S. Tanner On Bible Answer Man

[juliann]

As a christian living in Utah you might become a little bit annoyed when people talk about "The Church" or "The Priesthood" or "The Gospel". For example many Christians would recognize the term "The Church" as referring to The Body of Christ not to their specific denomination.

That assumes that everyone is part of that body so it is somehow different. There is still a sharp dividing line between their "us" vs "them". I just don't get this and I see this used as if it was says something about Mormons that it does not say about any Christian. What the heck difference does it make if you draw the line around some denominations instead of Mormons? The line is still there!

[Dale]

She is just mad that she can't get everyone to agree to the truth of her terminology. She certainly sounds as if she was claiming her religion owned the exclusive right to define words. I don't see LDS people as claiming such a right.

[Aquilifer]

PS, I find that the Tanners were modern pioneers who opened the eyes of Thousands to the "Meat" of Mormonism. I for one am thankful for their efforts. While I may not agree with ALL of what they have written. Most of their research has been impecable. As has been demonstrated by numerous other posters in this thread.

Oh really? Where? Your references are as bad as hers.

I am sure Brigham is proud to see his teachings brought back to prominent light by one of his predecessors in there [sic] original form.

I am puzzled as to how Sandra can violate the space-time continuum.

I am also glad to see a thread formed where she can be seen in her true light.

Surely you haven't read too closely?

As for the whole Mormons and copyright words issue. Don't LDS believe they have the divinely "restored" meanings? This implies that everyone else has got it wrong, AND since it was "restored" it is also implied that you had it first.

I don't see how that shows that Mormons have a 'copyright' to any of it. We have our own terms, and we use them in our own manner. Perhaps the other side would benefit from trying to understand Mormon terminology as Mormons actually use it instead of insisting on telling Mormons what they actually believe. See, e.g., the howls of protest from the Religious Right greeting Mitt Romney's statement that Christ is his personal savior. Stop accusing us of double-speak.

I think it is blatently clear that LDS claim "authority" in interpreting the words and phrases above all the rest of the world and it's many religions.

You're confusing the authority to exercise the priesthood of God with the ability to read a dang dictionary.

She is just mad that she can't get everyone to agree to the truth of her terminology. She certainly sounds as if she was claiming her religion owned the exclusive right to define words. I don't see LDS people as claiming such a right.

Well put.

[coolrok7]

As a Christian (Protestant, of the Lutheran Misouri Synod tribe) I can agree that there is not one person who is not guilty of getting things wrong at times. One certainly has the right to express one's views. When it comes to the "truth" and who has it, it can be said that we all will live and die by what we believe.

At the judgment we will each have to give an account of what we believed. I'm confident that I alone will be responsible for whom I believed. While others certainly can affect what I believe, I make my own choices as to what is valid for me.

Here's the rub, I believe in esence, after reading both sides of the fence (Mormons vs. non-Mormons) that Mormonism at is core, is anti-christian, while claiming to be the "only" true Christian Church. To those who are not Mormon, it can sound rather offensive:

only true and living church on the face of the whole earth. (D&C 1:30)

I wonder how many of us are aware of one of the great religious phenomenon of the ages, one that is now sweeping through Protestant Christianity, as only one other thing has ever done in the whole Christian Era. . . .let me first identify the original heresy that did more than anything else to destroy primitive Christianity.

This first and chief heresy of a now fallen and decadent Christianity- and truly it is the father of all heresies-. . .pertains now to the nature and kind of being that God is. . . .a spirit essence called the Trinity. . . .The adoption of this false doctrine about God effectively destroyed true worship among men and ushered in the age of universal apostasy. . . .

This second heresy-and it is the prevailing delusion and mania that prevails to this day in the great evangelical body of Protestantism-is the doctrine that we are justified by faith alone, without the works of the law. . . .It is the doctrine that we may be born again simply by confessing the Lord Jesus with our lips while we continue to live in our sins.

