Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Misshalfway]

Ceeboo.....I just have one thing to say to you. HELLLOO.....AVATAR!!!!

[Guest ceeboo]

Hi ceeboo/Carl,

I would really like to know how you interpret these scriptures. What does the Catholic church teach about these times? I'm not as learned as you and it's a little embarrassing asking you to explain. I know a little world history and it seems that the 'Dark Ages' explain a lot, and for me, give proof that something horrible happened after the death of the original apostles. What happened to the church after Peter?

I guess you can see that these are the questions I had in the thread I started, but more learned LDS have more experience with this kind of conversation, so I've popped in here.

Hope that's okay:p

Hello candyprpl,

Me ( ceeboo ) learned ??? thanks but I think more acurate to label me " slightly knowledgable with a hint of Catholic bias" ):)

Please do not be embarrassed to ask me to explain, I have asked you and others to explain about 645,982 times. ( I will add that my questions to you ( LDS ) were always answered with sincerity and kindness ):) thanks.

CONTEXT AND DEFINITIONS ARE CRITICAL FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

Apostasy- a falling away from the Church Jesus built

COMPLETE OR TOTAL APOSTASY- JESUS' Church gone, lights out, no more authority

I do understand the commitment that LDS MUST have in a " total " or " Great " apostasy

but I must reply that it IMHO the complete apostasy claim does not exist.

First, regarding my interpretation of these scriptures. Many of them do indeed speak of apostasy ( people falling away from the Church ) NOT ONE of them speak of a complete apostasy, total darkness of the Church, lights out etc. In addition, when the scriptures do speak of apostasy they tell us that it will be in the end times ( IMHO the end times do not mean the year 200 or 300 or whatever " shortly after the original 12 apostles passed" implies.

I am not a Biblical scholar ( just a 40 year old sinner like the rest of us ) but since I was asked about my interpretation of scripture, I think I will suggest a few of my own that I feel is directly related to this " total apostasy thread " thus " restoration".

Matthew 16:18, ( Jesus' promise of his Church ) " on this rock ( Peter ) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Matthew 28:20 ( Jesus' words to all of us ) " Behold I will be with you always "

( there are many many more )

If JS was right about a total apostasy then Jesus was a failure in regard to HIS CHURCH.

Jesus would also be not telling the truth and misleading us with his promises.

" What happened to the Church after Peter " IT IS STILL THE SAME CHURCH THAT JESUS PROMISED US ALL WOULD NOT EVER FALL". Yes indeed it is a FACT that there have been immoral members in the Church and still are there today. Jesus promised the Church would stand to the end and he also taught that there would indeed be good and evil members sitting side by side in HIS CHURCH until that end.

I think I will stop at this point to be fair to others who may want to contribute or rebute my crazy Catholic perspective.:)

I hope, candyprpl, I have answered your questions to me.:)

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

Thanks. Let's talk about "abomination". I agree that the words can be insulting to some.

I will quote the passage in question:

...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.”

According to the narrative, it is not Joseph Smith who is implying that "their creeds were an abomination" and that "those professors were all corrupt", it is the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. Obviously, one would be less likely to be insulted, if they knew for sure that Christ said that, and not Joseph. So, without knowing the answer to the question I posed in my previous post, it is premature for anyone to feel insulted in my opinion.

Obviously none of us were there when it happened. So where does that leave someone who is introduced to the account of the First Vision? I think it leaves them with the following options. They can-

1) ...outright reject it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID NOT happen.

2) ...outright accept it without investigating it further, and conclude, without really knowing for sure, that it DID happen.

3) ...investigate the claim to determine for themselves, if at all possible, the truth about it.

4) ...ignore the implications, and not care whether it is true or false.

Are there other options? And where do you see yourself, having had the account of the First Vision presented to you?

