The Body of Christ

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Please give me a verse that describes Peter as a president, or one that show him engaging in presidential duties as would be understood by the term.

As soon as you give me a verse for the age of grace, or trinity? You first.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I believe there is. The line is direct.

Either way you are screwed Hoops, you have no line of authority to trace back too.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is without question (if one believes the Bible) that Peter was the leader of the first church.

"

Uh, that is not the question, were in the bible can we read that Peter was the 1st bishop of Rome, I can't seem to find it.

One could say that he was the 1st President of the church, or prophet after Christ was ressurected?

[paulhadik]

Every time we try to discuss the matter of the legitimacy of the Protestant movement, we end up only with unfounded blanket statement. So if you believe that the Body of Christ embodies all of Christendom, then kindly explain what you're talking about. Instead of telling me where I'm wrong, please state your case.

I don't believe that most of us "protestants" really care to argue the legitmacy of the "protestant movement" (whatever that is)

I care simply about the legitimacy of my personal relationship with my Creator King. The arguments of movements' legitimacy be they LDS, RCC, RLDS etc is what I don't see in Scripture.

In this thread I have had it explained to me that a non-believer who has joined the LDS is a member of the Body of Christ and while a Believer in the Scriptures who hasn't joined the organization is not a member.

That is the sort of logic that comes from the idea that Christ established an organization. You get into a mystical power of authority that detracts from individual works of Grace, through the Spirit, adopting us into God's family.

Question: If I am a true believer in the LDS church and get baptized by an LDS elder who (it turns out) does not believe but has been playing a game (as we find in all churches) is my baptism valid?

[LeSellers]

If I am a true believer in the LDS church and get baptized by an LDS elder who (it turns out) does not believe but has been playing a game (as we find in all churches) is my baptism valid?

Yes, because the elder who performed the baptism was acting as the representative of the one who holds the keys for that unit, i.e., the bishop (or branch president) or mission president. It is those keys that validate the ordinance. This person hold his keys in proxy for the one in authority over him, and so on back to the President of the church, who holds the ultimate keys on the earth. Only if the president of the church were in apostasy would the baptism be invalid, and that is not the case nor ever has been since Joseph Smith.

Lehi

[David T]

one that show him engaging in presidential duties

By your definition of 'Presidential' (whatever that may be), or by the one we use when referring to Presiding Leaders?

[mfbukowski]

Yes, because the elder who performed the baptism was acting as the representative of the one who holds the keys for that unit, i.e., the bishop (or branch president) or mission president. It is those keys that validate the ordinance. This person hold his keys in proxy for the one in authority over him, and so on back to the President of the church, who holds the ultimate keys on the earth. Only if the president of the church were in apostasy would the baptism be invalid, and that is not the case nor ever has been since Joseph Smith.

Lehi

Yup. That's how it works. And the sacrament blessed by the priest who did who knows what last night is also valid.

[Cold Steel]

I don't believe that most of us "protestants" really care to argue the legitimacy of the "protestant movement" (whatever that is) I care simply about the legitimacy of my personal relationship with my Creator King.

How can you know your relationship with your Creator King, except by the Holy Spirit? Where in the scriptures does it talk about such a relationship and its effect on salvation? Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Thus, does it not appear that baptism also is required and, if so, that it be done by someone in authority? I don't read anywhere in the New Testament where someone speaks of their "personal relationship" with Christ, nor of anyone asking anyone else if they're "saved."

Through the Holy Spirit, one may know that Jesus is the Son of God, the Holy One of Israel, the Messiah. The knowledge comes from the Father, not the Son. Peter had a "personal relationship" with Jesus, as did the other apostles and, for that matter, Nicodemus. Nowhere, though, does it say that their relationship had anything to do with their salvation. Ultimately, men will be judged according to their works and the obedience they showed to Christ and his apostles.

Can a man be saved by believing in Jesus, but not those whom he has sent? No. You cannot be saved through a belief in Christ, while rejecting Moses, Elijah and the other prophets, including Joseph Smith. Thus, if you accept Jesus, yet you reject those whom he has sent, then you will not gain the salvation you seek. When Moses sent the graven staff and serpent throughout the camps of Israel, the people were saved; however, they had to exercise obedience in looking upon it. And those who refused to do so died.

I strongly believe we should have a personal relationship with God, but any relationship with one member of the Godhead, to the exclusion of the others, is wrong. As one member of the Body of Christ can not say to the others, "I have no need of thee," neither should we strive to have a personal relationship with the Son to the exclusion of the Father and of the Holy Spirit. How can you have a relationship with Christ, yet not accept those whom he has sent? You can't.

Question: If I am a true believer in the LDS church and get baptized by an LDS elder who (it turns out) does not believe but has been playing a game (as we find in all churches) is my baptism valid?

If a man has authority given to him and it is recognized by the church, then the baptism is completely valid in the sight of God. One might ask, what of an animal sacrifice carried out by one of the sons of Levi, who might not be worthy? The same thing would be true. God's House is one of Order, not chaos. The man who is baptized when his heart is black with unrepentant sin will find that his sins yet remain with him, for God knows the thoughts of all. But an ordinance is not nulled by the unbelief of the administrator, but by the unbelief of those being administered to.

Again, you cannot be saved by a relationship. You must believe and be baptized. Although a man cannot be saved by works, he cannot be saved without them.

[paulhadik]

Cold Steel

I have been reading with interest the thread on closet apostates and really feel it applies here. The LDS have elevated the organization to a mystical level where this concept of "authority" is transfered through the organization itself regardless of whether one believes the organizational doctrines or not.

You chide me on my idea of a "personal relationship" due to my not joining the LDS church

Yet in the LDS church, one can become a high ranking member, without ever holding as true the LDS doctrines, then partake in ceremonies of baptism and temple work where he is transferring authority to another even though he is apostate, or even a non-believer.

Then the question must be asked, what "authority" or "power" does this organization then have that the wielder of it remains unaffected by it?

See you define the body as the organization and thereby must limit it to that organization and also entertain the idea that one can join, yet never believe, yet partake of this authority and claim membership in the body, moreso than one who believes the LDS to be true yet never joins the organizations

while I can say that anyone, regenerated by our Savior, regardless of organizational affiliation is a member of Christ's body, due to faith.

why does yours make more sense than my definition?