Universal Apostasy Or Not?

[Zemah]

His response was several days and pages ago. I'm still reading back on page 36. I was gone for a couple days and got back about page 40. I have 4 pages left to be caught up.

You are a diligent fellow.

[owl]

Bob Do LDS make their children earn their birthday and Christmas gifts?

You should start a new thread on this. Don't derail it with works vs faith.

As I said pages ago, some agreement on the original Church doctrine and on the need for authority is necessary before we can hope to convince Bob that an apostasy occurred. I tried to start a separate thread back then, but since Bob wants to answer all the posts here, and since he still has a backlog, I gave up and just joined in trying to pin down some agreement on ECF dotrine. If we can do that, then we can look for changes as evidence of apostasy.

[Bob Betts]

Bob, If following a prophet or an apostle is the same as worshiping them, then by extention are YOU worshipping the Bible by your devotion to it?

No, because I'm no more devoted to the physical book, than I am the cross beams of the physical cross. I recognize the highest significance of Christ's cross, as Paul and Peter described its significance; and I recognize the highest significance of the message throughout the Bible. LDS, however, have made Joseph Smith an icon to the point of idolatry, IMO. And, that constitutes worship.

[Bob Betts]

Bob

Do you really want to know how the OT people treated the prohpets? THose that believed, vs those that didnt.

I tell you right now those that didnt believe probably killed these men. Hmmm That sounds familiar doesnt it?

You're changing the subject, regarding the LDS treatment of Joseph Smith. The only reason I brought up the OT prophets was to contrast how they were not lifted up to be worshipped in any way, as Joseph Smith is lifted up and worshipped in your church. As I see your church's treatment of Smith, it's idolatrous worship. You can deny it if you wish, but my mind is made up, based on the observations I've made and listed.

[Doctor Steuss]

No, because I'm no more devoted to the physical book, than I am the cross beams of the physical cross. I recognize the highest significance of Christ's cross, as Paul and Peter described its significance; and I recognize the highest significance of the message throughout the Bible. LDS, however, have made Joseph Smith an icon to the point of idolatry, IMO. And, that constitutes worship.

An icon that is neither fallible nor complete. Some LDS have elevated him into something that he wasn't, which is unfortunate and much like your elevation of the Bible into something that it isn't.

[Bob Betts]

But the ECF's prepared and selected the Biblical texts, and you accept their word on that alone. So indirectly, yes, you should answer for them.

No, that's your opinion. My opinion is that God prepared and selected the Bible texts. I believe God is responsibile for the canon. I believe in the absolute sovereignty and agency of God to have manipulated those men who decided on the NT canon, as a puppeteer would manipulate puppets on strings. My faith is entirely in God, that He gave us the Bible. I have no doubt that what we have is inerrant, because God made it so.

So, I accept no man's word as completely inspired of God, unless it fully agrees with God's chosen, inspired mouthpieces of the Bible. Therefore, the ECF's writings may be an interesting read. But, I would never determine biblical, doctrinal truth by anything they said. The only ones to be trusted for that, are the inspired, biblical writers themselves. Just as you LDS want people to go to the source for what you believe, I go to the source for what I believe. The Bible is my only source for what I believe. Christ's OT prophets and His NT Apostles are the only reliable and truly inspired sources of truth, IMHO. I trust no other men or sources. None have come even close to proving themselves worthy of such a high calling.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You're changing the subject, regarding the LDS treatment of Joseph Smith. The only reason I brought up the OT prophets was to contrast how they were not lifted up to be worshipped in any way, as Joseph Smith is lifted up and worshipped in your church. As I see your church's treatment of Smith, it's idolatrous worship. You can deny it if you wish, but my mind is made up, based on the observations I've made and listed.

Bob, I was not the one who "change" topics. You brought it up, I was just responding. I dont think you can argue your postition form the words that are in the bible for they are silent on how believeing people of Isreal treated the prophets. And for the record as I see it JS is not worshipped in my church, and you can deny it all you want if you wish,and my mind is made up too, based on my observations, he is revered but not worshipped.

