djholmess Posted August 25, 2012 Posted August 25, 2012 Hi dj,All right, then. Mission accomplished; you do appear to be legit. The reason why I went on about you becoming a lawyer, is that from my point of view your arguments are so weak and unconvincing that I thought you just might be pulling my leg. No disrespect is meant in saying this. It's just that your argumentation, from my perspective, is very,very weak indeed. You may think the same about my argumentation, and that's just fine. Each of us is allowed our own perspectives and opinions on the subjectThere's a mental exercise you could put yourself through when reading the New Testament: Remember, all that was written and spoken during the New Testament period happened at a time when there actually were living Apostles and Prophets in the Church. So you need to ask yourself this: "How would a New Testament time period Church member interpret the passages found in Ephesians 4?" When those folks heard Paul teach that the Church they belonged to was built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets, there can be no doubt they understood him to mean living Apostles and Prophets (Eph 2), for he was one. Don't interpret these scriptures in light of you own modern protestant church experience. Rather, try to understand them in the same way those of the New Testament Ghurch would have understood them. That's the key! Otherwise, confusion reigns.Though the point of the last question you ask seems somewhat vague to me, I think it might be satisfactorally answered by quoting Paul once again. Remenber, try very hard to understand these verses the the same way the New Testament Church members would have understood them...14 For the body is not one member, but many.15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the ahead to the feet, I have no need of you.22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be amore feeble, are necessary:23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same acare one for another.26 And whether one member asuffer, all the members bsuffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.27 Now ye are the body of aChrist, and bmembers in particular.28 And God hath set some in the church, first aapostles, secondarily bprophets, thirdly cteachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, dgovernments, diversities of tongues.29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of amiracles?30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? (1 Cor 12)It seems to me you are missing my point. As I read Ephesians 4:11-12 and the wider context (13-16) it seems clear and simple that Paul is talking about two connected but different things. Yet in your argumentation you conflate these things into one thing. Until you either give a reason from the text why they are same thing or alter your argumentation to accommodate this difference then there isn't much more we can discuss about this text.The two things are 1) Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers are given to equip the saints to do the work of ministry2) the work of ministry all the saints are responsible to do is to to build up the body of ChristAt present your argument from Ephesians 4 seems to be1) Apostels are given to build up the body of Christ into the full stature of Christ2) the body of Christ has not yet reached this full stature3) therefore living Apostles are still nessecary in the ChurchBecause you have not actually given any justification for why 1 is true then the rest of your argument built on this has no bearing. As I have said, and given reasons to back up, Apostles are NOT given to build up the body but are given to equip the all the saints so that THEY build up the body.Your quote above from a completely different letter of Paul does not answer my question. If it is still your position that 1 immediately above is true-that it is the Apostles, Prophets, Shepherds, Evangelists and Teachers who are given to build up the body (rather than equip the saints to build up the body) then can you explain what Paul means in verses 13-16. It seems to me a plain reading of these verses teaches that all the body must work together to build itself up-not just Apostles etcIf you have no explaination of 13-16 that is consistent with your understanding of verses 11-12 then I suggest our discussion has run its course or you are welcome to provide any other verses that you believe teaches that living Apostles are nessecary.
Flyonthewall Posted August 25, 2012 Posted August 25, 2012 8 Wherefore he saith, When he aascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that aascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)11 And he agave some, bapostles; and some, cprophets; and some, devangelists; and some, epastors and fteachers;12 For the aperfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the bedifying of the body of Christ:13 Till we all come in the aunity of the faith, and of the bknowledge of the Son of God, unto a cperfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:14 That we henceforth be no more achildren, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of bdoctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;15 But speaking the atruth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the bhead, even Christ:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.A simple reading of these verses gives a full understanding of what is being conveyed...Verse 8 - He gave some gifts unto men.Verse 11 - What did He give? apostles; and some, cprophets; and some, devangelists; and some, epastors and fteachersVerse 12 - Why did He give them? For the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the ministry and they edifying of the body of Christ.Verse 13 - How long will we need these gifts? Till we all come to a unity of faith and of the understanding of the Son of God, until a perfect man etc.Verse 14 - What happens without these gifts? Verse 15 - Christ is the headVerse 16 - The whole body fits together with Christ as the head, apostles, prophets etc are all parts of the body.Now Evangelicals have amputated parts of the body - apostles and prophets. What ever parts of the body they are, the body is not whole. And since they are needed to keep people from being tossed to and fro they seem to be a VERY important part of the body.How can Apostles and prophets be a part of the whole body of Christ, but yet not have them anymore? Are you saying we are done with them? we no longer need them? Have we all come to a unity of faith and understanding of the Son of God?You are saying we no longer need these gifts of God. We are saying we still need them...and have them once more. 1
teddyaware Posted August 25, 2012 Posted August 25, 2012 dj,I must admit, I'm having a very difficult time trying to comprehend exactly what the point is you're driving at. It seems you're parsing words to the point of absurdity. I'm considered a fairly bright guy, yet I find your point of contention here veritably impossible to discern. But I'll give it one more try... I'm groping here, but you can tell me if I'm on at least partialy on point by use of the following analogy: Let's suppose there is a construction company composed of people who are all laboring together to build a large offce building. And let's suppose our construction business is a "soup to nuts operation" complete with a president, vice presidents, financial officers, architects, engineers, accountants, truck drivers, heavy equipment operators, mechanics, construction workers etc. So using our theoretical company as an example, are you trying to say that the only group of the company's employees who can actually be said to have built the building are the ones who poured the foundation, raised the walls, drove the nails, and set the roof? And are you also trying to say that all the other employees who performed the other essential functions (including the truck drivers who hauled the supplies) in order to make it possible to build the building, did not build it?I'm doing the best I can. But it seems to me you may be straing at a nat while swallowing a camel.
