Universal Apostasy Or Not?

[owl]

Huh? It is? Were does it say that it is an immediate result of believing? I must have missed it. Care to point it out exactly were it says that it is immediate?

In one sense Bob is right. We believe that when you are born of the water and the spirit you become spiritually alive. Spiritual death was separation from God. When you feel the Holy Ghost, you are spiritually alive. You then have, in a small measure, the kind of life God has. Since the LDS definition of Eternal Life is the kind of life God has. You must experience a sample of Eternal Life when moved upon by the spirit.

[Aquilifer]

This thread is starting to make eternity look short!

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

In one sense Bob is right. We believe that when you are born of the water and the spirit you become spiritually alive. Spiritual death was separation from God. When you feel the Holy Ghost, you are spiritually alive. You then have, in a small measure, the kind of life God has. Since the LDS definition of Eternal Life is the kind of life God has. You must experience a sample of Eternal Life when moved upon by the sirit.

It is still erronious to say that you are saved immediatly upon having hope or believing. I agree you taste the HG, but no were can I find this idea that once you believe you are saved and it is a cased closed deal set in stone.

[consiglieri]

This thread is starting to make eternity look short!

And hell look good.

[charity]

What do you think the 10% of loving, Christ-like, literate Christians would do for their 90% illiterate brethren? I think they would make copies of the letters of the Apostles, and circulate them around the known world where Christianity had sprouted. Then I think the 10% of loving, Christ-like, literate Christians would also read those letters to their illiterate brethren wherever Christians were. I have NO reason to believe that the illiterate were all ignorant of the Apostle's teachings and the true doctrines of God. Just because they couldn't read, doesn't mean they couldn't know.

I am sure you are aware of the sea change that occurred with the availability of the scriptures to the populace. And I hope you are aware of the reason it was so important. When a few people in a church congregation have acces to a copy of the scriptures, or Paul's letters or whatever, and only they can read that writing, then it all passes through that one individual, with editorial notes, with interpretations, etc. And those who cannot read are bound to take the word of the one reader.

Do you refer to your Bible often? How much would you know if you had to find a person to read to you, and then try to remember what was read without getting some of your own ideas into the memory of what you read. And how would you know that the person reading wasn't throwing a little extra in to make it agree with his ideas?

[Mark Beesley]

If we've discovered anything throughout this thread, it's that you (LDS) and I have fundamental disagreements about virtually everything relevant to spiritual beliefs and doctrines. From the nature and function of God to the nature and function of man. From the Church to salvation. The more we converse, the more we will continue to discover how far apart we really are.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong ALL THE TIME?!?!?!

Love,

LDSNinja

[Zakuska]

In one sense Bob is right. We believe that when you are born of the water and the spirit you become spiritually alive. Spiritual death was separation from God. When you feel the Holy Ghost, you are spiritually alive. You then have, in a small measure, the kind of life God has. Since the LDS definition of Eternal Life is the kind of life God has. You must experience a sample of Eternal Life when moved upon by the sirit.

Hmmm... I always thought becoming "spiritual alive" was when your eyes where opened...

[Paul Ray]

Hmmm... I always thought becoming "spiritual alive" was when your eyes where opened...

Yeah, but we're not talking about who is and who isn't born again, specifically.

We're just talking about the way to be born again, and what it means to be born again.

Bob actually agrees with our teaching, and that is very interesting to me, personally.

[Paul Ray]

If we've discovered anything throughout this thread, it's that you (LDS) and I have fundamental disagreements about virtually everything relevant to spiritual beliefs and doctrines. From the nature and function of God to the nature and function of man. From the Church to salvation. The more we converse, the more we will continue to discover how far apart we really are.

Yes, but just because we have disagreements about virtually everything relevant to spiritual beliefs and doctrines doesn't mean we disagree about every particular point concerning our spiritual beliefs and doctrines.

The sooner you get past the desire to try to convey the idea that everything we believe is wrong, the closer we can then begin to become as brothers in the gospel.