[Bob Betts]

An icon that is neither fallible nor complete. Some LDS have elevated him into something that he wasn't, which is unfortunate and much like your elevation of the Bible into something that it isn't.

I have not witnessed that just some LDS have elevated him into something that he wasn't. I said, that the LDS church teaches people to idolize Joseph Smith. It's the church which promotes the carvings, pictures, the hymn, the movies and books, causing people to memorialize and worship Smith in demonstrable ways. The current movie at the VCs makes him out to be someone he was not. It's a false history. But, it's faith-promoting, with the obvious purpose to get people to love and adore Joseph Smith. It's unprecedented in its intent, completely contrary to anything seen in the Bible.

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

[Doctor Steuss]

[...]

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

Project much?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

Thank you for telling me what I believe. I wouldnt ever do it to you Bob.

Project much?

I 2nd this.

[Bob Betts]

Bob: So, I put no stock in Joseph Smith or anything he ever said. I do not believe he was sent by God.

That much is obvious to me, personally.

Bob: Nor did Christ's authority and priesthood ever leave the earth, since Christ was always ON the earth, in Spirit.

CFR for any scripture stating God was always on the Earth in Spirit without ever leaving, at least temporarily.

I did once already, but here it is again.

Matt. 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Bob: As I've already quoted Him saying to the disciples before His ascension, "Lo, and I will be with you always." I take Him at His word on that.

Without adding anything to what is written in the Bible, you can only honestly state that our Lord said that to the people who were with him when he ascended into heaven. You can't honestly state that he was speaking to you and/or other people who weren't there.

That's arguable. Why would he tell the ones who were there, that he would be with them to the end of the world. Obviously, the disciples weren't going to live to the end of the world.

Bob: Since He was here, so was His authority, and His priesthood, and the keys, even though the Apostles were all dead.

The fact that our Lord may have been here with His authority and His priesthood and the keys, even though the apostles were all dead, wouldn't necessarily mean you or any other people had His authority and His priesthood and or the keys that He had/has.

But, what it does mean is that the authority and priesthood keys were never taken from the earth as the PMG manual claims. What Jesus said to the disciples takes the whole LDS issue with the Apostles out of the equation. No matter what you want to believe about which Apostles had what priesthood keys and authority, whether or not they could use them, whether or not Christ gave them permission to use them, everything we've previously discussed on the subject becomes peripheral to the undeniable fact that Jesus said that HE would be with the disciple to the end of the world. Well, the end of the world hasn't happened, yet; so Jesus must still be here with the priesthood keys and authority. Therefore, they never left.

Bob: I repeat the problem which you have with these comments of yours: there are dozens of other Joseph Smith-believing churches around, all claiming to be the one true Mormon church, and all believing YOURS is the apostate one, being the false church of the Brighamites. Even Joseph Smith's own widow, the first lady of the original Mormon church, disavowed Brigham Young AND polygamy and helped to start a new Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, called the Reorganized LDS, now CoC. Smith's own son, eventually became the prophet, and evidence in LDS archival history affirms that Smith named His son as his successor.

... and I repeat... so what?

What does what those other people believe have to do with what God has told me, personally?

We do agree on some points, but not everything.

But, those other devotees of other LDS churches, to Smith, the BoM and their only true church on the face of the earth, would ask the same exact question: "What does what those Brighamites believe have to do with what God has told me, personally"?

No doubt, Emma Smith would have echoed the same response: "What does what those Brighamites believe have to do with what God has told me, personally, through my own late husband, the prophet, that our son was to be his successor"?

According to the first lady of the Mormon church, you guys are the apostates.

Bob: I don't believe that setting up a Church with Apostles and prophets is conforming to the pattern of the Holy Bible.

It is if our Lord and his apostles were/are the ones who are doing the setting up !!!

But you don't have to believe that if you don't want to.

Bob: The pattern of the Holy Bible, is that as the Apostles each died, replacements were not always picked.

No, according to the pattern of the Holy Bible, our Lord and his apostles appointed other apostles.

It is only where the Bible is silent that we see a cease to our Lord's apostles.