I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof. (POGP, JOSEPH SMITHâ??HISTORY, 1:19)

If Mormonism is true than all those who profess to believe in God should believe the way Mormons do. I agree with that. However, like those who are considered to be anti-Mormon, logically speaking, will be in opposition giving their reasons as to why one shoud not be.

The validity of the argument should be what determines what one should believe. Jesus said that where "two or three are gathered in His name, there I will be also". We should act as such. I think we at times can all do a better job at representing what others really do believe.

I'm of the persuasion that Mormons aren't any different then ayone else when it comes to misrepresenting what others believe. I do my best to do make corrections when it is pointed out to me that I'm doing that. I hope you all here could do the same.

[juliann]

Here's the rub, I believe in esence, after reading both sides of the fence (Mormons vs. non-Mormons) that Mormonism at is core, is anti-christian, while claiming to be the "only" true Christian Church. To those who are not Mormon, it can sound rather offensive:

Well, nothing offensive about that! I believe that Lutherans are anti-Christian at core (I mean, look at what Luther tried to do to the Bible!) while claiming to be the "only" true Christian Church. Your church just includes denominations other than Mormons. There is no distinction there at all and you would have to have a blindfold on to not see that as long as you exclude you are proclaiming a truth that must be adhered to. Do you exclude self-professed Christians from your "true" Christianity? You just did.

The hypocrisy is breath taking no matter how courteously it is packaged.

[coolrok7]

Well, nothing offensive about that! I believe that Lutherans are anti-Christian at core (I mean, look at what Luther tried to do to the Bible!) while claiming to be the "only" true Christian Church. Your church just includes denominations other than Mormons. There is no distinction there at all and you would have to have a blindfold on to not see that as long as you exclude you are proclaiming a truth that must be adhered to. Do you exclude self-professed Christians from your "true" Christianity? You just did.

The hypocrisy is breath taking no matter how courteously it is packaged.

I stated my belief. Why is that hypocricy?

[Dale]

I find the exclusive Christian claim's of certain churches far worse than the one true church claim. I don't grant Sandra Tanner is a Christian, but Mormon's are not. I find the Evangelical claim certain churches shouldn't be dignified with the title of Christian very offensive. If I can live with that definition of Christian's Evangelical's can live with the one true church belief of the restoration. I will try not to get offended if Evangelical's will try not to get offended over that belief.

My Community of Christ/RLDS has a Trinitarian view of God. Hank Hannegraff has admitted such in a handout he produced on my church. The LDS and Community of Christ are two seperate denominations of Latter Day Saints. Though LDS don't use a large "D" in Latter-day Saint.

I have questions and doubts about the Trinity. One is that in order for the person's of the Trinity not to be persons they have to be three dumb person's. Only three intelligent person's can think about eachother as three human's can think about eachother. That's partial poly-theism even if they somehow co-exist as the same being. The creedal writers knowing this to avoid teaching poly-theism compared God to the three person's of an actor in a play portrayed via face masks. The latin word persona idea of person's was how they explained the person's of God. I think the three are smart not three dumb pretend person's of an actor in a play.

Without that definition of person's the New Testament idea of God doesn't harmonize with Isa. 43:10. I don't look at John 17:21,22, and see Jesus meaning anything like persona. I think taught a true oneness of purpose in the Gidhead. You can't be one in purpose with yourself.

[coolrok7]

I find the exclusive Christian claim's of certain churches far worse than the one true church claim. I don't grant Sandra Tanner is a Christian, but Mormon's are not. I find the Evangelical claim certain churches shouldn't be dignified with the title of Christian very offensive. If I can live with that definition of Christian's Evangelical's can live with the one true church belief of the restoration. I will try not to get offended if Evangelical's will try not to get offended over that belief.

My Community of Christ/RLDS has a Trinitarian view of God. Hank Hannegraff has admitted such in a handout he produced on my church. The LDS and Community of Christ are two seperate denominations of Latter Day Saints. Though LDS don't use a large "D" in Latter-day Saint.