urroner Posted August 25, 2012 Posted August 25, 2012 Ephesians 411 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:1. God gave the Church different types of callings/positions for the following three reasonsa. Perfecting of the saints.b. For the work of the ministryc. For the edifying of the body of Christ2. For how long did God intend that these callings and positions be continued - until we all (Who is "we all" and why is Paul talking with a Southern dialect) come in the unity of the faith.Have "we all" come to a unity of the faith yet? If so, when did this happen? If not, then where are the apostles?What is meant by "a unity of the faith?"If Paul had meant only the living apostles in the early Church, then this would be meaningless once those apostles were dead, because once "we all" came to a unity of the faith, then wouldn't that mean we wouldn't need the scriptures any more, that the Bible would be without value? 1
djholmess Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 dj,I must admit, I'm having a very difficult time trying to comprehend exactly what the point is you're driving at. It seems you're parsing words to the point of absurdity. I'm considered a fairly bright guy, yet I find your point of contention here veritably impossible to discern. But I'll give it one more try... I'm groping here, but you can tell me if I'm on at least partialy on point by use of the following analogy: Let's suppose there is a construction company composed of people who are all laboring together to build a large offce building. And let's suppose our construction business is a "soup to nuts operation" complete with a president, vice presidents, financial officers, architects, engineers, accountants, truck drivers, heavy equipment operators, mechanics, construction workers etc. So using our theoretical company as an example, are you trying to say that the only group of the company's employees who can actually be said to have built the building are the ones who poured the foundation, raised the walls, drove the nails, and set the roof? And are you also trying to say that all the other employees who performed the other essential functions (including the truck drivers who hauled the supplies) in order to make it possible to build the building, did not build it?I'm doing the best I can. But it seems to me you may be straing at a nat while swallowing a camel.I have explained this to a number of people and never has anyone had any problem understanding. It honestly seems to me like you are being intentionally ignorant. That or else your LDS background has blinded you to any other understanding of this verse. But I will try one more time.To build a building you need lots of people; truck drivers, architects, brick layers, mechanics and all your list above. But you just don't need all those people you need them working together and each using his own skills. If a brick layer tried to design the building things might go badly.In this analogy the building is growing the body into the fullness of Christ, all the workers are members of the body-all the saints of God. In order to make the body grow into the fullness of Christ all the members must work together.Now to continue the analogy;All these workers first must be trained in their profession, they need teachers 'equipers' if you like. The architect needs teaching by a university lecturer, the mechanic has had training, the brick layer has had training. Without these teachers the building would never get constructed because the workers would not have the skills to construct the building.In this analogy the workers are once again the members of the body-all the saints. The teachers are the Apostles, Prophets etc, they are given to equip the saints so that the saints can do the job of building up the body of Christ.This is what Ephesians seems to be saying. The Apostles are given to perfect the saints so that the saints are equipped to do their ministry, what ministry? The ministry of building up the body of Christ-that is the responsibility of the saints. This is clearly apparent in modern translations and in the rest of the context 13-16.Thus just as a teacher can be involved in teaching through writing a book or article so too do the Apostles continue their work of equipping the saints through their writings. Obviously their writings are much more able to do this teaching because they are "God breathed" and so suitable for equipping the man of God to do "every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16)- including the good work of building up the body of Christ.Evangelicals see nothing in this text that means living Apostles are required-further I don't know of any orthodox group ancient or modern who have ever interpreted this verse in a way that means living apostles are nessecary.Further we see nothing in the NT or history of Israel that would lead us to see that God intended every generation to be lead by a living Apostle & Prophet.
teddyaware Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 dj, you wrote:"To build a building you need lots of people; truck drivers, architects, brick layers, mechanics and all your list above. But you just don't need all those people you need them working together and each using his own skills. If a brick layer tried to design the building things might go badly.In this analogy the building is growing the body into the fullness of Christ, all the workers are members of the body-all the saints of God. In order to make the body grow into the fullness of Christ all the members must work together."We are in complete agreement on these two paragraphs. Any believer who's read 1 Corinthians 12 knows what you've stated above is true. That's why I previously sent you quotes from 1 Cor 12, to underscore emphaticaly that this is what I know to be true.The only problem on this point is that you seem to be indicating you don'tfully believe your own cited points of doctrine. For you believe 'all the members must work together,' but not really. After all, in the New Testament model of the Church of Christ all the members of the body, including -- most importantly -- the living Apostles and Prophets, worked together to build the body of Christ.This is why Paul called the saints of the Church his "fellow laborers." But somehow (out of necessity because you reject the clearly revealed New Testament Church model) you've come up with some 'new-fangled' church model, nowhere outlined or described in the scriptures. In fact, there is no Christian who lived during New Testament times who would have been at all familiar with the form of Church government you espose. In fact, it would be totally foreign to their religious experience. They would feel like the proverbial 'fish(es) out of water" without their beloved living revelators to lead and guide them; it was all they knew.One other thing while we're on this point: Are you also saying that evangelists, pastors and teachers are no longer needed in today's church as well? Because, after all, they were (in Ephesians 4) listed along side of the Apostles and Prophets.You've rejected your own thesis. But why? Because you have no other choice. This thinking comes as the consequence of rejecting the revealed New Testament model of Church organization. Are the evangelists, pastors and teachers who are listed there along with the Apostles and Prophets also on the list of the once-needed but now obsolete "equipers" you speak of? This also begs the question: Are there no pastors or teachers in you own church's organization. If not why not? And if they are in your church's organization, why are they there? Aren't they -- according to your understanding of Paul -- just like the Apostles and Prophets ... no longer needed? Let me say it once again so as to not be misunderstood: Evangelists, pastors and teachers are contained on Paul's list of those you believe are "equipers.". Though I'm now about to be in violation of my own "one point at a time" rule for our discussion, I must make another point. As you know, Paul said Apostles and Prophets are needed in the Church so as to prevent the Church members from beeng "carried to and fro by every wind of doctrine;" and by your own admission you show what happens to people when they are not ministered to by living Apostles and Prophets. Let me demonstrate -- you wrote:"This is what Ephesians seems to be saying. The Apostles are given to perfect the saints so that the saints are equipped to do their ministry, what ministry? The ministry of building up the body of Christ-that is the responsibility of the saints. This is clearly apparent in modern translations and in the rest of the context 13-16."Notice how you say "Ephesians seems to be saying." What happens to people who attempt to follow God without instruction under the tutilage