Sincerely,

Vanhin

Hello again Vanhin,

I must admit, you were probably a great missionary :) ( To be clear that was truly a compliment ):)

I realize concerning " abomination " JS claimed to be only the mouthpiece but I promise you, my new friend Vanhin, because of my opinion on the matter, it would not add anything of use to all who are involved in this thread to beat on that horse.

Your 4 options that you offer me, ok I will play ( because you have been more than fair and generous with me :)) I will choose # 3 with no hesitation.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

Ceeboo.....I just have one thing to say to you. HELLLOO.....AVATAR!!!!

Hi Misshalfway,

I have no idea how to do that, I click on the avatar thingy and it says I must first log in or something and I get real frustrated. When I try to log in or whatever it says, it tells me I have to email or something??

Anyway what is wrong with my current avatar " Ceeboo ( green dot ) "

[HiJolly]

CONTEXT AND DEFINITIONS ARE CRITICAL FOR THIS DISCUSSION:

Apostasy- a falling away from the Church Jesus built

COMPLETE OR TOTAL APOSTASY- JESUS' Church gone, lights out, no more authority

I notice here an institutional emphasis. In the LDS view, the Church still could exist in the midst of a complete or total apostacy. When we speak of apostacy, it is not so much just the Church in name that goes away, but rather two important elements: (1) the organization of the Church (2) the Priesthood of the individual members of the Church.

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail.

Donatism strikes at the heart of #2 above. We as LDS understand that the priesthood authority departs from a priesthood holder if that man does not walk the path of righteousness. We either excommunicate the wicked priesthood holder, or release them from positions of authority, since we know by revelation that God has ALREADY removed their authority. We do agree with the Catholic Church that ordinances performed by men WITH exoteric authority but without the Godly (esoteric) authority are honored by the institution of the Church, but we also remove the offender post haste as soon as their ungodly deeds are known.

So we have here 2 cases for an apostate church that still exists (at least after Constantine pulled it together again) that has lost its divinely appointed organization and lost its leader's godly (esoteric) authority. And all this with no Pope in sight. I want to make it clear, though, that this apostacy applies to an existing Church, and not to individuals who are sincere and honest in their spiritual pursuits. For example, I am completely convinced that St. John of the Cross (Juan de la Cruz) did in fact see God. I love his books!

I do not think this is incompatible with St. John belonging to an apostate Church. God is who He is, and speaks to whomever He will.

I do understand the commitment that LDS MUST have in a " total " or " Great " apostasy

but I must reply that it IMHO the complete apostasy claim does not exist.

Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.

First, regarding my interpretation of these scriptures. Many of them do indeed speak of apostasy ( people falling away from the Church ) NOT ONE of them speak of a complete apostasy, total darkness of the Church, lights out etc. In addition, when the scriptures do speak of apostasy they tell us that it will be in the end times ( IMHO the end times do not mean the year 200 or 300 or whatever " shortly after the original 12 apostles passed" implies.

I think we can agree to differ on this. Amicably, I'm sure! :)

I am not a Biblical scholar ( just a 40 year old sinner like the rest of us ) but since I was asked about my interpretation of scripture, I think I will suggest a few of my own that I feel is directly related to this " total apostasy thread " thus " restoration".

Matthew 16:18, ( Jesus' promise of his Church ) " on this rock ( Peter ) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Matthew 28:20 ( Jesus' words to all of us ) " Behold I will be with you always " ( there are many many more )

Joseph taught that the 'rock' meant revelation from God. Peter had just told Jesus that he knew He was the Christ, then Jesus said it was because of revelation that Peter knew it. I know about the play on words in the Greek 'Cephas' and so forth. I think there are more levels of meaning here than some may acknowledge. Again, I'm sure you disagree and I don't claim that our view is the only justifiable one. Especially if you don't believe Joseph had a clue. So its OK.

If JS was right about a total apostasy then Jesus was a failure in regard to HIS CHURCH.

Jesus would also be not telling the truth and misleading us with his promises.