I have questions and doubts about the Trinity. One is that in order for the person's of the Trinity not to be persons they have to be three dumb person's. Only three intelligent person's can think about eachother as three human's can think about eachother. That's partial poly-theism even if they somehow co-exist as the same being. The creedal writers knowing this to avoid teaching poly-theism compared God to the three person's of an actor in a play portrayed via face masks. The latin word persona idea of person's was how they explained the person's of God. I think the three are smart not three dumb pretend person's of an actor in a play.

Without that definition of person's the New Testament idea of God doesn't harmonize with Isa. 43:10. I don't look at John 17:21,22, and see Jesus meaning anything like persona. I think taught a true oneness of purpose in the Gidhead. You can't be one in purpose with yourself.

Christian is an exclusive term. One cannot be a Buddhist, Islamist, Christian Scientist and a Christian all at the same time. hile certain beliefs are common, the end result is different.

[coolrok7]

I'm not personally trying to make anyone not Christian if in fact they are. I make my determination s on content of belief contrasted with Scripture (to me only the bible). Be bacl later, I'm off to Disneyland.

[Dale]

Evangelical's do not match early Christian orthodoxy. Grace alone was popularly rejected by the early Christian's. If Evangelicals can claim to be Christian inspite of unorthodoxy they can learn to share the title with everyone else. The reformation was a new religion that did not get the church back to orthodoxy. I don't consider Evangelical's orthodox, so how can I grant them recognition as exclusively Christian?

The Trinity idea has it's major flaw as I just pointed it out. The idea I can't be a Christian unless I accept that doctrine as essential is a rule made out thin air. I am willing to affirm the idea as one idea of God, but it's not an unquestionable doctrine.

If the church only went into partial apostasy which some remained faithful? I don't see the reformation as the faithful remnant. Saying a church is partially apostate is like saying a woman can be partially pregnant. The reformation either reformed the church, or it created a new apostate Catholic Church.

[Notquitewetyet]

Evangelical's do not match early Christian orthodoxy. Grace alone was popularly rejected by the early Christian's. If Evangelicals can claim to be Christian inspite of unorthodoxy they can learn to share the title with everyone else. The reformation was a new religion that did not get the church back to orthodoxy. I don't consider Evangelical's orthodox, so how can I grant them recognition as exclusively Christian?

The Trinity idea has it's major flaw as I just pointed it out. The idea I can't be a Christian unless I accept that doctrine as essential is a rule made out thin air. I am willing to affirm the idea as one idea of God, but it's not an unquestionable doctrine.

If the church only went into partial apostasy which some remained faithful? I don't see the reformation as the faithful remnant. Saying a church is partially apostate is like saying a woman can be partially pregnant. The reformation either reformed the church, or it created a new apostate Catholic Church.

AMEN!!!

[coolrok7]

Evangelical's do not match early Christian orthodoxy. Grace alone was popularly rejected by the early Christian's. If Evangelicals can claim to be Christian inspite of unorthodoxy they can learn to share the title with everyone else. The reformation was a new religion that did not get the church back to orthodoxy. I don't consider Evangelical's orthodox, so how can I grant them recognition as exclusively Christian?

The Trinity idea has it's major flaw as I just pointed it out. The idea I can't be a Christian unless I accept that doctrine as essential is a rule made out thin air. I am willing to affirm the idea as one idea of God, but it's not an unquestionable doctrine.

If the church only went into partial apostasy which some remained faithful? I don't see the reformation as the faithful remnant. Saying a church is partially apostate is like saying a woman can be partially pregnant. The reformation either reformed the church, or it created a new apostate Catholic Church.