of living Prophets? Uncertainty, that's what. You also use the words "clearly apparent." When a lawyer says some fact of evidence placed in a trial is "clearly apparent," the judge or jury may say 'apparent' doesn't necessarily mean proven. And so, as long as one rejectS God's duly ordained and authorized Apostles and Prophets of today, he will continue to live in the world of things that seem to be, or only apparently are. Problems like this didn't need to exist in New Testament times, unless one was among the apostates who rejected the living Apostles and Prophets.By revelation I know what Paul is teaching here; there is no 'seems to be' or 'apparently" about it.By the way, in the above quote, if I'm to take your words at face value, you're implying you believe Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers are not to be called saints (remember, these Church leaders on Paul's list of five are your "equipers"), unlike the rest of the Church members you call saints who "build the body." So then, if they are not called saints, why are they not? What makes them different from all the other members of the Church that they wouldn't be numbered among and called 'saints' as well ? And if they are saints, why then are they not supposed to remain as a living presence in the Church? This final quote of yours really has me fascinated!"Further we see nothing in the NT or history of Israel that would lead us to see that God intended every generation to be lead by a living Apostle & Prophet."Would you please explain that one to me? Because from Genesis to Revelation (that's thousands of years) God continually called upon Prophets to lead his people (Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants,the prophets. Amos 3:7) And the brief periods of time when they were without Prophets came as a consequense of the wickedness and hard- heartedness of those who rejected the prophets, whom God by his love sent them. They rejected and even slew the prophets. That's why there were periods when the Lord's people were left to flounder; it was there own fault that they lost the supreme blessing of being led by living revelators. As Isaiah said:"Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink.For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered." (Isaiah 29: 9-10). 1
Flyonthewall Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 dj,The reason LDS do not buy into your interpretation, is that it denies the simple straight-forward message it is to convey.Paul states we have been given Apostles and prophets, but you say we don't need them.Paul states we have been given all these gifts to the perfecting of the saints(you use equip but a more complete rendering is perfecting of the saints until a perfect man). Paul uses the analogy of the body of Christ to a perfect man - the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.You have amputated the Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers from the body of Christ. Paul included them, you have cut them off.I agree with Teddy - the reason you say they are not needed, is because you don't have them. And to agree that they are needed is admit that what you have is lacking.I can certainly understand why you would interpret them that way though. 1
teddyaware Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 You have amputated the Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers from the body of Christ. Paul included them, you have cut them off.Hey Flyonthe wall,I think your use of the word 'amputated' in relation the unwarrented exclusion of essential body parts (aren't they all supposed to be essentai?) of the body of Christ is excellent! I'm going to remember that one. Isn't this amputation exactly what Paul warned so passionately against in 1 Corinthians 12?I'm truly astonished at the capacity and ability people have to rationalize, explain away, find supposed loopholes within, and twist simple statements of truth into something that suits their purpose, when those simple, straightforward statements of truth put them in an untenable position.
Flyonthewall Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 Hey Flyonthe wall,I think your use of the word 'amputated' in relation the unwarrented exclusion of essential body parts (aren't they all supposed to be essentai?) of the body of Christ is excellent! I'm going to remember that one. Isn't this amputation exactly what Paul warned so passionately against in 1 Corinthians 12?I'm truly astonished at the capacity and ability people have to rationalize, explain away, find supposed loopholes within, and twist simple statements of truth into something that suits their purpose, when those simple, straightforward statements of truth put them in an untenable position.Yes, Paul uses the body of Christ to illustrate a point, all parts of the body are required to work together. Without any of those parts it is not a perfect man unto the fullness of the stature of Christ.To me, this is part of the process of removing the plain and precious truths from the gospel...to take a scripture that says "A", perform an elaborate tumbling run, and then proclaim it means "not A"This is indeed, a perfect example of why Prophets and Apostles are needed. 1
Sleeper Cell Posted August 26, 2012 Posted August 26, 2012 I have explained this to a number of people and never has anyone had any problem understanding. It honestly seems to me like you are being intentionally ignorant. That or else your LDS background has blinded you to any other understanding of this verse. But I will try one more time.To build a building you need lots of people; truck drivers, architects, brick layers, mechanics and all your list above. But you just don't need all those people you need them working together and each using his own skills. If a brick layer tried to design the building things might go badly.In this analogy the building is growing the body into the fullness of Christ, all the workers are members of the body-all the saints of God. In order to make the body grow into the fullness of Christ all the members must work together.Now to continue the analogy;All these workers first must be trained in their profession, they need teachers 'equipers' if you like. The architect needs teaching by a university lecturer, the mechanic has had training, the brick layer has had training. Without these teachers the building would never get constructed because the workers would not have the skills to construct the building.In this analogy the workers are once again the members of the body-all the saints. The teachers are the Apostles, Prophets etc, they are given to equip the saints so that the saints can do the job of building up the body of Christ.This is what Ephesians seems to be saying. The Apostles are given to perfect the saints so that the saints are equipped to do their ministry, what ministry? The ministry of building up the body of Christ-that is the responsibility of the saints. This is clearly apparent in modern translations and in the rest of the context 13-16.Thus just as a teacher can be involved in teaching through writing a book or article so too do the Apostles continue their work of equipping the saints through their writings. Obviously their writings are much more able to do this teaching because they are "God breathed" and so suitable for equipping the man of God to do "every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16)- including the good work of building up the body of Christ.Evangelicals see nothing in this text that means living Apostles are required-further I don't know of any orthodox group ancient or modern who have ever interpreted this verse in a way that means living apostles are nessecary.Further we see nothing in the NT or history of Israel that would lead us to see that God intended every generation to be lead by a living Apostle & Prophet.If I understand you correctly, you are saying that once the apostles had finished their inspired writings, the continued existence of living apostles was no longer essential to the church. Their writings -- as we now have them in the NT -- were sufficient to continue their work of equipping the saints to do their ministry.If so, why didn’t they establish the NT canon before they died? Why did the apostles, in effect, fail to fully equip the next several generations of Christians? Why didn’t Paul, at least, make a list of those of his own epistles which he felt were essential to fully equip the saints in later generations? (If nothing else, this may have helped resolve the authorship of Hebrews.)Why was it necessary for a committee(s) entirely composed of non-prophets and non-apostles -- living a couple of hundred years after the last apostle died -- to pass judgment on the authenticity and inspiration of the writings of the apostles?