Of course Jesus would not mislead anyone, unless someone through lack of the spirit could not understand what He was saying. I hope you agree that if we don't have the Spirit with us, we run the risk of not understanding the things of God?

The LDS view is that Christ set up the perfect Church and it was the failings of individual Church leaders after His departure that caused the failure (apostacy). We all know that Christ would not mislead anyone, but we also know that He allows us to misunderstand Him when our lives or situations prevent our correct understanding. That's what continuing revelation (the 'rock') is there for.

" What happened to the Church after Peter " IT IS STILL THE SAME CHURCH THAT JESUS PROMISED US ALL WOULD NOT EVER FALL".

And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.

Yes indeed it is a FACT that there have been immoral members in the Church and still are there today. Jesus promised the Church would stand to the end and he also taught that there would indeed be good and evil members sitting side by side in HIS CHURCH until that end.

Yes, tares and the wheat.

I think I will stop at this point to be fair to others who may want to contribute or rebute my crazy Catholic perspective.:)

Not crazy at all. Thanks for your posts, and I really respect your ability to discuss without rancor. You rock!

HiJolly

Edited August 28, 2008 by HiJolly

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

I didn't really feel like reading through all this...so I'll just testify of my belief in the divine doctrine of deification, and what it is to me.

I believe that the Lord God, our Father in Heaven has promised man all things. As it says in the Bible I believe that I am a son of God and a joint-heir with Christ. I believe that if I am worthy and faithful that I will be perfected through the atonement of Yeshua bar Abba (Joshua son of the Father in Hebrew, Jesus being the Greek form of Joshua). I believe in the God of the New Testament and all scriptures, who promises that we shall inherit all the things he has. The literal Father of our spirits who seeks to help us become like him and his Only Begotten Son, the one who extends his hand and says "Come, your sins are washed clean in the blood of the lamb. Now let me teach you all that I know and give you all that I have."

All that he has to give is the perfection of love kindness or charity, that being eternal unconditional love. It involves the perfection of my priesthood, and the power to spread happiness, and righteousness through out all of God's creations. He will teach me other divine attributes if I am worthy, but the attributes of love, righteousness, and charity are his most important I believe. God is nothing without love, and the atonement of his son. All his creations, his powers, his acts and accomplishments are for naught if he had not charity. This is what to become a god is to me. The Christ came down and became like us, so we can go back up and become like him. Though I am not perfect right now I believe that if I am faithful, if I strive to follow God's will and if I endure to the end I will one day be cleansed by the fire of the Holy Spirit and the blood of the Messiah. Even now I, and all faithful and good of any religion are on the path to what I call godhood. As the three servants described in the bible we are to increase our talents, whether they be spiritual, mental, or physical in preperation for that blessed day when we can kneel at the feet of Christ and hear the words "Well done my good and faithful servant."

This I testify in God's name.

[OneEternalSonata]

I really feel for you and understand your struggle, if even in a small way. I hope and pray that this doctrine will become clearer to you and that the discomfort will pass. I too had a difficult time with this doctrine as a convert, as it made sense in my head, but my heart just didn't accept it at first. I understand how it feels blasphemous, and it would be, if man made the theory all up. If it is of God, as I believe it to be, then it is a precious gift that unites us with Him and doesn't exalt us above Him.

[pam]

I notice here an institutional emphasis. In the LDS view, the Church still could exist in the midst of a complete or total apostacy. When we speak of apostacy, it is not so much just the Church in name that goes away, but rather two important elements: (1) the organization of the Church (2) the Priesthood of the individual members of the Church.

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail.

Donatism strikes at the heart of #2 above. We as LDS understand that the priesthood authority departs from a priesthood holder if that man does not walk the path of righteousness. We either excommunicate the wicked priesthood holder, or release them from positions of authority, since we know by revelation that God has ALREADY removed their authority. We do agree with the Catholic Church that ordinances performed by men WITH exoteric authority but without the Godly (esoteric) authority are honored by the institution of the Church, but we also remove the offender post haste as soon as their ungodly deeds are known.