The primary premise of "Mormonism", as explained by Joseph Smith (as it permeates the Mormon Church today), was that:

While I was laboring under the extreme difficulties caused by the contests of these parties of religionists, I was one day reading the Epistle of James, first chapter and fifth verse, which reads: if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God. For how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know, for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passage of scripture so differently so as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible, . . .I at length came to the determination to â??ask of Godâ? (POGP, JOSEPH SMITH-HISTORY 1:11-13)

I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof. (POGP, JOSEPH SMITHâ??HISTORY, 1:19

Salvation comes only through Jesus Christ. In him and in him alone is there redemption. But he works in his own way. Godâ??s way is not manâ??s way. The Lord provided that salvation should come through his gospel functioning through his church, wherein are prophets and apostles â??for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.â? (Ephesians 4:12). . .Is there such a church upon the earth? Until 1830 there was not. It had been lost through the falling away we have described in this pamphlet. (Which Church is Right pamphlet, p.17)

Joseph wrote, in his own hand- written in 1832, that (with no mention of the Father and Son together appearing to him):

At about the age of twelve years my mind became Seriously imprest with regard to the all important concerns for the wellfare [sic] of my immortal soul which led me to Searching the Scriptures believing as I was taught, that they contained the word of God. . .thus from the age twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things. . .and by Searching the Scriptures I found that. . .there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the new testament. . . (An Analysis of the Accounts Relating Joseph Smithâ??s Early Visions, by Paul R. Cheesman, Masterâ??s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1965, pp.127-28)

The Gospel of John opens with this statement:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. . . .And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-2, 14)

In Joseph Smith's rewrite of the Gospel of John, it, the BOM states (there is no manuscript evidence for the distortion of Joseph Smith to God's Word, the Bible; the underlined words are the addition of Joseph Smith):

In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God. (JST, Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible)

The Biblical Gospel:

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

The "Mormon gospel":

. . .God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, . . . (History of the Church, Joseph Smith Jr., April 1844, 6:305)

â??As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may beâ?â?? Lorenzo Snow

The first principles of men are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. . . . (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.354)

The Gospel of the Son of God that has been revealed is a plan or system of laws and ordinances, by strict obedience to which the people who inhabit this earth are assured that they may return again into the presence of the Father and the Son. (quoted in the pamphlet entitled, BRIGHAM YOUNG PROPHET STATESMAN PIONEER, 11/81; JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, 13:233, Brigham Young)

Our Heavenly Parents have through aeons of time and a multitude of experiences gradually become acquainted with and applied in their lives an untold number of these everlasting laws. As they learned these verities and how to operate them, these laws thereby became subject unto Elohim and henceforth were His lawsâ??or, in other words, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. (The Gospel Through the Ages, Milton R. Hunter, p.4)

Jesus became a God and reached His great state of understanding through consistent effort and continuous obedience to all the Gospel truths and universal laws. (The Gospel Through the Ages, Milton R. Hunter, p.51)

The Mystery Religions, pagan rivals of Christianity, taught emphatically the doctrine that â??men may become Gods.â? Hermeticism, which had its rise in Egypt in the second or third centuries B.C., was a prominent religion in the Mediterranean world during the period of the rise of Christianity. Its literature, The Corpus Hermeticum, professes to be revelations to Hermes from his divine father and teacher. Hermes declared: â??We must not shrink from saying that a man on earth is a mortal god, and that God in heaven is an immortal man.â? This thought very closely resembles the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith and of President Lorenzo Snow. (The Gospel Through the Ages, Milton R. Hunter, p.110)

Hence, true and acceptable Christianity is found among the saints who have the fullness of the gospel, and a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom. . . . (Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p.132)

In a Church temple preparation teaching manual concerning Celestial marriage (D&C 132 which also teaches a plurality of wives), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches the following doctrine (eternal progression- the false gospel of Mormonism):

As shown in this chapter our Father in heaven was once a man as we are now, capable of physical death. By obedience to eternal gospel principles, he progressed from one stage of life to another until he attained the state that we call exaltation or godhood. In such a condition, he and our mother in heaven were empowered to give birth to spirit children whose potential was equal to that of their heavenly parents. We are those spirit children. . . .It is this fact that makes marriage in a temple of God such an important step in our eternal progression. Elder Bruce R. McConkie has written this: â??Celestial marriage is a holy and an eternal ordinance;. . .The most important things that any member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ever does in this world are: 1. To marry the right person, by the right authority; and 2., to keep the covenant made in connection with this holy and perfect order of matrimony--thus assuring the obedient persons of an inheritance of exaltation in the celestial kingdom.â? (Mormon Doctrine, p.118) (Achieving a Celestial Marriage, Salt Lake City: Church Education System, 1976, p.132)