Vance Posted August 27, 2012 Posted August 27, 2012 DJ,So, if I understand you correctly, you are basically saying that Paul got it wrong. What you are saying is that it wasn't the Apostles and prophets that were the gift to the church, put merely their writings. So Paul got it wrong. He should have said was, Ephesians 41 And he gave the WRITINGS OF THE apostles, the WRITINGS IF THE prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,So, you seem to be saying,1) The writings of the apostles are MORE valuable than the apostles who created them.2) The writings of the prophets are MORE valuable than the prophets who created them.3) The writings of the apostle Paul are wrong. What he actually wrote is not exactly correct, but YOU know what he SHOULD HAVE written.That is very interesting.Now, to get back to the topic of the thread.The problem with your argument is that Hebrews also calls Jesus a "priest".Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. 6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. (Quoting Ps 110:4)It also says, 10 Called or God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.So, was the order of Melchisedec, an order of "high priests" or simply "priests"?(Wouldn't "high priests" be a subset of "priests"?And again it says,Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.What is consistent is the "after the order of Melchisedec".Perhaps you need to determine what an "order" is.You haven't established that.That part is true. Your problem is that you don't understand that ONLY those of the same "order" as Melchizedek “abideth a priest continually”.Do you realize that by that statement you are admitting that Jesus was a "priest".Well, those parts are not limited to only Jesus. And you are neglecting the rest of the chapter which does the same.1) You haven't established that Jesus was not "a priest". Hebrews clearly says he was.2) No, He was not "likened to a High Priest of the Aaronic" order, He was distinguished from them.Do you not see the distinction?You mean, besides the one you just mentioned?Other than him being a member of the same order as Jesus?As was Melchizedek. So, what is your point?You mean other than 1 Pet 2:9????Ok, the text doesn't clarify this concept so you don't know what it all means, BUT MORMONS ARE WRONG!!!That is a common anti-Mormon approach. It doesn't sell well here.Actually it does, Melchizedek was ALSO of the order of Melchizedek. So that is TWO. Besides, it take more than one to make an order. And it makes no sense at all to use the word "order" if there were only two.From the 1828 Dictionary,Sorry, but the use of the word "order" TOTALLY BLOWS AWAY YOUR ARGUMENT!!!!!See above.Still waiting for a response.
teddyaware Posted August 27, 2012 Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) I hope many. both LSD friend and critic, will read what I have to say on this post. I now sincerely attempt to fill the role of a peacemakerThere is a place of compromise that exists between the camp of those who believe the Church of Jesus Christ somehow continued to exist as the true church -- even though ALL the post-apostolic churches rejected the belief that living Apostles and Prophets were essential in order to maintain the integrity of the body of Christ (the Church) -- and the LDS, who testify that the true Church must have at its foundation duly-authorized and ordained living Apostles and Prophets of God.Those who reject the need for living Apostles and Prophets believe they are no longer necessary because, they assert, the writings and teachings of the Apostles and Prophets, as contained in the Bible, are a sufficient guide and all that's needed for an individual to come fully unto Christ.So from an LDS perspective, and in a sort of 'limited defence' of the point of view of our Evangelical brethren, I offer the following brief look at how the continued existence the Christian Bible -- in spite of universal apostacy, and without the continuance of the true Church organization and authority-- impacted the world for good, and was of supreme importance in making the restoration of the true Church possible.1 In spite of the universal apostacy, there is no Latter Day Saint who would think of denying the powerful force for good that the Bible has been throughout the post-apostolic centuries. One can only imagine what the world would have been. and would now be, without the potent leaven of righteousness that permiated civilization because of the existence of the Bible. Even without the sure guidance of living Apostles and Prophets, the teachings of the Savior, the Apostles, and the Prophets found in its pages carry a spiritual power of enlightenment of their own, serving as a holy conduit for the Light of Christ to enter the human heart -- just as it did when I was growing up as a member of a Protestant church. Before becoming a Latter Day Saint, I felt of the Bible's potent power many times, and I can truly say it was a powerful force for good in my life, and in the life of my family as well.2 The leaders of the LDS Church teach that the Protestant Reformers were great, good and heroic men of God, sent to earth by our Heavenly Father in their own day and age, in order begin the process of making the teachings of the Bible more available to a world of men deprived of its great power; break the grip of religious depotism; begun the process of an intense search for greater truth and spiritual emlightenment.3 The Book of Mormon teaches that the discoverer of America, Christopher Columbus -- a student of the Bible -- was filled with the Spirit of God as a result of his studies, which Spirit gave him courage and emboldend with faith to cross the great deep. Speaking of him, the Book of Mormon says:"And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man (remember, he read the Bible); and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land." (1 Nephi 13)The Bible played a significant, preparitory role in the discovery of America.4 The Book of Mormon teaches that the pre-Restoration (of the Gospel) pilgrims who came to America were inspired by powerful faith, through their understanding of the Bible, to leave Europe in search of a new home of religious freedom, where they could practice a purer form of Christianity they searched out and found within the pages of the Bible, The great truths they learned from the Bible filled them with the Spirit of God that motivated their exodus to a new promised land. Speaking of these fervent Bible believers, the Book of Mormon says:"And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters ... And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land (America) for their inheritance"(1 Nephi 13)My 8th great grandfather, the fiery, Bible-inspired Reverend Joseph Hull, who founded the town of Barnstable Massachusetts, was among the host of these pilgrims. It's a safe bet he never would have been motivated to come here if it weren't for the inspiring power he gleaned from the pages of the Holy Bible.5 Within the pages of a book of LDS scripture known as Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord reveals that the (primarily) Bible-believeing descendents of these aforementioned pilgrims were sent to earth by the Lord in their day and time to Establish the United States of America, under the divinely inspired twin-banners of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States. And so I quote the Lord:"And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood. (D & C 101"This nation of liberty would never have come to be if it weren't for the fact that men, steeped in the Bible and Christianity as men then best understood it, were thereby quided and inspired by the God of the Bible to do the wondrous, blessed and miraculous work they did. All of this great effort took place before the arrival of the Prophet Joseph Smith on the scene. Though Living Apostles and Prophets were ye to arrive, the Bible was here, and its mighty word inspired the children of men.6. The Prophet Joseph Smith was not raised as a Mormon. He grew up in a Protestant Christian home where the Bible was read daily, and that great Book of Holy Scripture blessed the Smith family's lives. Yes, it's true, the Prophet grew up in Protestant Christian home, not an LDS home. And by his own testimony, the teachings that he learned from his diligent study of the Bible, alone, had such a powerful spiritual influence upon him, that he said he tells us he was eventually equiped with belief powerful enough to go and ask God which church he should join, and know, with a surity borne of unwavering faith in God, that the Lord would answer him. I quote from the Prophet's official testimony:"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, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him... Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did." (Joseph Smith History)Joseph's First Vision happened because he was diligently studying the God's word in the Bible; scripture that inspired him with faith sufficient to part the curtains of heaven.8. Throughout my life I've known a great many wonderful non-LDS Christian people. The Bible and its sacred ipermeating influence had the power to help them to be the wonderful, kind, unselfish, merciful, happy, hard working, honest, loving people they were and are. Among them, my special Grandparents, now deceased, whom I miss and yearn to see again..So what's the moral in all this? The Bible does equip those who desire to find God, and to reach out to him so as to establish open lines of spiritual communication with him. It blesses the world with a portion of the knowledge, wisdom, glory, power and salvation of God. But it is not sufficient alone to supply one with the fullness of God; that can only be achieved by becoming a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The Lord's one true Restored Church, paterned after the New Testament Church. With not only the Bible to guide her, but also The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price and living Apostles and Prophets for:... "the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" Edited August 28, 2012 by teddyaware
shalamabobbi Posted August 27, 2012 Posted August 27, 2012 Regarding the wider context.In verse 15 Paul identifies one of the ways the body is built up; by "speaking the truth in love". The "we" that does this speaking is clearly all believers not just Apostles and Prophets. So this indicates that the ministry of building up the body is done by all believersIn verse 16 it is clear that the body makes itself grow when all the parts of the body are working properly, not just the Apostles and Prophets. All the parts of the body are all believers so again it is the ministry of all saints to build up the body. To limit this ministry to a ministry of the Apostles and zpriphets in verse 12 seems to contradict verses 15&16.So because of 1) the grammar of modern translations (which are meant to be easier understood) and 2) the immediate context. I do not think it is correct to limit the list of Apostels, Prophets ... as the ones who alone are doing the ministry of building up the body. I believe it is pretty clear that is is the work of all the saints to do this ministry.Every member a missionary in LDS vernacular. Excellent insight! But to return to the analogy of a body can it live when the head is severed? In later posts you leave the analogy of the body and replace it with a very different analogy of building a structure.In doing so you change the meaning of coming unto Christ or building the body of Christ from one where converts work at perfecting themselves to emulate Christ in His perfections to a model where the body consists simply of adding numbers (more converts).How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!You need an example of people being sent by scripture within the scriptures themselves.And to underscore that a written record alone is insufficient..And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.How would this play out without something more than scripture? You end up with thousands of denominations and their interpretations. What results is a sort of lowest common denominator becoming all that is required a dumbing down if you will from which we end up lacking at last that which is necessary to walk back into the presence of God.Further we see nothing in the NT or history of Israel that would lead us to see that God intended every generation to be lead by a living Apostle & Prophet.Except for the fact that that is the only model of God's interaction with mankind ever recorded in scripture. And in every example in scripture where there is illustrated apostasy the apostates are always leaning on scripture alone without acknowledging current prophets.Amos 3:7 contradicts this viewpoint for one. 1
teddyaware Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 (edited) I hope many. both LDS friend and critic alike, will read what I have to say on this post. I now sincerely attempt to fill the role of a peacemakerThere is a place of compromise that exists between the camp of those who believe the Church of Jesus Christ somehow continued to exist as the true church -- even though ALL the post-apostolic churches rejected the belief that living Apostles and Prophets were essential in order to maintain the integrity of the body of Christ (the Church) -- and the LDS camp, who testify that the true Church must have at its foundation duly-authorized and ordained living Apostles and Prophets of God.Those who reject the need for living Apostles and Prophets believe they are no longer necessary because, they assert, the writings and teachings of the Apostles and Prophets as contained in the Bible are a sufficient guide and all that's needed for an individual to come fully unto Christ.So from an LDS perspective, and in a sort of 'limited defence' of the point of view of our Evangelical brethren, I offer the following brief look at how the continued existence the Christian Bible -- in spite of universal apostacy, and without the continuance of the true Church organization and authority-- impacted the world for good, and was of supreme importance in making the restoration of the true Church possible.1 In spite of the universal apostacy, there is no Latter Day Saint who would think of denying the powerful force for good that the Bible has been throughout the post-apostolic centuries. One can only imagine what the world would have been. and would now be without the potent leaven of righteousness that permiated civilization because of the existence of the Bible. Even without the sure guidance of living Apostles and Prophets, the teachings of the Savior, the Apostles, and the Prophets found in its pages carry a spiritual power of enlightenment of their own, serving as a holy conduit for the Light of Christ to enter the human heart. Just as it did when I was growing up as a member of a Protestant church, before becoming a Latter Day Saint. Throughout those pre-LDS years, I felt of the Bible's potent power many times, and I can truly testify it was a mighty force for good in my life, and in the life of my family as well.2 The leaders of the LDS Church teach that the Protestant Reformers were great, good and heroic men of God, sent to earth by our Heavenly Father in their own day and age in order begin the process of making the teachings of the Bible more available to a world of men deprived of its great power. They were also sent to break the grip of religious despotism and begin the ongoing process of an intense search for greater truth and spiritual emlightenment that would culminate in the Restoration of the Gospel.3 The Book of Mormon teaches that the discoverer of America, Christopher Columbus -- a student of the Bible as well -- was filled with the Spirit of God as a result of his scripture studies, which Spirit gave him courage and emboldend with faith to cross the great deep. Speaking of him, the Book of Mormon says:"And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man (remember, he read the Bible); and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land." (1 Nephi 13)The Bible played a significant, preparitory role in the discovery of America.4 The Book of Mormon teaches that the pre-Restoration (of the Gospel) pilgrims who came to America were inspired by powerful faith, through their understanding of the Bible, to leave Europe in search of a new home of religious freedom. A new abode where they could practice a purer form of Christianity they searched out and found within the pages of the Bible, The great truths they learned from the Bible filled them with the Spirit of God that motivated their exodus to the new promised land. Speaking of these fervent Bible believers, the Book of Mormon says:"And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters ... And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land (America) for their inheritance"(1 Nephi 13)My 8th great grandfather, the fiery, Bible-inspired Reverend Joseph Hull -- who founded the town of Barnstable Massachusetts --was among the host of these faith-filled pilgrims. It's a safe bet he never would have been motivated to come here if it weren't for the inspiring power he gleaned from the pages of the Holy Bible.5 Within the pages of a book of LDS scripture known as Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord reveals that the (primarily) Bible-believeing descendents of these aforementioned pilgrims were sent to earth by the Lord in their own day and time to Establish the United States of America under the divinely inspired twin-banners of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States. And so I quote the Lord:"And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood. (D & C 101"This nation of liberty would never have come to be if it weren't for the fact that men steeped in the Bible, and Christianity, as men then best understood it, were thereby quided and inspired by the God of the Bible to do the wondrous, blessed and miraculous work they did. All of this great effort took place before the arrival of the Prophet Joseph Smith on the scene. Though Living Apostles and Prophets were yet to arrive, the Bible was still here, and its mighty word inspired the children of men.6. The Prophet Joseph Smith was not raised as a Mormon. He grew up in a Protestant Christian home where the Bible was read daily; and that great Book of Holy Scripture blessed the Smith's lives. Yes, it's true, the Prophet grew up in Protestant Christian home, not an LDS home. And by his own testimony, we understand that the teachings he learned from his own diligent personal study of the Bible had such a powerful spiritual influence upon him, that he tells us he was eventually equiped with belief powerful enough to go and ask God which church he should join, and know, with a surity borne of unwavering faith in God, that the Lord would answer him. I quote from the Prophet's official testimony:"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, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him... Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did." (Joseph Smith History)Joseph's First Vision happened because he was diligently studying God's word in the Bible; scripture that inspired him with faith sufficient to part the curtains of heaven.8. Throughout my life, I've known a great many wonderful non-LDS Christian people. The Bible and its permeating, sacred influence had the power to help them to become the wonderful, kind, unselfish, merciful, happy, hard-working, honest, loving people they were and are. Among them, my special Grandparents, now deceased, whom I miss and yearn to see again..So what's the moral in all this? The Bible does equip those who desire to find God. It also empowers them to reach out to him so as to establish open lines of spiritual communication. It blesses the world with a portion of the knowledge, wisdom, glory, power and salvation of God. But it is not sufficient alone to supply one with the "all the fullness of God;" that can only be achieved by becoming a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- the Lord's one true Restored Church, paterned after the New Testament Church. With not only the Bible to guide her, but also The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price and living Apostles and Prophets:"For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" (Eph 4)So see and learn ye Mormons -- our beloved brethren among the denominations of Christianity have their own stories of faith to tell as well. And according to the God of the Latter Day Saints, they too will enjoy salvation within one of God's many mansions of glory. Love is the fulfillment of the law... Edited August 28, 2012 by teddyaware
djholmess Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 (edited) Teddyaware,So far I have not seen anything from your responses to the interpretation I provided of Ephesians 4:11-16 that would indicate you have actually took the time to understand what I’m saying.For example:The only problem on this point is that you seem to be indicating you don'tfully believe your own cited points of doctrine. For you believe 'all the members must work together,' but not really. After all, in the New Testament model of the Church of Christ all the members of the body, including -- most importantly -- the living Apostles and Prophets, worked together to build the body of Christ.I have time and time again said all the saints work together to build up the body of Christ. Further I very clearly said that Paul as a saint and member of the body worked to build up the body.But that is not the issue at all anyway. The issue is whether the role, skills and responsibility of Apostles, Prophets Shepherds etc was/is to build up the body. Paul as a saint built up the body of Christ, but all Ephesians 4 says about Paul’s responsibility as a Apostle is that he must equip the saints so that they are able to build up the body. One other thing while we're on this point: Are you also saying that evangelists, pastors and teachers are no longer needed in today's church as well? Because, after all, they were (in Ephesians 4) listed along side of the Apostles and Prophets.I have not been saying Ephesians 4 teaches living Apostles and Prophets are necessary or aren’t necessary. All I have been doing is critiquing your use of the verse to prove they are necessary and explaining to you how this verse is typically understood in evangelical circles based on modern translations and the immediate context. By the way, in the above quote, if I'm to take your words at face value, you're implying you believe Apostles, Prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers are not to be called saints (remember, these Church leaders on Paul's list of five are your "equipers"), unlike the rest of the Church members you call saints who "build the body." So then, if they are not called saints, why are they not? What makes them different from all the other members of the Church that they wouldn't be numbered among and called 'saints' as well ? And if they are saints, why then are they not supposed to remain as a living presence in the Church? Again it you are twisting my words and misunderstanding what I have been saying. I have never said Apostles are not saints. In fact I have said the opposite a number of times when I have said Paul as a saint also did the work of building up the body.In post #76 on this thread I summarized what your argument seems to beAt present your argument from Ephesians 4 seems to be1) Apostles are given to build up the body of Christ into the full stature of Christ2) the body of Christ has not yet reached this full stature3) therefore living Apostles are still necessary in the ChurchAs you did not disagree with my summary I have been under the assumption I correctly summarized your line of reasoning. If you re-read that post you will see why I disagree with the above. To move the conversation along it would be helpful if you could maybe summarize my interpretation similar to the above – so that we can be sure we fully understand each other’s position.Maybe an explanation from someone other than me may help as wellWe are going to spend two weeks on this text. Today we will ask the question, "Why do the saints minister to the body of Christ?" Next week we will ask the question, "How do the saints minister to the body of Christ?" Another way to say it would be: today we ask about the aim or goal of every-member ministry, and next week we ask about the ways and means that members use to minister to the body.Is Every Member to Minister to the Body of Christ? But before we can take up either question I need to justify the assumption that every member is to minister to the body of Christ. Why do I think that?The answer is found in verse 7 and verses 11–12. In verse 7 Paul talks about how each individual Christian is gifted by Christ with various measures of grace; and in verses 11–12 he talks about how the church is gifted by Christ with certain ministering people who equip the saints to minister to the body.Every Believer Is Gifted by Christ with Varied GraceVerse 7: "But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ's gift." Here the focus is on Christ's