So we have here 2 cases for an apostate church that still exists (at least after Constantine pulled it together again) that has lost its divinely appointed organization and lost its leader's godly (esoteric) authority. And all this with no Pope in sight. I want to make it clear, though, that this apostacy applies to an existing Church, and not to individuals who are sincere and honest in their spiritual pursuits. For example, I am completely convinced that St. John of the Cross (Juan de la Cruz) did in fact see God. I love his books!

I do not think this is incompatible with St. John belonging to an apostate Church. God is who He is, and speaks to whomever He will.

Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.

I think we can agree to differ on this. Amicably, I'm sure! :)

Joseph taught that the 'rock' meant revelation from God. Peter had just told Jesus that he knew He was the Christ, then Jesus said it was because of revelation that Peter knew it. I know about the play on words in the Greek 'Cephas' and so forth. I think there are more levels of meaning here than some may acknowledge. Again, I'm sure you disagree and I don't claim that our view is the only justifiable one. Especially if you don't believe Joseph had a clue. So its OK.

Of course Jesus would not mislead anyone, unless someone through lack of the spirit could not understand what He was saying. I hope you agree that if we don't have the Spirit with us, we run the risk of not understanding the things of God?

The LDS view is that Christ set up the perfect Church and it was the failings of individual Church leaders after His departure that caused the failure (apostacy). We all know that Christ would not mislead anyone, but we also know that He allows us to misunderstand Him when our lives or situations prevent our correct understanding. That's what continuing revelation (the 'rock') is there for.

And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.

Yes, tares and the wheat.

Not crazy at all. Thanks for your posts, and I really respect your ability to discuss without rancor. You rock!

HiJolly

Yes ceeboo does Rock!!!!

[Misshalfway]

Whenever I think or discuss the great apostasy, I always think in my mind that of all the Christian groups it is the Catholic that is the strongest. Who else would have had the authority if not them?

I think I see that there is some acknowledgement in this conversation that some form of apostasy did occur. My understanding from my limited study is that the 12 apostles were killed...torturously I might add. And that the church was in a state of confusion for many years as HiJolly stated. I can't look at the Christian world today without seeing such variety in interpretation and doctrine. One builds a church on baptism. Another on tongues. And the list goes on. In my very limited missionary service to one state in the US, I spoke with many who had such differing views of the same biblical text. I was astonished by the variety of interpretations on the Nature of God question alone. And the last piece of this that still surprises me (and I don't know for sure if this is the Catholic position or not) is the decision that God no longer talks to man. That God somehow decided that he would let us interpret on our own. These ideas confuse me.

If God is the same yesterday, today, and forever then he must continue revealing his will. He literally led the Israelites every step of the way from Moses and Pharaoh and what Moses was to do with his staff, to telling the people to put lambs blood on their doorways, to giving the 10 commandments and to leading them to the promised land! And this is just one example.

It is clear that revelation was part of Jesus's mission after his resurrection for he met the twelve on the road and spent days and days with them. What was he saying if not setting the direction for the church to go forward with that very group of twelve that he so carefully chose and instructed before his death and resurrection. And also showing them his resurrected body so they would very literally be able to testify of the "good news"! How can one be a special witness of Christ without such literal and visual experience?

I ask myself now.....if I weren't going to be a LDS, where would I go? Well, the Catholic church would be my first stop. :) Precisely because of the Peter/Rock/thing. But I stop in my tracks and ask where are the 12?

At the end of the day, I must conclude that either the Catholics got it right and the rest of the Christian world rebelled and went their own way OR a restoration was necessary. Not a new idea to my LDS friends here.......but something that I keep coming back to in my own searchings and questioning.