Note the following quote of Luther in an LDS proselytizing pamphlet:

A falling away from the true religion that Christ preached, from the ordinances he performed, and from the church he organized was foretold in the Bible. Confirming this loss of truth are many of historyâ??s great Christian reformers. Many of them sought to conform with the Holy Scriptures; some looked for the restoration â??of all thingsâ? that Peter had prophesied. The Latter-day Saints not only recognize that this falling away did occur, but also announce that God has made himself known to mortal men in these modern times and has restored his church in detail as it was anciently. . . .Christianity Has Ceased to Exist- I have sought nothing beyond reforming the Church in conformity with the Holy Scriptures. . . .I simply say that Christianity has ceased to exist among those who should have preserved it. . . .MARTIN LUTHER. . .The Gospel of Jesus Christ Restored Through a Modern Prophetâ??Joseph Smith (The Falling Away And Restoration Foretold pamphlet, pp.1, 4, 5, 14, 15)

The Reformation was in part, a response by Luther, to the teaching of the selling of indulgences of Roman Catholicism. Luther had the following to say:

I would gladly have seen all my books forgotten and destroyed; if only for the reason that I am afraid of the example. For I see what benefit it has brought to the churches, that men have begun to collect many books and great libraries, outside and alongside of the Holy Scriptures; . . .Not only has good time been wasted, and the study of Scripture neglected; but the pure understanding of the divine Word is lost, . . .Then, too, it was our intention and our hope, when we began to put the Bible into German, that there would be less writing, and more studying and reading of the Scriptures. For all other writing should point to the Scriptures, as John pointed to Christ, when he said, â??He must increase, but I must decrease.â? . . .I only ask in all kindness, that the man who wishes at this time to have my books will by no means let them be a hindrance to his own study of the Scriptures, . . . (Lutherâ??s preface to the first part of his German Works, 1539 edition, pp.7-9)

This in contrast to Joseph's view of himself, Brigham Youngs view of Joseph (also in contrast with Charles Taze Russell of the Jehovah's Witnesses):

God made Aaron to be mouthpiece for the children of Israel, and He will make me be god to you in his stead, and the Elders to be mouth for me; and if you donâ??t like it, you must lump it. (History of the Church, Joseph Smith, Vol. 6:319-20)

Every intelligent person under the heavens that does not, when informed, acknowledge that Joseph Smith Jr. is a Prophet of God, is in darkness, and is opposed to us and to Jesus and his kingdom on the earth. (Journal of Discourses, 8:223, Brigham Young)

God gave Brother Russell to the church to be as a mouthpiece for him; and those who claim to have learned the truth apart from Brother Russell and his writings have been manifested by the Lord as deceivers, ready to lead the flock of God in their way. Since Brother Russellâ??s death the evidence of Godâ??s favor upon the Society, which was organized by Brother Russell for the furtherance of the Lordâ??s work, has been manifested as clearly as it was previously upon him. . . . (The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1922, p.279)â?

According to the Utah branch of Mormonism (as contrasted with your position as a member of the "Reorganized"/Community of Christ branch- which would not be considered "orthodox"), they are the:

only true and living church on the face of the whole earth. (D&C 1:30)

The apostle Paul uses the term â??heresiesâ? in this context:

For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. (1 Corinthians 11:18-19)

The Biblical teaching on apostasy (or falling away- the truth has to be there to fall away from) is taught through the apostle Paul. The Holy Spirit says that â??someâ? would fall away from the faith, not that the truth would be lost or that the church would be destroyed (â??someâ? does not mean â??allâ?):