And btw, here is something I think you missed earlier, from post #528.

What I said in my last post was that the apostasy was not â??completeâ? in the sense I think you meant it.

We still have vestiges of the earlier church, such as words from some apostles that are recorded in our New Testament, so I donâ??t think it is proper to say there was a â??completeâ? apostasy, if by â??completeâ? you are thinking there isnâ??t anything leftover from the earlier church.

What we didnâ??t have were apostles to establishâ?¦ and correctâ?¦ local leaders, until the restoration God accomplished by the work of Joseph Smith.

Try looking at it this way for a moment:

If the earlier church was still on the Earth in the days of Joseph Smithâ?¦ and Iâ??m not saying it was or wasnâ??t at that pointâ?¦ which one do you think Joseph should have joined? Which one do you think had the fullness of the gospel and was led by authorized apostles of God with the authority to establishâ?¦ and correctâ?¦ and removeâ?¦ and replaceâ?¦ local leaders in all of the churches of God everywhere on the Earth then... while also appointing new apostles and general authorities over the whole Earth as the need for more apostles and general authorities arose?

We (LDS) claim that our Lord told Joseph Smith to join none of the churches in his day because they were all wrong (meaning they were all wrong to some extent, I believe). That their creeds were an abomination in our Lordâ??s sight, and those professors were all corrupt (meaning they all taught truth mixed with error, I believe). That they drew near to him with their lips, but their hearts were far from him (meaning they were like the Pharisees and Sadducees, I believe). That they taught for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they denied the power thereof (meaning they denied the actual power of God and what God could accomplish through them, including the power to reveal new revelation to them, I believe).

Nowhere in that statement did our Lord say there werenâ??t still some remnants of either doctrine or people who remained from the earlier church, and nowhere did our Lord say the Holy Bible is useless to help others see what the earlier church once was.

When people start teaching their own ideas as the doctrine of God, without accepting the idea that some other people have the actual authority of God to correct them, we see divisions upon divisions of people forming so-called churches of God with nobody thinking God has the power to bring everyone into unity... and that power of God to bring people into unity with God is exercised through the priesthood of God that is righteously exercised by Godâ??s authorized servants, aka apostles of our Lord, Jesus Christ.

At least the Catholic church seems to be aware that there needs to be some kind of general authority figures, NOW (they didn't have any for several centuries after the death of the apostles), but they are not following the pattern of our Lordâ??s earlier church. They have changed some ordinances and come up with some new doctrines that are not in harmony with what we can see in the Holy Bible.

At least some other Christians see the value of trying to conform to the pattern of the Holy Bible.

Why donâ??t you just bring all the good that you have and add it to all the good that we have by joining you and your whole church with us and our church? I donâ??t think any LDS would ever try to tell you that you are completely wrong about everything. You simply need to be willing to learn more than you know now, from the people who have the authority to teach you, aka our Lordâ??s apostles.

God bless you in your journey.

Enjoy the experience.

If you're not a member of our Lord's church before this year is over, I'll be very disappointed with you, personally, Bob.

p.s. And btw, you might also enjoy reading 'Bishops and Apostles in Early Christianity', written by Hugh Nibley.

p.p.s. I'd like to explain that statement you quoted in the PMG. Who knows, maybe this will help you:

After the death of Jesus Christ, wicked people persecuted the Apostles and Church members and killed many of them... OIOW, wicked people, including Jews, persecuted and killed many of the apostles and true disciples of the true God that some of them claimed to worship.

With the death of the Apostles, priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth... OIOW, when the apostles died, the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority of those apostles who died were taken from the Earth along with them.

The Apostles had kept the doctrines of the gospel pure and maintained the order and standard of worthiness for Church members... OIOW, the apostles maintained order and the standard of worthiness for Church members and kept the doctrines of the gospel pure despite any/all efforts by other people who taught, perhaps unintentionally, corrupt forms of true gospel doctrines.