Well, since you LDS and I agree that there came a time when their was a death of the Apostles, without Apostles being apointed to take their place, then how am I incorrect in my statement that "replacements were not always picked." If they had been continuously picked, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Bob: If the pattern of the Holy Bible was to keep the succession of Apostles going, Christ would certainly have arranged for that to happen. He didn't.

I think you're assuming our Lord would continue to call apostles even when nobody was worthy.

You're right. I am assuming that because of what I see in the NT. The ones Jesus called, when he first called the disciples and said, "Come and follow me," were not called because they were worthy. They had to be made worthy as Christ discipled them. And, one of them was not the least bit worthy, as he was the son of perdiction. Saul was not worthy, as he was killing and torturing Christians for a living. Christ made a habit of calling the unworthy, and making them worthy, except for Judas.

He won't force anyone to be worthy, for one thing.

That's not true. He made the disciples worthy, and he made Saul worthy. None of them started out worthy of their calling.

... and maybe he thought it was better to wait until later.

Well, I don't built my theology on "maybe." I take what Christ and His Apostles said and did.

Bob: You have your reasons why, and I have mine. And mine has nothing to do with an apostasy of priesthood authority and keys, since Christ was always here with His priesthood authority and keys.

You are entitled to your opinion.

I'd just like to see you acknowledge that we (LDS) have a Biblical foundation for our beliefs.

I cannot do that because I see no biblical basis for the priesthood authority and keys being taken from the earth. First, because the Bible doesn't teach it; second, because Christ promised to always be with us to the end of the world; third, because there has always been a remnant from the begining of time that God has preserved, and the time following the deaths of the Apostles would be no exception.

Bob: ...for me to even accept your church as a true church, I'd have to believe Smith was true. I don't.

... and if you did accept Joseph Smith, you would.

I suppose that's logical. But, it could never happen. I know Joseph Smith from reading about him in LDS books. I don't believe him as a prophet, and I don't like him as a person. Knowing what I know, I would not want to hang out with Joseph Smith. I don't like his character, his claims or his teachings. He was not even an honest man, and I wouldn't have wanted to be one of his buddies.

Gotta run for now.

[LifeOnaPlate]

I know Joseph Smith from reading about him in LDS books. I don't believe him as a prophet, and I don't like him as a person. Knowing what I know, I would not want to hang out with Joseph Smith. I don't like his character, his claims or his teachings.

It's ok, you wouldn't enjoy being where Joseph will be, anyway.

Some might suppose that it would be a great blessing to be taken and carried directly into heaven and there set down, but in reality that would be no blessing to such persons; they could not reap a full reward, could not enjoy the glory of the kingdom, and could not comprehend and abide the light thereof, but it would be to them a hell intolerable, and I suppose would consume them much quicker than would hell fire. It would be no blessing to you to be carried into the celestial kingdom, and obliged to stay therein, unless you were prepared to dwell there (Brigham Young, JD 2:221).

[Bernard Gui]

It's the church which promotes the carvings, pictures, the hymn, the movies and books, causing people to memorialize and worship Smith in demonstrable ways.

Been a Mormon 60 years in 6 states and 5 foreign countries. Never seen a Mormon worship Joseph Smith.

All the ones I have known worship God. Nothing wrong with memorializing someone. The Lutheran Church is named after whom? Just down the road is St. Peter and Paul's church complete with statues of the brethren. Over in the big city is St. Mark's cathedral (not RC). Those folks don't worship St. Mark. What is the ratio of hymns about Joseph Smith to hymns about Jesus in the LDS hymnal? My Jewish friends hold Abraham and Moses in very high esteem.

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

How do you know what he is to us all? Tell me what he is to me, OK?

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

No doubt, Emma Smith would have echoed the same response: "What does what those Brighamites believe have to do with what God has told me, personally, through my own late husband, the prophet, that our son was to be his successor"?

According to the first lady of the Mormon church, you guys are the apostates.

Then you believe what she said about the translation of the Book of Mormon!