But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, . . .In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following. (1 Timothy 4:1 2, 6)

The realization that the Lordâ??s true church was not only vulnerable, but destructible, comes as a shock to many people. But if wicked men were able to put to death the Messiah himself, is it so strange that they should have power to destroy his church? (APOSTASY AND RESTORATION pamphlet, p.11)

I believe your view concerning the idea of "apostasy", along with the Utah branch, to be un-Biblical ("total" "complete"):

Following the death of the apostles, revelation ceased. The authority of God was no longer among men. Christianity sickened and died. In time, a new religion grew up in its placeâ??a religion that professed to be Jesus Christâ??s Church, but which in reality was a conglomerate of pagan worship and Greek philosophy, â??having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.â?. . .that eventually led to the complete apostasy of the true church and the eventual creation of an apostate religion that has been responsible for the extermination of the Messiahâ??s true followers and the persecution of his chosen people, the Jews. . . . (APOSTASY AND RESTORATION pamphlet, p.9)

3. There was a complete apostasy affecting both Catholic and Protestant churches. . . .2. There was a total apostasy affecting the Catholic and Protestant churches. . . . (A UNIFORM SYSTEM FOR TEACHING INVESTIGATORS, Aug. 1961, pp.32, 58)

Heresy, See APOSTASY, DOCTRINE, ORTHODOXY, TRUTH. In the true gospel sense, any opinion or doctrine in opposition to the revealed word of the Lord as recorded in the standard works of the Church as taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an heresy. The issue is not how many people believe a teaching; it is whetherthe doctrine is true or false (2 Peter 2:1). . .There is no salvation in a false doctrine. (Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, p.352)

The Mormon Church (LDS) did not exist in the first century therefore it cannot be the judge of "heresy" within "Christianity" except for within the boundaries of their version of religiosity because I believe it has demonstrated that it is a Christian heresy (based on what it teaches in contrast to Biblical teaching).

[captain-jack]

The primary premise of "Mormonism", as explained by Joseph Smith (as it permeates the Mormon Church today), was that:

Joseph wrote, in his own hand- written in 1832, that (with no mention of the Father and Son together appearing to him):

The Gospel of John opens with this statement:

In Joseph Smith's rewrite of the Gospel of John, it, the BOM states (there is no manuscript evidence for the distortion of Joseph Smith to God's Word, the Bible; the underlined words are the addition of Joseph Smith):

The Biblical Gospel:

The "Mormon gospel":

In a Church temple preparation teaching manual concerning Celestial marriage (D&C 132 which also teaches a plurality of wives), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches the following doctrine (eternal progression- the false gospel of Mormonism):

Note the following quote of Luther in an LDS proselytizing pamphlet:

The Reformation was in part, a response by Luther, to the teaching of the selling of indulgences of Roman Catholicism. Luther had the following to say:

This in contrast to Joseph's view of himself, Brigham Youngs view of Joseph (also in contrast with Charles Taze Russell of the Jehovah's Witnesses):

According to the Utah branch of Mormonism (as contrasted with your position as a member of the "Reorganized"/Community of Christ branch- which would not be considered "orthodox"), they are the:

The apostle Paul uses the term â??heresiesâ? in this context:

The Biblical teaching on apostasy (or falling away- the truth has to be there to fall away from) is taught through the apostle Paul. The Holy Spirit says that â??someâ? would fall away from the faith, not that the truth would be lost or that the church would be destroyed (â??someâ? does not mean â??allâ?):

I believe your view concerning the idea of "apostasy", along with the Utah branch, to be un-Biblical ("total" "complete"):

The Mormon Church (LDS) did not exist in the first century therefore it cannot be the judge of "heresy" within "Christianity" except for within the boundaries of their version of religiosity because I believe it has demonstrated that it is a Christian heresy (based on what it teaches in contrast to Biblical teaching).