Without the Apostles, over time the doctrines were corrupted, and unauthorized changes were made in Church organization and priesthood ordinances, such as baptism and conferring the gift of the Holy Ghost.... OIOW, without apostles to maintain order in the Church and the standard of worthiness for Church members and the purity of true gospel doctrines, the true gospel doctrines became corrupted and unauthorized changes were made in Church organization and priesthood ordinances, such as doctrines concerning who can baptize another person and who can confer the gift of the Holy Ghost upon another person, as well as how to perform those ordinances.

Now to sum it up: Without apostles to continually maintain the church and all true gospel principles, by personally visiting and/or writing letters continually, the field was open and ready to be corrupted by people who were laboring in God's vineyard... some of whom probably have had only the best of intentions while thinking that their way was the best way to do things.

Adieu, Bob.

Adieu.

[Bob Betts]

This thread is starting to make eternity look short!

[Tsuzuki]

Bob, someone's calling you.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208307590

[Bob Betts]

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.

Before the six days of creation, God foreknew what he was going to create. That foreknowldedge didn't mean that what he would create already existed. Foreknowledge is always just foreknowledge, in it's context. Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. Not only did God foreknow Jeremiah before He formed him in the womb, God ordained him a prophet unto the nations before He formed him in the womb. These are demonstrations of foreknowledge, just as the word is used. Not a veiled assertion that we pre-existed. There is not one word of teaching about pre-existence in the entire Bible. Only Christ pre-existed, and that, as God: Matt. 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

And, BTW, Jer. 1:5 is also another blow against man's unlimited agency. PacMan said that God would never infringe on man's agency. However, when God ordains, it WILL be done. There is no use in man ever attempting to fight God's ordination, because God's will (agency), will always pre-empt man's. Jeremiah was ordained to be a prophet, and that was that.

-

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.

To properly interpret Rom 8:29, keep the gospel in context, and include verse 30.

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

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

Why did Christ come in the first place? To deal with man's sin which entered the world through one man, Adam. To deal with man's sin, Christ died on the cross. Only Christ was qualified for that purpose because, as a human, he was sinless, spotless, and blameless. The result of His death for our sins, was to conform the predestined believers to His sinless, spotless, blameless, spiritual image. Those He predestined, He also called, justified and glorified. How do I know the purpose was to conform us to His sinless, spotless, blameless, spiritual umage? Go back to the beginning of the chapter:

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

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

My intent was to keep it simple. I'm more than happy to go through the entire chapter with you if you like.

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.

1) Eph. 1:5 does not say, future tense, "predestined to be adopted" as you put it. Paul, speaking to already believers, puts it in the past tense, "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will." It's important that you keep the tenses straight. They're important.

And, the predestination was according to Whose will? Ours? No, God's will to predestinate us, was according to His good pleasure. Whose initial choice is it? John 15:16 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.

2) That is not to say that God does not know what each person will choose. He knows who will and who will not choose Him. If God had forknowledge of Jeremiah and his ordination as a prophet before He formed him in the womb, what person who was ever been formed in the womb by God, did He not have foreknowledge of His future? 2 Tim 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

John 10:14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. Do you think that though God knows the future of the world, He has no idea who His sheep will be in the future, whether you or I would be one of His sheep? Of course He does. Based on that knowledge, those that He knows will choose Him, are the ones who have clearly been predestined unto adopted by Christ, to Himself.

-

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.

What do you think the inheritance is, spoken of in verses 11, 14 and 18? None other than eternal life in the Kingdom of God/heaven: John 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Matthew 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

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.

I reject McConkie's definitions as unbiblical. He quotes an LDS scripture for Predestination, and for Foreordination, he quotes a piece of a verse in 1 Peter. McConkie does not build a biblical case for either of his definitions.

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.