You're right. I am assuming that because of what I see in the NT. The ones Jesus called, when he first called the disciples and said, "Come and follow me," were not called because they were worthy. They had to be made worthy as Christ discipled them. And, one of them was not the least bit worthy, as he was the son of perdiction. Saul was not worthy, as he was killing and torturing Christians for a living. Christ made a habit of calling the unworthy, and making them worthy, except for Judas.

As he did Joseph Smith. So said those who knew him best. We know nothing about the personal lives of Andrew, Philip, and Bartholomew. We cannot pick through their writings nor those of Thomas, James, James, and Matthias. When you say they were made worthy, what evidence do you have? Exactly what do you know about Judas the brother of James? What references can provide of their stability, their faithfulness, the inerrency of their utterances, the nature of their characters?

That's not true. He made the disciples worthy, and he made Saul worthy. None of them started out worthy of their calling.

Do you mean to say that they had no choice in the matter? They became worthy against their will?

Bernard

[Dale]

I am Community of Christ/RLDS. Yes i am in the same church Emma Smith was in. Many LDS have thought the claim Joseph Smith appointed his son was fabricated. Joseph Fielding Smith was very critical of our historical basis for that claim. But even if Joseph Smith had appointed his son to LDS Joseph Smith 3rd was in apostasy. LDS may practice common consent differently than my people, but Joseph Smith 3rd never submitted to that process. So he could never could have become President of the LDS Church because to LDS he preferred the authority of men, and not from the true apostles and prophets of the church. Not saying LDS are right, but they have as much right to know they are right as we do.

As to Joseph Smith lying. I don't see him as a habitual liar. He is reported to have lied about his non-involvement in polygamy. Some RLDS are still devoted to defending him against the charge he lied. The JSFP section of the http://www.restorationbookstore.org has Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy online to read. Officially my church has admitted he was involved and see no reason defend him. But one lie out of the many truth's he told is not proof he lied about everything.

I have been flipping though some book's very critical of my belief's. I am studying the grace and works issue, so was reading Letters To A Mormon Elder on that topic. One of them I am slowly re-reading is the Jesus christ/Joseph Smith book by Floyd Mcelveen. The book has in the back the film by the same name. I am not persuaded by such materials to think less highly of Joseph Smith. I suppose it's because i feel i can apply the Barean test to his teaching's and i mostly agree with him. (Acts 17:11) I think some of his Nauvoo theology was a bit speculative, but i still respect the man. I don't think Joseph Smith was a bad man for being a polygamist.

[Bob Betts]

It's the church which promotes the carvings, pictures, the hymn, the movies and books, causing people to memorialize and worship Smith in demonstrable ways.

Been a Mormon 60 years in 6 states and 5 foreign countries.

Been a follower of Jesus Christ for 37 years, wherever I've been, at any given time.

Never seen a Mormon worship Joseph Smith.

I've seen a great deal of Joseph Smith worship, as I've described above.

All the ones I have known worship God.

Then I believe they serve two masters.

Nothing wrong with memorializing someone.

Mormons do a great deal more then memorialize his name.

The Lutheran Church is named after whom?

Mormons do a great deal more than admire Joseph Smith.

Just down the road is St. Peter and Paul's church complete with statues of the brethren.

I believe such a practice is just as wrong as what LDS do. Some people pray for dead people, others pray to dead people. Doesn't make it right.

Over in the big city is St. Mark's cathedral (not RC). Those folks don't worship St. Mark.

Whatever. I believe from everything I've seen, heard, read and watched, that Mormons worship Joseph Smith.

What is the ratio of hymns about Joseph Smith to hymns about Jesus in the LDS hymnal?

I don't care about the ratio. One hymn of praise to Joseph Smith, doesn't lesson the fact that the very nature of that one hymn is the worship of Joseph Smith. And, that's what matters.

My Jewish friends hold Abraham and Moses in very high esteem.

That may very well be. But, I doubt they carry on the form of worship of those OT patriarchs, which LDS carry on for Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

How do you know what he is to us all? Tell me what he is to me, OK?