giving each believer varied grace. You are uniquely graced with Christ's gift. This means that you are not an accident in the body of Christ. When you received grace, it was because Christ gave it in a measure suited to his good purposes for you and for the body.This does not yet prove that every member is to be a minister to the body. But it does lay the foundation for it when it comes in verses 11–12. "Each of us" is given grace not according to the measure of our worth or merit, but according to the measure that Christ decided to give. Romans 12:6 says almost the same thing: "We have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us." Our different giftedness is owing to sovereign grace, bestowed according to the will of Christ, the head. The Head knows what is good for the body.The Church Is Gifted with People in Varied OfficesNow verses 11–12 make the point of every-member ministry explicit. After describing (in vv. 8–10) how Christ rose from the dead and ascended to heaven like a triumphant general with his wagons full of booty, ready to distribute it to his troops, Paul says, "And He [Christ] gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ."This is different from verse 7. There the point was that every believer is gifted by Christ with varied grace. Here the point is that the church is gifted by Christ with people in varied offices: "some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, some as pastors and teachers [probably one office]." These gifts to the church—these people—are charged with equipping the saints, that is, the believers. (All believers are saints in the New Testament; they are set apart for God.)The Need for EquippingThe word for equipping usually means fixing something that's broken (as when nets are torn, Matthew 4:21) or supplying something that is lacking (as in 1 Thessalonians 3:10, "We desire to supply, or equip, what is lacking in your faith"). So the point of verses 11–12 is that Christ not only gives varied grace to each believer in the church, he also gives leaders to the church whose job is to repair what's broken and supply what's lacking in the believers.We will talk more about this next week. But think how significant this is for the nature of the church. Each of you is personally gifted by Christ with varied grace, and yet not so perfectly that you are not in need of fixing and supply by apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. No one may say: "I am gifted and graced by Christ himself, I have no need of apostolic authority (which I believe comes through the New Testament), or prophetic encouragement, or evangelistic training, or pastoral nurture, or human teachers to apply the Bible to my life." This text makes plain that all of you are gifted with a measure of grace, and all of you are in some measure lacking the improvement of grace. The one proves that you are vitally needed by the church, and the other proves that the church is vitally needed by you.For the Work of Service/MinistryBut the main point still hasn't been made. Verse 12 goes on to say that the leaders equip the saints for a specific purpose, namely, "for the work of service," or, "for the work of ministry." The fixing of what is broken and the supplying of what is lacking in the saints is not an end in itself. The leaders don't stop then and say, "O good, now we have fixed and supplied saints. The work is done." No, the fixing and supplying are meant to make the saints into servants, or ministers.So this finally is the justification of the assumption I started with, namely, that every saint—every Christian—is a minister. This is why today's message can be titled, "Why the Saints Minister to the Body," and next week's message can be titled, "How the Saints Minister to the Body.Taken from http://www.desiringg...ter-to-the-body Edited August 28, 2012 by djholmess
djholmess Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Sleeper Cell,Thank you it appears you have taken the time to understand what I have been saying.If I understand you correctly, you are saying that once the apostles had finished their inspired writings, the continued existence of living apostles was no longer essential to the church. Their writings -- as we now have them in the NT -- were sufficient to continue their work of equipping the saints to do their ministry.If so, why didn’t they establish the NT canon before they died? Why did the apostles, in effect, fail to fully equip the next several generations of Christians? Why didn’t Paul, at least, make a list of those of his own epistles which he felt were essential to fully equip the saints in later generations? (If nothing else, this may have helped resolve the authorship of Hebrews.)Why was it necessary for a committee(s) entirely composed of non-prophets and non-apostles -- living a couple of hundred years after the last apostle died -- to pass judgment on the authenticity and inspiration of the writings of the apostles?I don't have a biblical answer to 1) why the Apostles didn't establish the NT cannon before they died or 2) why Paul didn't make a list of his own epistles, because there is no discussion within the NT about this issue. However I can share with you my thoughts.First though I want to make it clear that I disagree with your summary of (presumably) one of the early Christian councils – you didn’t give a name so I can’t be more specific. As I understand it the councils did not ‘pass judgement’ on the inspiration and authority of the scriptures. Rather they came together to agree on the recognised list of writing that were already considered ‘scripture.’ These books had already proven their ‘God breathedness’ in the life of the church; they were simply being recognised on a ‘Church wide basis’ for what they were.Back to your question:-In order to understand how God was working to bring about the formation of the NT cannon it would seem sensible to try to understand how the OT cannon came about. Within the time of the OT and the OT prophets there never was a declaration of which books made up the OT. Rather the OT came about through a process over time as the people of God recognised the writings of his Prophets that were scripture.As some LDS are keen to point out there are other books mentioned in the OT yet no OT prophet or NT apostle treats them like they should be part of the OT-they accepted the OT cannon as it was. Further, Jesus very clearly accepted the established cannon of the OT. So I see nothing in the way the OT cannon; as accepted by Jesus, was formed that would make it necessary that the NT cannon be listed by an Apostle.-The Apostles were travelling far and wide; often in danger (especially Paul) and many died unexpectedly. It would seem unfair to expect them to have a list of their writings when they themselves wouldn’t know if they were going to live a few more months to write another letter or die the next day. Further, following on from the above point I don’t actually believe that the writers of scripture would have known what they were writing was going to become part of the NT cannon. God brought the OT cannon about in the midst of his people, without any Prophets actually declaring ‘these writings are cannon, these aren’t’ I see no reason why he didn’t use the same process – by having his people recognise which writings were God breathed scripture and which weren’t.Now I’m not saying that when Paul wrote other letters they weren’t just as authorative, but that the letters the Holy Spirit chose to use in the church and become widely recognised are the ones we have today.-From the tone and language of the NT letters it is clear that some were carefully and thoughtfully written out (e.g. Romans) whilst others were rushed (e.g. Galatians). So again I do not see the Apostles in a position to be laying out a ‘cannon’ when there is no indication they were carefully planning all they wrote.-It’s clear from the books of the NT that they were written by a number of different authors from a wide range of places and were sent to an even more varied list of destinations. Maybe in our modern world it would be possible to track the writings of a number of authors spread across a number of countries but back then it would have been impossible for Paul to know that Peter was writing a letter to Jewish believers. To demand that the Apostles even had the capacity to make a list of scriptures that were cannon seems to be unfair.