Biblically speaking, no LDS has ever shown me where anyone has the power to change their own lives or change how they live, according to the will of God, BEFORE God saves, sanctifies, and seals them with His Spirit. Who can walk in God’s Spirit, before the Holy Spirit with the power to walk in holiness, is dwelling in them?

[Bob Betts]

Bob, someone's calling you.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208307590

Obviously, I haven't run away. so, what are you talking about, with your link back to post #137?

[Bob Betts]

I think I recall responding to this, but just in case . . .

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.

In none of these verses does Paul say a word about following prophets or Apostles. In the Phillipian verse, he clearly is referring to himself alone as an example to be followed. The word in the KJV is ensample, meaning the same thing, and is used again at the end of the Thessalonians passage you quote. In both cases, Paul is obviously referring to his Christ-like behavior and conduct, as you read the passages in context.

In the Corinthian passage, Paul is again referring to his Christlike behavior and conduct. But, you have to include verse 17 to the context to see that: 17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.

So I do not think you can deny the fact that at least Paul admonishes the Saints to follow him as he follows Christ.

Not in anyway, shape or form, to "following" as is defined by your 14 Fundamentals of Following the Prophets.

That is the duty of all true prophets, to be an example to those whom they are called to minister to.

Example, yes. To be followed, as defined by the LDS church, no. There is no teaching in the Bible to follow prophets, or any other man who holds a leadership office.

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.

Of course, there are no such verses, any more than there are any instructions anywhere in the Bible to follow prophets or any other man who holds a leadership office, in the way LDS define "follow" when it comes to prophets.

[owl]

If we've discovered anything throughout this thread, it's that you (LDS) and I have fundamental disagreements about virtually everything relevant to spiritual beliefs and doctrines. From the nature and function of God to the nature and function of man. From the Church to salvation. The more we converse, the more we will continue to discover how far apart we really are. Bob Betts @ Nov 20 2007, 08:42 PM

I think we actually agree on a lot.

Would you agree that Christ ordained Peter, James, John, and the other Apostles and gave them authority to direct the church, to ordain bishops and other local leaders, and to make sure the doctrines taught locally were correct?

Supposing questions arose about how to baptize, or who had authority to baptize, or even if you actually needed to be bapized at all to be saved. Would you agree that while there were Apostles on earth leading the Church, if there were any such questions about doctrine, the members or even the leaders would not have gotten together to debate and vote in order to decide? Wouldn't they have just asked the Apostles?

Don't you think the Church organization definitely differed between the time of the Apostles and the time of the pre-Catholic church councils?

[Bob Betts]

If we've discovered anything throughout this thread, it's that you (LDS) and I have fundamental disagreements about virtually everything relevant to spiritual beliefs and doctrines. From the nature and function of God to the nature and function of man. From the Church to salvation. The more we converse, the more we will continue to discover how far apart we really are. Bob Betts @ Nov 20 2007, 08:42 PM

I think we actually agree on a lot.

Would you agree that Christ ordained Peter, James, John, and the other Apostles and gave them authority to direct the church, to ordain bishops and other local leaders, and to make sure the doctrines taught locally were correct?

Yes, but this isn't a doctrinal issue.

Supposing questions arose about how to baptize, or who had authority to baptize, or even if you actually needed to be bapized at all to be saved. Would you agree that while there were Apostles on earth leading the Church, if there were any such questions about doctrine, the members or even the leaders would not have gotten together to debate and vote in order to decide? Wouldn't they have just asked the Apostles?

What you describe is not the pattern I see in Acts or the Apostles epistles, no. I don't read about anyone taking any votes on doctrineal issues. I would not be surprized if the Apostles were asked for clarifications, because of the infiltration of tares and wolves, bringing their false ideas into the Churches. That would appear to be the most constant battle. The battle over truth.

Don't you think the Church organization definitely differed between the time of the Apostles and the time of the pre-Catholic church councils?