I'm not going to say what he is to any one person. My statement, all along, has been to identify the LDS church as the promoter of the worship and adoration of Joseph Smith. What Smith is to LDS, in general, is apparent to me as I have observed how LDS do treat Smith as so much more than just a mouth-piece of God, unlike any biblical prophet or Apostle. I have seen the busts, the statues, and the multiple renditions of pictures of him. I've read the "faith-promoting" books by him and about him. I've read the words to Praise to the Man, and observed a theater full of LDS stand and sing that hymn of praise to Joseph Smith. And, I've seen the current VC movie. That's how I can say that Smith is not a mere mouth-piece of God to you all.

[Bob Betts]

Joseph Smith is not a mere mouth-piece to you all.

Thank you for telling me what I believe. I wouldnt ever do it to you Bob.

I didn't tell you what you believe. I told you what I've observed that LDS do, with regard to their view of Smith. My observation isn't obscured. Everything I've listed as evidence of worship of Smith, is true. You can deny that all those things don't amount to worship, and I will simply disagree. That doesn't mean that I'm telling you what you believe, in the slightest.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I didn't tell you what you believe. I told you what I've observed that LDS do, with regard to their view of Smith. My observation isn't obscured. Everything I've listed as evidence of worship of Smith, is true. You can deny that all those things don't amount to worship, and I will simply disagree. That doesn't mean that I'm telling you what you believe, in the slightest.

Ok If this is your Idea of worship than I disagree with it. so this is pointless then. Sorry I miss understood you. Note I dont think the majority of the public share your defintion of what wroshipp means.

[Mark Beesley]

Been a follower of Jesus Christ for 37 years, wherever I've been, at any given time.

You are always following in Christ? Even when you are engaged in unChristlike behavior? Or are you saying you are perfect? Or are you saying you can engage in unChristlike behavior and still follow Christ? Or maybe your statement was just too broad?

I've seen a great deal of Joseph Smith worship, as I've described above.

Your problem is you think you get to define what worship is, and then tell us we worship Joseph Smith. Sorry Bob, it doesn't work that way.

Then I believe they serve two masters.

Again, an over-broad generalization, taking a scriptural reference out of context, and twisting it for cheap effect. You work for money, right? And you get paid by "Concerned Christians", right, so do you serve Jesus too? Oh, so you serve two masters? See how that works?

Mormons do a great deal more then memorialize his name.

Yep.

Mormons do a great deal more than admire Joseph Smith.

Yep.

Whatever. I believe from everything I've seen, heard, read and watched, that Mormons worship Joseph Smith.

As long as you define worship the way you want to, you can bring yourself to believe anything you want to as well.

I don't care about the ratio. One hymn of praise to Joseph Smith, doesn't lesson the fact that the very nature of that one hymn is the worship of Joseph Smith. And, that's what matters.

This has got to be the dumbest argument today: A song about someone equals worship!

What Smith is to LDS, in general, is apparent to me as I have observed how LDS do treat Smith as so much more than just a mouth-piece of God, unlike any biblical prophet or Apostle.

How do you know how biblical prophets and apostles were venerated by the believers? Were you there? Do you know what songs they sung? You know nothing.

That's how I can say that Smith is not a mere mouth-piece of God to you all.

You can say that because you have an internet connection, a keyboard, and no compunction about distorting reality. Good for you.

And I'm the hypocrit? Right!!

[Doctor Steuss]

Me have formed opinion. Me opinion right. You say opinion wrong. You in first-hand position to say opinion wrong. Me not care. Me right. Me agenda most important. Me no like facts when donâ??t fit agenda. Me form opinion. Me right.

Me use crosses to show poster ratings. That different. That not worship of object. That not making mockery of holy symbol. Me always right and holy. You evil. I not idolatrous. You idolatrous. Me right, you wrong.

[Paul Ray]

I didn't tell you what you believe. I told you what I've observed that LDS do, with regard to their view of Smith. My observation isn't obscured. Everything I've listed as evidence of worship of Smith, is true. You can deny that all those things don't amount to worship, and I will simply disagree. That doesn't mean that I'm telling you what you believe, in the slightest.

I have no problems admitting that I follow Joseph as one of God's prophets, Bob, even if I am admitting that fact to someone who thinks there is something wrong with that idea.

