have been those who did and still apostasized anyway.

Something to ponder.

Bob: Why do you think Paul specifically used the analogy of a being "dead"? Why didn't he say, "half dead" or "weak"? What can a dead man do? Do dead men make decisions...about anything...let alone salvation?

Hmm. How does a person know if they are dead or alive?

Good question. Answer: according to the teachings and doctrines of Christ and His Apostles (the gospel), does the person know in his heart and mind, whether he is focussed on the things of God, and following Christ only? Is the truth of Christ and His Apostles paramount in his thoughts and actions? Does he relate to Christ, and both His and His Apostles teachings? Does he view the cross as the most significant point of reference in His salvation, both here now and hereafter? Does he sorrowfully view his sins as reprehensible, and regularly accept God's forgiveness for them? Does he walk in the Spirit, so that he will not fulfill the deeds of His flesh? I could go on, but these are some major indicators of a spiritually alive person.

Are you dead or alive, now?

Very much alive.

If you are alive now, how would I know that?

If you knew me, then you would know by the above indicators I listed.

I think you're alive on some level, but not fully, honestly, otherwise you would see what is true.

According to the scriptures, as well as observable life around us, whether spiritually or mortally, we're either alive or we're not. There's no being "alive on some level."

I believe I DO see the truth, Paul. I fully understand the gospel preached by Christ and His Apostle. I embrace the Bible as His Truth.

Bob: A person DOES choose to be saved, AFTER God makes them alive together with Christ. Who chooses whom first.

God chooses us, and then we choose him. I'm clear on that concept.

Then you should understand that our salvation (being granted everlasting life, as soon as we place our trust in Him and accept His atonement on the cross for our sins) starts with God's agency with pursuing us, before our agency to accept His call to repentance and reconciliation. If God had not pursued me first, making himself appealing to me, I would have never chosen to repent and receive His forgiveness for all my sins, being reconciled to God through Christ's atonement on the cross.

How do you think we choose Christ if not by choosing to accept what Christ tells us is true?

That's absolutely a part of what we're to do. What Christ tells us to do is in the NT. I'm doing it. I'm living it...daily.

Bob: When my wife was not my wife, but simply an attractive young lady across the room at a college-aged Bible-study group, I decided to pursue her as my eventual wife. I chose her. But, I had to woo her, entice her, appeal to her (with more than just my good looks ). Eventually, I won her over, and she chose me, as well. I initiated. We both chose. But, I chose her first. Understand?

Yes, I understand.

Do you think there is anything we or our Lord's apostles can do to help in the "wooing" process?

No. It's a one-on-one with the Lord, just like between a man and a woman. But, I must mix analogies here, to make the point. Switching to Eph. 2:1-10, what can a dead person do, to respond to the courting of the Lord? Until Christ makes a person spiritually alive, during the courting period, that person is never going to pay attention to the One doing the courting. I had to get the attention of (open) my future wife's eyes and ears, to get her to recognize me as the one for her. Likewise, the Lord courts individuals. As He spiritually opens their eyes and ears, as they spiritually awaken, they can THEN make the choice to follow the One who made them alive. It's an easy choice, of course, when the one being courted recognizes that the Lord is definitely the One, and ONLY one, to be with and follow.

Mormonism teaches that Joseph Smith and living leaders should be included in that relationship, as if they belong there, and should be followed along WITH Jesus Christ. That's just wrong. And, please don't tell me they're just there as mouthpieces of God. The "14 Fundamentals of Following the Prophets," the hymns about prophets (Praise to the Man), the pictures, movies, busts and statues of Smith, all add up to him, and the "living prophets" not being just mouthpieces of God.

What did it take for you to accept Christ to the point that you have now accepted him?

I accepted Christ entirely by faith, at the time I first believed. I grew in knowledge and understanding, as I read His Word. As I grew in knowledge and understanding, I also grew in comprehension. But, anyone can gain knowledge. I believe that the gradual understanding and comprehension of what I was learning, was directly the work of the Holy Spirit in me.

You do realize you're not done yet learning all of the truth now, don't you?

I fully understand and comprehend the gospel. There's always peripheral truth to gleen, but salvation and the nature of God are not subjects that I don't have all the truth about, or need to gain more knowledge about. I've thoroughly studied the word of God, and can biblically defend those two essential doctrines.

I think you first have to find some truth and then somehow know that it is true.

Well, I've found the truth about Christ in the Bible, and I'm satisfied that what I know about the Savior and His atonement, through the scriptures, is complete and comprehensive.

What can we do to facilitate that process?

I don't know that you can.

Bob: I'm trying to help you see, but (no offense intended) it's not an easy task. But, I'm praying for you.

Heh, I feel the same way, and I am praying for you too, my brother Bob.

Does this help at all?

I seriously doubt it. I'm praying that you'll come to know the truth as I see it, while you're praying that I will come to know the truth as you see it. I know that I know too much about Joseph Smith to ever see him as true.

Bob: ... remember that Christ is a very jealous Husband, and rightfully so, as any human husband would and should be. Therefore, don't bring anyone else into your life to try to share in that one-on-one relationship.

He isn't the type of husband that gets jealous if we have other friends, Bob.