1) I don't read about any central, controlling, Church "organization" in the NT. Church buildings or offices as we know them, didn't appear until after Constantine. I see Christ heading His Church from within all true believers. The scriptures tell us that WE are the Temple of God/Christ/the HS, in which He resides and accomplishes His will. It was not the formal entity that it later became under Constantine, and continues to this today, whether Catholic, Protestant, LDS or other. The early Church simply met in people's homes daily, according to Acts.

2) Yes, I see continuous differences throughout the 2,000 years of the Church, whether the body of all true believers, or the formal organizations. The constant of tares and wolves in Christ's Church, has caused every generation to wrestle with beliefs and doctrines and authority. And, LDS are no exception to Catholics and Protestants. But, for me, the other constant is the Biblical canon, ordained of God, not of men. My faith in God relies on the truth of the Bible, regardless of the infiltration of tares and wolves, and organizations. IMO Joseph Smith was just another wolf, as Jesus described in Matt. 7:15-20, and the CoJCoLDS is just another organization that, when I view them both in light of biblical truth, I can disregard them. That doesn't make all the Christian denominations/non-denominations/organizations perfect. But, in the world of Bob Betts and wife, we've chosen one of the most biblically-based Churches in our area. We could have chosen from many others. But, we would never choose an LDS church, because we do not believe they are biblically based. We do not believe Joseph Smith was who he claimed to be. Nor do we believe any of his other claims.

So, regardless of any incidental things we may find agreement on, overall we will never come to agreement. Agreement must start with Joseph Smith. If he's not who and what he claimed to be, then nothing else we discuss, matters.

Owl, you are one of the nicest and most respectful LDS on this Board, which I have had the privilege to converse with. Thank you. I know you are looking for common ground. I'm truly sorry, that ultimately we are permanently divided over Joseph Smith.

[carpeomnius]

Joseph Fielding Smith has this to say on the topic.

"...the Lord, of necessity, has kept authorized servants on the earth bearing the priesthood from the days of Adam to the present time; in fact, there has never been a moment from the beginning that there were not men on the earth holding the Holy Priesthood. (Moses 5:59.) Even in the days of apostasy, and apostasy has occurred several times, the Lord never surrendered this earth and permitted Satan to have complete control. Even when the great apostasy occurred following the death of the Savior's apostles, our Father in heaven held control and had duly authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil power. These servants were not permitted to organize the Church nor to officiate in the ordinances of the gospel, but they did check the advances of evil as far as the Lord deemed it necessary..."(Answers To Gospel Questions, 2:45, Joseph Fielding Smith.)

Joseph Fielding Smith also said:

There has never been a time from the beginning when the influence of the Spirit of the Lord has not been active on the face of the earth. Our Eternal Father has never surrendered the human family completely to the power and influence of Satan. It is true that the time came when there was no one left in mortal life with authority to organize and set in order the kingdom of God. However, there never has been a time when the inhabitants have been entirely subject to Lucifer and his followers without some means of inspiration...During the dark period after the death of all but one of the apostles and their rightful successors holding the divine authority, there was no person on the earth who was authorized to restore the Holy Priesthood. Nevertheless, during these dark years there were many righteous persons endeavoring to keep the commandments of the Lord to the best of their ability and understanding. Mormon in writing to his son Moroni made this enlightening statement: "For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God." (Moroni 7:16.) This must have been true even in the dark days of universal departure from the way of eternal life. However, after false teachings and organizations had been introduced, the time came when the pure gospel of Jesus was not found among men on the earth; false ordinances and doctrine had been substituted for the divine truth in all parts of the earth; and the Holy Priesthood had been replaced by false creeds and a spurious order of priesthood. This does not argue or prove that the influence of the Lord had disappeared and that the earth had been surrendered entirely to Satan. In the Doctrine and Covenants we have this divine revelation given by the Prophet Joseph Smith: "Thus saith the Lord; for I am God, and have sent mine Only Begotten Son into the world for the redemption of the world, and have decreed that he that receiveth him shall be saved, and he that receiveth him not shall be damned--And they have done unto the Son of Man even as they listed; and he has taken his power on the right hand of his glory, and now reigneth in the heavens, and will reign till he descends on the earth to put all enemies under his feet, which time is nigh at hand--I, the Lord God, have spoken it; but the hour and the day no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor shall they know until he comes. Wherefore, I will that all men shall repent, for all are under sin, except those which I have reserved unto myself, holy men that ye know not of." (D&C 49:5-8.)