I believe you simply don't know that Joseph Smith was one of God's true prophets, and your lack of knowledge concerning that fact may limit you from discovering the true nature of God and God's work.

I suggest that you talk with God about everything... with enough faith to believe God will answer you, personally... instead of simply relying on your own ideas and what other people (other than God) have told you that you agree with.

Your intellect and your understanding of God and the Bible, alone, will not help you to truly know God.

[Mark Beesley]

Me have formed opinion. Me opinion right. You say opinion wrong. You in first-hand position to say opinion wrong. Me not care. Me right. Me agenda most important. Me no like facts when donâ??t fit agenda. Me form opinion. Me right.

Me use crosses to show poster ratings. That different. That not worship of object. That not making mockery of holy symbol. Me always right and holy. You evil. I not idolatrous. You idolatrous. Me right, you wrong.

ROTFLMAO!!!

[Lightbearer]

You do not know of what you speak, the truth is you envy Joseph Smith and the followers of the restoration of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. I will quote to you what I (and most LDS) think of Joseph Smith:

(D&C 135:3-7) "Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. In the short space of twenty years, he has brought forth the Book of Mormon, which he translated by the gift and power of God, and has been the means of publishing it on two continents; has sent the fulness of the everlasting gospel, which it contained, to the four quarters of the earth; has brought forth the revelations and commandments which compose this book of Doctrine and Covenants, and many other wise documents and instructions for the benefit of the children of men; gathered many thousands of the Latter-day Saints, founded a great city, and left a fame and name that cannot be slain. He lived great, and he died great in the eyes of God and his people; and like most of the Lordâ??s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood; and so has his brother Hyrum. In life they were not divided, and in death they were not separated!

When Joseph went to Carthage to deliver himself up to the pretended requirements of the law, two or three days previous to his assassination, he said: â??I am going like a lamb to the slaughter; but I am calm as a summerâ??s morning; I have a conscience void of offense towards God, and towards all men. I SHALL DIE INNOCENT, AND IT SHALL YET BE SAID OF MEâ??HE WAS MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD.â?â??The same morning, after Hyrum had made ready to goâ??shall it be said to the slaughter? yes, for so it wasâ??he read the following paragraph, near the close of the twelfth chapter of Ether, in the Book of Mormon, and turned down the leaf upon it: And it came to pass that I prayed unto the Lord that he would give unto the Gentiles grace, that they might have charity. And it came to pass that the Lord said unto me: If they have not charity it mattereth not unto thee, thou hast been faithful; wherefore thy garments shall be made clean. And because thou hast seen thy weakness, thou shalt be made strong, even unto the sitting down in the place which I have prepared in the mansions of my Father. And now I . . . bid farewell unto the Gentiles; yea, and also unto my brethren whom I love, until we shall meet before the judgment-seat of Christ, where all men shall know that my garments are not spotted with your blood. The testators are now dead, and their testament is in force.

Hyrum Smith was forty-four years old in February, 1844, and Joseph Smith was thirty-eight in December, 1843; and henceforward their names will be classed among the martyrs of religion; and the reader in every nation will be reminded that the Book of Mormon, and this book of Doctrine and Covenants of the church, cost the best blood of the nineteenth century to bring them forth for the salvation of a ruined world; and that if the fire can scathe a green tree for the glory of God, how easy it will burn up the dry trees to purify the vineyard of corruption. They lived for glory; they died for glory; and glory is their eternal reward. From age to age shall their names go down to posterity as gems for the sanctified.

They were innocent of any crime, as they had often been proved before, and were only confined in jail by the conspiracy of traitors and wicked men; and their innocent blood on the floor of Carthage jail is a broad seal affixed to â??Mormonismâ? that cannot be rejected by any court on earth, and their innocent blood on the escutcheon of the State of Illinois, with the broken faith of the State as pledged by the governor, is a witness to the truth of the everlasting gospel that all the world cannot impeach; and their innocent blood on the banner of liberty, and on the magna charta of the United States, is an ambassador for the religion of Jesus Christ, that will touch the hearts of honest men among all nations; and their innocent blood, with the innocent blood of all the martyrs under the altar that John saw, will cry unto the Lord of Hosts till he avenges that blood on the earth. Amen."