I see that you quote a lot of what the people wrote personally, and not much of what is written in the Book of Mormon. I also see a lot of '...' in some of the quotes which does distort their meaning if it is not recognized as such. There isn't a lot of manuscript evidence left for anything so to claim that Joseph Smith was false on this alone, then I'm sure there is a lot that can be said the same for the Bible. There are plenty of sects that broke off and changed the Bible without manuscripts. I'm curious why you keep quoting certain things and labeling others. "Mormon gospel" and Utah branch of Mormonism, the Phairasees did the same thing...

You make assertions that we are false but provide zero Biblical evidence to support it. Make your claims as you like and have your opinions, but they will remain as such until you stop cut/pasting from other places rather than use the Scriptures.

[coolrok7]

I see that you quote a lot of what the people wrote personally, and not much of what is written in the Book of Mormon. I also see a lot of '...' in some of the quotes which does distort their meaning if it is not recognized as such. There isn't a lot of manuscript evidence left for anything so to claim that Joseph Smith was false on this alone, then I'm sure there is a lot that can be said the same for the Bible. There are plenty of sects that broke off and changed the Bible without manuscripts. I'm curious why you keep quoting certain things and labeling others. "Mormon gospel" and Utah branch of Mormonism, the Phairasees did the same thing...

You make assertions that we are false but provide zero Biblical evidence to support it. Make your claims as you like and have your opinions, but they will remain as such until you stop cut/pasting from other places rather than use the Scriptures.

These issues as you raise them was directly in repose to what Dale had said. I've already dialogued with him and others here elsewhere (ZLMB). My response did have Biblical references that deal directly with his views as a Community of Christ member in opposition to the Utah branch of Mormonism. I reject both on the same basis, the BOM as well as other so-called Mormon "Scripture".

I will be more than happy to send you (if you would like) a response to your inquiry where I go through this and other issues. You are certainly free to disagree with me. I'm not persuaded so far by Mormon apologetics. (Its copy, cut, and paste just like Mormons do)

[captain-jack]

These issues as you raise them was directly in repose to what Dale had said. I've already dialogued with him and others here elsewhere (ZLMB). My response did have Biblical references that deal directly with his views as a Community of Christ member in opposition to the Utah branch of Mormonism. I reject both on the same basis, the BOM as well as other so-called Mormon "Scripture".

I will be more than happy to send you (if you would like) a response to your inquiry where I go through this and other issues. You are certainly free to disagree with me. I'm not persuaded so far by Mormon apologetics. (Its copy, cut, and paste just like Mormons do)

Let he who is without sin among you...

Doesn't make it right anyway. I would simply request that you not use the quotes so much, it does tend to convey the attitude of condescension. I don't know why you call it the Utah branch of Mormonism, is there another I'm unaware of? I thought we were the first Mormons and that all the ones calling themselves Mormons listened to the same prophet, thus making us all the same, not branches.

As for the Biblical references, I apologize, you did and I stand corrected. However, I still disagree with you on much of what you said. But I'll leave it at that.

[Dale]

The reformation stands or fall's on grace alone. I have read a stack of quotations from the church father's that goes against his gospel. Will The Real Heretics Please Stand up book by David Bercot documents his gospel was different from early Christianity.

I don't see the OT as precluding the idea God is a personage of some type. I doubt the New Testament condradicts the idea either. I don't see the NT idea of God as far from the Mormon gospel as you think. Luke 24:39 makes me open to the possibility Christ was a spirit personage without his body. John 4:24 lump's the Father, and Holy Spirit together when it describes God as Spirit. It may not be commenting at all on the person's of God being personages which would possibly contradict Luke 24:39.

Psalm 90:2 sould be read with Psalm 103:17. How can we experience something from everlasting to everlasting unless we become everlasting ourselve's? My understanding is the word everlasting comes from the Hebrew Olam which has to do with a long, but hidden period of time. This period is uncertain as to it's temporal duration. I am not sure Psalm 90:2 absolutely precludes the possibility of God becoming God at some point.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit look to me individually as smart as three human person's. This seem's closer to the LDS idea of the Godhead of three distinct beings than the creedal Trinity.