[carpeomnius]

I think we actually agree on a lot.

Would you agree that Christ ordained Peter, James, John, and the other Apostles and gave them authority to direct the church, to ordain bishops and other local leaders, and to make sure the doctrines taught locally were correct? Yes, but this isn't a doctrinal issue.

What you describe is not the pattern I see in Acts or the Apostles epistles, no. I don't read about anyone taking any votes on doctrineal issues. I would not be surprized if the Apostles were asked for clarifications, because of the infiltration of tares and wolves, bringing their false ideas into the Churches. That would appear to be the most constant battle. The battle over truth.

1) I don't read about any central, controlling, Church "organization" in the NT. Church buildings or offices as we know them, didn't appear until after Constantine. I see Christ heading His Church from within all true believers. The scriptures tell us that WE are the Temple of God/Christ/the HS, in which He resides and accomplishes His will. It was not the formal entity that it later became under Constantine, and continues to this today, whether Catholic, Protestant, LDS or other. The early Church simply met in people's homes daily, according to Acts.

2) Yes, I see continuous differences throughout the 2,000 years of the Church, whether the body of all true believers, or the formal organizations. The constant of tares and wolves in Christ's Church, has caused every generation to wrestle with beliefs and doctrines and authority. And, LDS are no exception to Catholics and Protestants. But, for me, the other constant is the Biblical canon, ordained of God, not of men. My faith in God relies on the truth of the Bible, regardless of the infiltration of tares and wolves, and organizations. IMO Joseph Smith was just another wolf, as Jesus described in Matt. 7:15-20, and the CoJCoLDS is just another organization that, when I view them both in light of biblical truth, I can disregard them. That doesn't make all the Christian denominations/non-denominations/organizations perfect. But, in the world of Bob Betts and wife, we've chosen one of the most biblically-based Churches in our area. We could have chosen from many others. But, we would never choose an LDS church, because we do not believe they are biblically based. We do not believe Joseph Smith was who he claimed to be. Nor do we believe any of his other claims.

So, regardless of any incidental things we may find agreement on, overall we will never come to agreement. Agreement must start with Joseph Smith. If he's not who and what he claimed to be, then nothing else we discuss, matters.

Owl, you are one of the nicest and most respectful LDS on this Board, which I have had the privilege to converse with. Thank you. I know you are looking for common ground. I'm truly sorry, that ultimately we are permanently divided over Joseph Smith.

The truth of the matter is the Church of Jesus Christ is a formal organization...not an informal body of believers. In New Testament times the Church had a formal method of entry, baptism, and a formal method of exit, excommunication. Whether or not there existed buildings called "Churches" is beside the point. The early Christians couldn't establish those buildings because of the severe persecution they were under. They had to meet privately in people's houses to avoid persecution. Had there been no persecution how do we know but that the Apostles would have established regular meetinghouses for worship services? You should check out the book "The Inevitable Apostasy" by Tad R. Callister.

It was the Savior who initiated the formal organization of the Church when he ordained the twelve Apostles. (See Mark 3:14.) He also appointed seventy men to assist the Apostles in their work. (See Luke 10:1.) Shortly after his death, the Apostles perpetuated the number in their quorum by choosing Matthias to replace the fallen Judas. (See Acts 1:23â??26.) They also enlarged the organization of the Church when they chose seven men to aid in the temporal affairs of the Church. (See Acts 6:1â??7.)