You need to give me a little more credit for understanding Mormonism, than you do. We all know thar Joseph Smith is much, MUCH more than just a friend to you.

But don't worry, you will never replace my husband.

Husband? Your name is Paul and you have a husband?

But I take it that the statement that you are careful was OK.

Yes, I'm careful.

[Paul Ray]

Paul: Do you think there is anything we or our Lord's apostles can do to help in the "wooing" process?

Bob: No. It's a one-on-one with the Lord, just like between a man and a woman.

Then what is the point of you and I continuing our conversation?

If you don't believe I can do anything to help you, and our Lord's apostles also can't do anything to help you...

OIOW, if you believe only God can actually "woo" you or any other person to God...

What is the point of you and I continuing our conversation with each other, or talking with other people?

Maybe all you are doing is getting to know me, personally, and I am only getting to know you, personally?

Maybe?

It's been fun getting to know you better, personally, Bob.

Paul: But don't worry, you will never replace my husband.

Bob: Husband? Your name is Paul and you have a husband?

You were talking about how Christ is the husband of the Church, remember?

... doesn't that mean every member of the Church has Christ as his/her husband?

Heh, you seem tired, Bob. Have yourself a very nice and good day.

[Bob Betts]

I have looked for evidence of a partial apostasy only in the church. Finding a pure Evangelical like church preserving essential Christian doctrine until the reformation would interest me. Such a group must not accept the Pope. It could not believe in a ministerial priesthood. It must believe in grace alone. It must believe in the Bible only as the final authority in faith, and practice. It must teach the creedal Trinity without teaching any non-creedal Trinity ideas regarded as heresy by Evangelical's. Anything this pure faithful church would teach must not conflict with modern Evangelicalism.

I believe you're looking for the remnant I've spoken of, that the Bible speaks of. But, such a group of Christians, large or small, scattered around the "old world," would probably not make it into the history books.

Paul told the Thessalonians, 4:11 "Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, 12 so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody."

If Christians were following that advice from Paul, they were living a lot like I live today. And, I'LL certainly never make into any history book (thank God).

[consiglieri]

I believe you're looking for the remnant I've spoken of, that the Bible speaks of. But, such a group of Christians, large or small, scattered around the "old world," would probably not make it into the history books.

That has got to be the best argument from silence I have ever heard!

Of course nobody has ever heard of this remnant of true Christians.

They didn't make it into the history books.

So the absence of evidence is evidence of presence?

Bravo!

Our revels now are ended: these our actors

As I foretold you, were all spirits, and

Are melted into air, into thin air:

And, like the baseless fabric of this vision

The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces,

The solemn temples, the great globe itself,

Yea, and all which it inherit, shall dissolve,

And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,

Leave not a rack behind.

I know it is goading you to repress you desire to respond to me.

As your psychoanalyst, I suggest that you just get it off your chest.

All the Best!

--Cognoscente

[Bob Betts]

Anyone who has any doubts about an apostasy needs to run not walk to the nearest bookstore and get Voting About God in Early Church Councils by Ramsay MacMullen.

By definition, it could be said that there was a falling away from faith. That's not the question. The question is, where's the evidence that there was a complete apostasy of authority and priesthood keys, where they were taken from the earth and the Church organization became ineffectual.

If anyone can read this book and think God was behind the power plays, rioting and killing there is no hope for them. MacMullen estimates 25,000+ deaths in the two and a quarter centuries following Nicaea. (p 56). And it was the competing groups who were killing each other not the ruler. The scandal is that this is ignored..."the evidence denied being so abundant and so strident." (p58).

But, a remnant of quiet, faithful Christians had to have existed, not found in history books. That's my biblically-based assumption.

I think this is the problem with apostasy debates....the information has not been used even by scholars. I don't think in the current climate that EVs can depend on a whitewash much longer...as this new book demonstrates.

Without reading it, I'm confident that nothing is said about a remnant of Christians who avoided entanglement with the worldly religious systems of every generation.

The burden is theirs to demonstrate how this debacle can be attributed to God .. it is not ours to demonstrate that theology and doctrine was turned over to mob rule.

I don't attribute any debacles to God. The burden is yours to demonstrate that God did not have a remnant of true believers, who avoided entanglement with the world's religious systems, resulting in Christ's authority and keys being taken from the earth for 1,700 years. Since Christ claimed to be here always, even to the end of the earth, then apparently you won't be demonstrating that any time soon.

[Bob Betts]

Unbelievers are not sheep. They're goats. "Sheep" is analogous to those people who have been saved by the blood of the Shepherd. The "sheep" who do the works of the Father are His sheep (Eph. 2:10). Goats are the ones who do not do the works of the Father, because they don't belong to Him. What is done that is not of faith in Christ is sin (Rom. 14:23).

Bob,

This begs two questions:

1) Are all unbelievers rejected to the Lord's left-hand because He didn't see fit to allow many of them to even HEAR of Him?

Why would you think that? I have no doubt in the justice and fairness of God at judgement time.

Wouldn't that make Him a respecter of persons?

Nnnno.

2) Who then, are His lambs?

Lambs are young sheep. I'll make an educated guess, then, that His lambs are young followers of the Shepherd.