As far as the apostasy goes who apostasized and which one's remained faithful? Unless I become a Catholic I would have to join with the reformation. Martin Luther was a part of the faithful remnant, or he wasn't. I compared Evangelicalism with quotations from early Christian writings. Mormonism I did a bit of the same plus a little of the Barean test. (Acts 17:11) Before I got baptized Community of Christ I exposed myself to a lot of Evangelical education material on Mormonism. Today I have been reading the Jesus Christ/Joseph Smith book by Floyd Mcelveen.

[coolrok7]

Let he who is without sin among you...

Doesn't make it right anyway. I would simply request that you not use the quotes so much, it does tend to convey the attitude of condescension. I don't know why you call it the Utah branch of Mormonism, is there another I'm unaware of? I thought we were the first Mormons and that all the ones calling themselves Mormons listened to the same prophet, thus making us all the same, not branches.

As for the Biblical references, I apologize, you did and I stand corrected. However, I still disagree with you on much of what you said. But I'll leave it at that.

I'm not without sin along with everyone else here. It is not sinful to point out things correctly as they exist in the world in light of the different religious views. I accept your apology. Every statement I made has a context in which I provided the quotes.

If Mormons would not quote others out of context, put words in Protestants mouths that we don't teach, take things out of contet, then we would have fewer issues to discuss. I think you responded emotionally first. I understand that.

My refences to "branches" of Mormonism should be a familiar term to you, what term should I use?. Not something that I've made up. Dale is not a member of the Utah Mormon (LDS) Church (he used denomination):

My Community of Christ/RLDS has a Trinitarian view of God. Hank Hannegraff has admitted such in a handout he produced on my church. The LDS and Community of Christ are two seperate denominations of Latter Day Saints. Though LDS don't use a large "D" in Latter-day Saint.

[Dale]

We started out as one church, but after 15 year's we split. We have been on different historical and doctrinal tracks ever since.

[captain-jack]

The idea of factions within the LDS faith is not foreign, but referencing them by location does not do anything.

Each faction has respectively taken a name, those are best to use when referring to them

[Dale]

Our two denomination's name's have been historically almost identical. We have sometime's called the LDS the Utah Church. The church is based in Utah. But in recent years the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints went to the smaller name Community of Christ. I was baptized Community of Christ in 2005. I was LDS prior to that time.

[coolrok7]

We started out as one church, but after 15 year's we split. We have been on different historical and doctrinal tracks ever since.

So according to you, which is the correct view to hold to?

[juliann]

My refences to "branches" of Mormonism should be a familiar term to you, what term should I use?. Not something that I've made up. Dale is not a member of the Utah Mormon (LDS) Church (he used denomination):

Do you consider Protestants a branch or denomination of Catholicism? You both lay claim to the same source.

[coolrok7]

Do you consider Protestants a branch or denomination of Catholicism? You both lay claim to the same source.

Protestantism is a reaction within the body of Christ to non-Biblical teaching. Roman Catholocism is not the ony true church. I can accept a lot of what they teach and don't necessarily consider them not Christian which depends on what doctrine is being taught.

[CQUIRK]

Here's a link on the matter of Joseph's 1832 account of the First Vision-

http://www.fairwiki.org/Only_one_Deity_app...he_1832_account

...Which is concluded-

"The Father is not explicitly mentioned as making an appearance in the theophany portion of the 1832 First Vision account because Joseph Smith patterned that part of his narrative after the vision of Jesus Christ experienced by the apostle Paul. The words spoken by the Father during His First Vision appearance are, however, referred to in the introductory paragraph of the 1832 text."

[CQUIRK]

Protestantism is a reaction within the body of Christ to non-Biblical teaching. Roman Catholocism is not the ony true church. I can accept a lot of what they teach and don't necessarily consider them not Christian which depends on what doctrine is being taught.

Why can't you say the same about the LDS Church? The Catholic Church also teaches many things which are against 'orthodox' Christianity, in your view.