Tobeloved

Please stay on topic. We are talking about the supposed apostasy. Thanks

John the Baptist, Mary just to name two.

NO BIBLICAL PROPHET has ever changed or down played ONE WORD in the Bible. Keep in mind that this is one office of an individual church. So, if you think you can prove some apostle from the Bible who will change and add to scripture be my guest. I'll be waiting to read the Bible verses you come up with and maybe correct the context if needed.

NO BIBLICAL PROPHET has ever changed or down played ONE WORD in the Bible. Keep in mind that this is one office of an individual church. So, if you think you can prove some apostle from the Bible who will change and add to scripture be my guest. I'll be waiting to read the Bible verses you come up with and maybe correct the context if needed.

Serious question here. No slight intended, ok. How offensive do you think it is for Christians to be told our faith went into apostasy in the 1st Century and the faith has been lost for 1900 years? Then the AGREED upon tenants of the Christian faith are not what you believe but that you think you have a right to use a name that we have used since 300 AD? Now whose religion trampled on another's here? I could include much more, but I just want you to think about that.

Because evidently the false prophets were going to do much harm to His children and were the priority. It is telling that in that speech that real prophets are not mentioned at all. I think that is interesting in itself.

Eh, wrong. The fact that there was a Reformation required that the apostasy did happen. Why would Luther and Hess and the others risk their lives to reform the church if it wasn't in apostasy? The problem Lehi is your timeline. JS was clear that Christianity went into apostasy in the 1st Century. BUT Martin Luther was from the 15th and 16th Centuries. Furthermore, the reformation separated only Protestants and Catholics in that protestants wanted to have their own churches. IT DID NOT kill Christianity in anyway, because Protestants and Catholics still both exist and are both Christian. I am interested to hear your reply.

I see, no sources or scripture, but you just say what is your opinion. I am going to stop talking to you if you do not back this up with something. It is immature to keep doing this in a doctrinal discussion.

If you offer no sources, url's, Bible verses ect to make your point and think that I am going to go try to figure out what you are saying, you are wrong. What you should do is start with one thing, instead of 6 or 7 and show how you came to that conclusion and list your sources. Then we can talk, but all this opinion with lack of any source, I'm not doing that. So it is your choice

Have you read what Jesus Himself told the disciples right before He died? It was NOT that there was some new revelation or an upgrade to the Christian church, it was there would be FALSE PROPHETS. The problem is is that nothing that LDS says about the Christian church happened. 1800 AD, years later there are I think 6 Billion Christians. None of the Biblical prophets ever prophesized about JS or what he said happened. I would think about that.

The thing is though, is that these basic tenants of the Christian faith existed BEFORE Mormonism. So, they were not written to 'root some out" they were written as an agreement to the tenants of the Christian faith. So, how can you say they 'root you out'. Your prophet knew exactly what he was doing when he wrote his writings.

I think there is a HUGE difference. In Jereusalem, there were Jews all over. Christianity had to go through this entire transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant of Jesus Christ, PLUS their were many, many Jewish people who were against the faith from the beginning. Three major faiths stem from the Bible; Judaism, Islaam and Christianity. I do not consider Mormon splinter groups anything like the Apostles who were killed for their faith. Or the Mormon apostles who live in very nice houses and are held to high regard.

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD. Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses. So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go. You guys just throw these words out there

Ummm.... If there were offshoots in 200 AD that would have NOTHING to do with the Epistles being written BEFORE 90 AD. Most of the problems were from the Jewish Pharisee's who did not believe Jesus was the Messiah and wanted to take people back to the OT times of Moses. So, if you are going to start with apostasy talk, then I would think about where that will go. You guys just throw these words out there

Are you sure you want to go there? What you are in essence saying is that Jesus Christ is not strong enough to keep His church growing.

Are you sure you want to go there? What you are in essence saying is that Jesus Christ is not strong enough to keep His church growing.

Someone brought up the different denominations in Christianity. My point was that LDS has them too. My second point is that I do not think most LDS really understand that Christianity is united of the basic tenants of our faith. It is because we are united on the basic tenants of our faith that we can root out what is not Christian quickly, because to be a Christian one must believe in the basic tenants of the Christian faith. So this splinter, denominations thing is made much bigger than it is. And unless someone wants to get very hairy I would not want to discuss it.

This is not really accurate. Most people are very clear on what the gospel is. The gospel is the good news that Jesus Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world. That all can come to Him for the forgiveness of sin and be justified from all sin, through His shed blood on the cross. Jesus Christ being God, Himself sent down from heaven by the Father, 'fully man' and 'fully God'. All who accept Jesus Christ gift of grace (because we cannot atone for our own sin) will live with Him for eternity as heirs of Jesus Christ and co-heirs to the Father, in Christ. That is not a much debated thing. That is standard Christianity 101. Denominations do not exist from the above definition of the gospel. Denominations are an entirely different thing and I'm not sure we want to get into that because it will be long.

Is there a LDS version of Romans 5, 6, and 7? Can you give me the url to it so I can read it? Thanks.

I did not say that I rely on Romans for everything. What I said is with the scripture I've read and with Romans 5,6,7 I do not believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation. Just_A_Guy actually summed up what I believe very well. But that's ok, we disagree on baptism with water. But I find it interesting that you gave Titus 3:5 as a proof text when that was about Holy Spirit baptism which I think confused me a bit.

I did not say that I rely on Romans for everything. What I said is with the scripture I've read and with Romans 5,6,7 I do not believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation. Just_A_Guy actually summed up what I believe very well. But that's ok, we disagree on baptism with water. But I find it interesting that you gave Titus 3:5 as a proof text when that was about Holy Spirit baptism which I think confused me a bit.

YES! ^^ This