Vance Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Paul as a saint built up the body of Christ, but all Ephesians 4 says about Paul’s responsibility as a Apostle is that he must equip the saints so that they are able to build up the body. And for you, a DEAD apostle does that much better than a live apostle. Got it. I have not been saying Ephesians 4 teaches living Apostles and Prophets are necessary or aren’t necessary.Sure you have. You have been saying that living Apostles are UNnecessary and UNimportant. And that we don't even need writings from all of the dead ones.Let me guess, ONLY some of the writings of Paul are needed, right?All I have been doing is critiquing your use of the verse to prove they are necessary and explaining to you how this verse is typically understood in evangelical circles based on modern translations and the immediate context. You have made it clear that you believe that we don't need live apostles, only some of their writings. To you, some of their writings is ALL we need, but only when you get to dictate what they SHOULD have written.We get it. Again it you are twisting my words and misunderstanding what I have been saying.?????So, when you change the words of the Apostle Paul to read, Ephesians 41 And he gave the WRITINGS OF THE apostles, the WRITINGS IF THE prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,It is us who is changing words?Question, does this mean that we don't need evangelists, shepherds and teachers either, if we have their writings?
Tacenda Posted August 28, 2012 Author Posted August 28, 2012 And for you, a DEAD apostle does that much better than a live apostle. Got it.Sure you have. You have been saying that living Apostles are UNnecessary and UNimportant. And that we don't even need writings from all of the dead ones.Let me guess, ONLY some of the writings of Paul are needed, right?You have made it clear that you believe that we don't need live apostles, only some of their writings. To you, some of their writings is ALL we need, but only when you get to dictate what they SHOULD have written.We get it.?????So, when you change the words of the Apostle Paul to read,It is us who is changing words?Question, does this mean that we don't need evangelists, shepherds and teachers either, if we have their writings?I think it can be dangerous to "follow" a prophet especially a false one, not that Pres. Monson is false leader, it's easy to pick out the false ones such as the leaders in some cults that have led members astray and even led them to their deaths. I see that it's up to individuals to get that relationship with the Lord with no mediator. I don't feel like I would be in the dark without a current prophet. I love that we have teachers etc. and consider the prophet to be a teacher who loves us and wants the best for us.
shalamabobbi Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 The concept of the keys of the priesthood is something difficult to understand without the gift of the Holy Ghost.I understand that I cannot baptize anybody without arranging that baptism with the consent of the bishop etc. The bishop cannot do anything of his own volition that goes contrary to the direction given him from higher up. The apostles cannot operate contrary to the direction of Christ whose church this is.Without order chaos reigns and that is what we see in all the myriad denominations. Historically inquisitions, selling of indulgences, death penalties for diverging from church orthodoxy and in our age, new age nonsense that offers, rather than repentance followed by baptism and forgiveness, acceptance of sin into our life. These are mistakes that cannot occur in the restored church and didn't occur in the meridian church when the apostles, the guardians of the flock yet lived.
teddyaware Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 dj,I now gracefully retire from our discussion. As far as I'm concerned, what this exercise has turned out to be is nothing less than a doctrinal version of a wild goose chase; something not unlike running endlessly on a hampster wheel and expecting to get somewhere. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result from the same ones you've gotten a thousand times before -- that's not going to happen with me and you. No offence, but the Spirit whispers continuing on here would prove to be unprofitable. All the best to you and yours.
Vance Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 I think it can be dangerous to "follow" a prophet especially a false one, not that Pres. Monson is false leader, it's easy to pick out the false ones such as the leaders in some cults that have led members astray and even led them to their deaths.The real danger is NOT following the prophets of God.
Tacenda Posted August 28, 2012 Author Posted August 28, 2012 dj,I now gracefully retire from our discussion. As far as I'm concerned, what this exercise has turned out to be is nothing less than a doctrinal version of a wild goose chase; something not unlike running endlessly on a hampster wheel and expecting to get somewhere. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result from the same ones you've gotten a thousand times before -- that's not going to happen with me and you. No offence, but the Spirit whispers continuing on here would prove to be unprofitable. All the best to you and yours.Your words weren't in vain and I appreciate that you tried. You never know of the good that you may have done. Even if you may have affected even one. Hopefully it's worth your efforts.
Recommended Posts