And such a question could be debated long into the night! :) I am grateful, in this case, for the institution of prayer. I can go and sit alone before my maker and ask the question. Who of all these groups is right? And He will answer. I figure if anyone knows the answer, He does. :)

[bytor2112]

As a Father.....I want my children to learn and grow and become better than I am......because I love them. One day, they will inherit all that I have......sound familiar? Heavenly Father loves us so incomprehensively much, that he wants us to have the kind of life that he has....eternal life....exaltation. We can all claim to be heirs of royalty, yet seem to struggle that one day when we are ready, when we have progressed, we will rise to that station in the eternal worlds. Not to be above the Father, but to become like him.

[Guest ceeboo]

I

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail

Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.

And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.

HiJolly

Hello HiJolly,

Thanks so much for the wealth of perspective you have shared.:)

Yes indeed we do not agree on some of your offerings but it is my stance that God above is pleased by the manner his children are extending their hands and hearts with eachother.

I ( for one ) am truly humbled and encouraged to read the last several posts, I am also honored to be a part of them.:). In addition, The thing that trumps all of our seeming disagreement ( some may certainly disagree with this and that's ok by me ) is the Christ-like tone that IMHO is alive and well.:) At the end of the day, we all try our very best to walk as Jesus did and for me, I certainly do my best to not "call out the sawdust in others eye when I know I have a plank in my own".

A very short offering as not to overshadow my above contribution:

" No central or organized Church for first 300 years or so" " Church no longer had apostles"

My offering, For the first 300 years or so it was illegal to be Christian and many were put to death for this, much was done " under the radar ".

IMHO, ( I realize you feel differently and offered a contribution regarding this :)) It has nothing to do with " no longer set up or organized by mere men, it also has nothing to do with the building " church, small c ". It has everything to do with the Church " Capital C "

that Christ left us and the promise that indeed it would never fall.

Lastly, " the promise not to fall was revelation " I respectfuly disagree and further see no scriptural support for this. The promise was from Jesus himself ( God as Catholics believe )

that His Church, teachings,promise to all, would stand to the end.

I really do appreciate your input HiJolly.:)

For what i's worth, I look forward ( hope not real soon though ) that we all can smile and talk about this in HIS KINGDOM some day.:):)

You and many others here also rock!! ( I wonder if that means Peter LOL )

God bless,

Carl

[Vanhin]

Hello again Vanhin,

I must admit, you were probably a great missionary :) ( To be clear that was truly a compliment ):)

I realize concerning " abomination " JS claimed to be only the mouthpiece but I promise you, my new friend Vanhin, because of my opinion on the matter, it would not add anything of use to all who are involved in this thread to beat on that horse.

Your 4 options that you offer me, ok I will play ( because you have been more than fair and generous with me :)) I will choose # 3 with no hesitation.

God bless,

Carl

Thanks Carl. I think #3 is the the wise choice. Because if it is true, ignoring or rejecting the message could be as consequential as it was for the people at the time of Noah, who rejected his message.

For his own purposes, God has opted to bring about the restoration in this manner. He prepared and called a prophet, and revealed his will to him. Then, He commanded his prophet to share the message with others. From that stand point, Joseph Smith's experience is not unique. The Bible is full of the same pattern. Moses, for example, was called as a prophet, and given a message to share with the Israelites, and ultimately the world at large. So, if the Bible is used as a guide, then we must at least admit that an event like the First Vision is not only possible, but probable considering how long it had been since God had called a prophet.

It is evident from the scriptures that God reveals his will through righteous men called prophets. Indeed, the Bible plainly teaches us this fact:

Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7)

Even the early Church, established by Jesus Christ, would be built upon a foundation of apostles and prophets, Christ himself, being the chief corner stone.

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; (Eph. 2:19-20)

God, of course, has not left us without a way to know for ourselves that what the prophets teach us is from him. Whenever we read or hear something that is claimed to be from God, we can receive a witness directly from God that the message is true. Obviously there are many things having to do with faith and religion, that have no physical proof, yet they are true. Paul taught that faith "is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Heb. 11:1).