The Bible does not record all of the officers in the Church and their specific duties at the time of the Savior, nor does it provide much detail on how that organization developed as the Church grew and spread. But we see ample evidence from these scriptures that there was a formal organization, with men authorized to perform specific duties within the Church.

God bless you.

P.S. Have you checked out the topical guide entry labeled "Church organization"? There are so many scriptures supporting the fact that Jesus established a formal organization and not just an informal body of believers. Here's a link

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/tg/c/93

[Mark Beesley]

Heh, heh, heh . . .

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Heh, heh, heh . . .

Uh ok. Im now confused.

[Zemah]

IMO Joseph Smith was just another wolf, as Jesus described in Matt. 7:15-20, and the CoJCoLDS is just another organization that, when I view them both in light of biblical truth, I can disregard them.

How is it that this â??wolfâ?? you call Joseph Smith was slaughtered by â??sheepâ?? (believers like yourself that he was a false prophet) crashing through the door of his voluntary captivity?

You apply Matthew (7:15-20) incorrectly. Whereas your interpretation places the saints of His Church as the rotten fruit of Joseph Smith, I place the produce of doubt and denial as the bad fruit of the tree. Rottenness stems from doubting true prophets of God be them Joseph Smith, Gordon B. Hinckley, all those between these two, myself, or any priest performing in his calling to be as Christ.

In spite of the warnings, Matthew also provides a path to believe in prophets in chapter 10:40-41. But denial in the restoration prophesied in the NT, denial of a Church receiving living revelation, and denial of the apostolic priesthood again on the earth under the direction of Christ in heaven, contradicts the biblical description of His Church.

Paul taught that His Church would have apostles and prophetsâ?¦

â??And to some, his gift was that they should be apostles; to some, prophets; to some, evangelists; to some, pastors and teachers; so that the saints together make a unity in the work of service, building up the body of Christ. In this way we are all to come to unity in our faith and in our knowledge of the Son of God, until we become the perfect Man, fully mature with the fullness of Christ himself.â? (Ephesians 4:11-13)

So a church without these things is a false church.

Failure to believe these things leaves the â??faithfulâ?? in an apostasy outside of a â??unity in our faith and in our knowledge of the Son of Godâ?. We cannot become â??the perfect Manâ? in â??the fullness of Christâ? without the Church.

Your knowledge of the Son of God is different from my knowledge of the Son of God because you doubt and deny the word of God that teaches of Him in the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants. These and the words of modern prophets are the building blocks of a man's growing maturity in faith.

Christ does not build upon doubt and denial. These are the way of Lucifer our unholy brother. Neither did Christ say that we should preach doubt and denial as you have promoted to the saints on this board throughout this dissertation.

The Holy Ghost does not visit the fruit of the tree of doubt and denial, except to remove them from that doubt, except to pluck the fruit out of denial. Neither will the tree of doubt and denial produce good fruit because the Holy Ghost cannot nourish that tree, but surely it will be â??cut down and thrown in the fireâ?.

Look back it the things the saints have taught you here; many have visited you in the Spirit of Christ.

Christ lives in hope and truth. My hope is that all who doubt the word of God that came through Joseph Smith (even because of his imperfections) will repent and judge the word not the man. My truth and testimony is that denial brings destruction upon the soul.

Zemah

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Were has Bob been. It has been a while.

[usmc513]

Good Morning,

Not that I speak for Bob, but he's been pretty busy back at the CC board. Just thought you'd like to know. Merry Christmas.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Good Morning,

Not that I speak for Bob, but he's been pretty busy back at the CC board. Just thought you'd like to know. Merry Christmas.

Thanks. Merry Chirstmas to you and Bob. Tell him when he gets a chance to come on over.

[Mark Beesley]

Were has Bob been. It has been a while.

I think there may have just been too many LDS Christians challenging him, and he must have felt he could only ignore so many of us before it became suspicious. He made a valiant stand for his position, but in the end, his house was built on sand. It was all he could do to keep his head above ground . . .