That is what I think of the Prophet Joseph Smith, I do not pray to him or partake of a sacrament in his name, I was not baptized in the name of Joseph Smith. False piety is not very becoming and treating the Lord's anointed servants in the manner you have and slandering the Latter-day Saints by insisting that we worship him is a libel and an abomination. I know exactly who and what you are, you are an "accuser of the brethern" and if it were up to me I would close this thread and ban you from this board. But I do not have that authority, so I must be content with the following promise:

(D&C 64:11) "And ye ought to say in your heartsâ??let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds."

[Paul Ray]

I have the idea that Bob will now feel satisfied in thinking that he has responded to everything we had to tell him and all the while, and even now, he still believes everything he believes.

Sorry, Bob.

Maybe someone else better than us can help you.

[Bob Betts]

Bob: Then why did Christ allegedly tell SMITH that.

He didn't. Read again where I outlined what our Lord actually said to Joseph.

After all this time, I couldn't find your outline. But, I know what Smith claimed that Christ told him in the "official version" of the vision.

Bob: It appears as if you're back-pedaling from the very blunt, ALL-condemning statements which Smith claims Christ emphasized to him.

There weren't all condemning, at least not IMO.

I believe you're interpreting those words incorrectly.

I simply don't know how to interpret all as being anything less than...all. All is all, not most or everything except. All means all.

Bob: Don't you believe what Christ allegedly told Smith?

Yes. I just don't believe your interpretation of what our Lord told Joseph.

I interpret all to mean all.

Bob: If you do, then all our Churches must still be wrong, all our creeds must still be an abomination, and all our professors still corrupt.

The fact that they once were wouldn't necessarily mean they still were, but even so, I don't believe they are wrong about everything they believe, and I don't believe our Lord ever said that they were.

Are you saying that you think non-LDS Churches have moved closer to the LDS church in whatever they were previously wrong about (though we have no idea what was wrong with Churches back then)? Are you saying we've adjusted our "creeds" to be less wrong than "all wrong"? Are you saying the professors today are less corrupt than they were 188 years ago (though we have no idea what they were corrupt about)?

I just have no idea what it is you're using to measure how non-LDS Churches are better today than they were when Smith was 15 years old.

Bob: I doubt that you would view our Protestant Churches as having become less wrong, our creeds less abominable, and our professors less corrupt. At least not according to what I've heard on THIS site.

I believe many of them are making a lot of progress, actually.

Who knows, maybe someday they will accept everything we (LDS) believe.

No Bible-based Christian Church will ever believe that Smith was a prophet, or that the BoM is actual history, or that your church is the only true church.

Bob: I know you mean well and you're sincere. But, I don't believe your church or apostles have anything to offer this biblicist.

We are in agreement more than you seem to realize.

We are in a lot less agreement than YOU seem to realize.

Bob: I've experienced your "church." It was not enjoyable.

Try it again.

Why? What would change the third time around?

Bob: You will be very disappointed. Last week, I completed 3 weeks of the most amiable discussions with some "elders." They put on the full press to get me to pray about Smith and the BoM. I did not succumb. They ended future discussions because I would not do so. We parted on the friendliest of terms.

I hope you will try it again, later, very soon.

Why? I will still never pray about Smith, the BoM or your church.

Bob: I do not believe there was such an apostasy. I don't believe the priesthood authority of Christ ever left the earth, because He has always been here, as He promised the disciples. I believe the foundation of Christ's Church, built upon the OT prophets and Apostles and Christ as the Cornerstone, was permanently laid for all generations. I don't believe that every time an Apostle died, that part of the foundation went away also, and needed to be replaced by another living Apostle. If Christ, the Cornerstone and Head of the Church, who was always here according to His promise to the disciples, wanted an Apostolic succession of living Apostles, He would have made it so. He didn't.

I hope I've at least given you some optional ways to interpret the scriptures.

I only know of one way to interpret God's Word: exegetically, using the principles of hermeneutics. There are no other optional ways to interpret scripture.