How do you suppose God reveals truth to us?

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

Here's an interesting little tid bit for you all. In the original greek the new testament was written in the word hell used in Matthew 16: 18 is translated from Hades, meaning death. So the actual words should be "And death shall not prevail against it."

In fact, in some coptic scripture used by the Ethiopian Christians and other Orthodox religions the words "But it shall be renewed, resurrected as I was" are added to the verse.

[candyprpl]

Here's an interesting little tid bit for you all. In the original greek the new testament was written in the word hell used in Matthew 16: 18 is translated from Hades, meaning death. So the actual words should be "And death shall not prevail against it."

In fact, in some coptic scripture used by the Ethiopian Christians and other Orthodox religions the words "But it shall be renewed, resurrected as I was" are added to the verse.

hmmmm -- that's very interesting. That's why I'm always wondering if God's word as found in the Bible have been translated correctly.

You know Vanhin,

When I prayed to know that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was the restored Church of Christ, I did get that comfirmation in a miraculous way. Since joining this forum I have had a lot of questions. I've taken all of this to the Lord in prayer. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think I'm getting any definite answers. I'm not bold enough to say what I'm really thinking. But, I do know they are my thoughts right now and not answers to my prayers. Sorry, just rambling. Sometimes it helps me sort out my thoughts.:)

[Hemidakota]

Here's an interesting little tid bit for you all. In the original greek the new testament was written in the word hell used in Matthew 16: 18 is translated from Hades, meaning death. So the actual words should be "And death shall not prevail against it."

In fact, in some coptic scripture used by the Ethiopian Christians and other Orthodox religions the words "But it shall be renewed, resurrected as I was" are added to the verse.

Greek Lexicon: Strong's Number 86

86 haides, hah'-dace; from 1 (as a neg. particle) and 1492; prop. unseen, i.e. "Hades" or the place (state) of departed souls

Mormon Doctrine as most do not like to see, Elder McConkie explains it:

Gates of Hell

See CHAINS OF HELL, HELL. Lucifer leaves the gates of hell wide open so that all who will yield to his enticements can enter that abode of darkness and sorrow. The path of sin leads to the gates of hell; unrepentant persons carry their own sins which are the tickets of admission granting entrance through those mammoth gates.

Figuratively, these gates beckon to the unwary, inviting them to enter, and these gates of hell are said to prevail against those who by sin cast their lot with Lucifer and thus go to hell. But those who accept the gospel, join the Church, live in righteousness and faith, and endure to the end, have the promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. (D. & C. 10:69; 17:8; 18:5; 21:6; 33:13; 98:22; 3 Ne. 11:39.) To Peter the Lord said that the gates of hell should never prevail against the rock of revelation. (Matt. 16:18.)

Edited August 28, 2008 by Hemidakota

[Guest ceeboo]

For his own purposes, God has opted to bring about the restoration in this manner. He prepared and called a prophet, and revealed his will to him. Then, He commanded his prophet to share the message with others. From that stand point, Joseph Smith's experience is not unique. The Bible is full of the same pattern. Moses, for example, was called as a prophet, and given a message to share with the Israelites, and ultimately the world at large. So, if the Bible is used as a guide, then we must at least admit that an event like the First Vision is not only possible, but probable considering how long it had been since God had called a prophet.

It is evident from the scriptures that God reveals his will through righteous men called prophets. Indeed, the Bible plainly teaches us this fact:

Even the early Church, established by Jesus Christ, would be built upon a foundation of apostles and prophets, Christ himself, being the chief corner stone.

How do you suppose God reveals truth to us?

Sincerely,

Vanhin

Thank you as well Vanhin,

I have seriously considered not making this post as to not seem argumentative but have decided to share in hopes that we can extend our thoughts to eachother in an even light for mutual benefit and fairness.:)

Your comments to me seem to take as FACT the prophet ( JS ), how God has chosen to restore his church. In addition you use the early Church to strengthen your claims.

There is indeed an alternate perspective on this, I will try and share mine with you while trying my best to be fair and respectful to your beliefs, as you have to mine.:)

The " restoration " was to restore the Church back to the early church days ( before the JS claim of great apostasy and due to the broken line of apostles ) agreed ?

Well IMHO ( with a hint of Catholic bias ) the early Church writers do not strengthen the LDS claim at all, Rather drastically weaken it, the early Church writers ( Ignatious, Eusebius, Clemente,Polycarp, etc ) Write nothing at all about this Great Apostasy, In addition, it is my further humble opinion that they also wrote nothing about much of the Mormon Doctrine that is claimed to be restored ( not to mention they seemingly never knew or heard of a Mormon ).

" How do I suppose God reveals truth to us "

IMHO, there are many ways, but the primary way that he did was to send his son to tell us directly from his mouth what we needed and should know through his teachings, love, examples,parables,. To be clear I ( Catholic ) believe God was the one who revealed truth to us directly from God ):)

God bless,

Carl

Edited August 28, 2008 by ceeboo
Real bad typo ( thank you HiJolly )

[Guest ceeboo]

Greek Lexicon: Strong's Number 86

86 haides, hah'-dace; from 1 (as a neg. particle) and 1492; prop. unseen, i.e. "Hades" or the place (state) of departed souls

Mormon Doctrine as most do not like to see, Elder McConkie explains it:

Hi Hemi,

I have seen others as well.

To me, I guess we all have to decide who's basket we place all our eggs,

Elder McConkie, any other man, or the Lord and Savior the Divine Jesus Christ.

God bless,

Carl

[HiJolly]

Ceeboo -- it's PolycARp, not what you wrote... :-)

HiJolly

[HiJolly]

Hello HiJolly,

Thanks so much for the wealth of perspective you have shared.:)

My pleasure.

For what i's worth, I look forward ( hope not real soon though ) that we all can smile and talk about this in HIS KINGDOM some day.:):)

Amen.

You and many others here also rock!! ( I wonder if that means Peter LOL )

Like I was saying, the rock is revelation. (ducking)

HiJolly

[Guest ceeboo]

Ceeboo -- it's PolycARp, not what you wrote... :-)

HiJolly

:o:o:o OOOOOOPS ( SORRY )

You are indeed correct, thank you for pointing that out ( of all the things I could have mispelled ??? go figure LOL :lol:

[Vanhin]

Thank you as well Vanhin,

I have seriously considered not making this post as to not seem argumentative but have decided to share in hopes that we can extend our thoughts to eachother in an even light for mutual benefit and fairness.:)

Ceeboo,

No worries. Feel free to speak your mind.

Your comments to me seem to take as FACT the prophet ( JS ), how God has chosen to restore his church. In addition you use the early Church to strengthen your claims.

Well, I hope you can see that my comments also recognize and appreciate, that you do not accept these things as facts.

The truth is, I do accept the Joseph Smith story as fact, and I approach this topic as someone who knows it to be true, addressing someone who clearly does not. I am a life long member of the Church, having joined at the age of 9. For me, the path to this knowledge started at option #2 and then, inevitably I was faced with option #3.

What I have attempted to explain to you, is that God calls prophets. That is how he operates, and the scriptures are a testament to that. Even after his ascension into Heaven, Jesus Christ directed the afairs of his kingdom through the apostles, by way of revelation. You would have to totally ignore many important parts of the Bible to come to some other conclusion.

So, one thing I am trying to establish, is that it is plausible, and entirely possible that the pesky Mormons are right about this; or at the very least, that something like this can happen. I am curious about whether you believe that it is a possibility that what we claim is true?

There is indeed an alternate perspective on this, I will try and share mine with you while trying my best to be fair and respectful to your beliefs, as you have to mine.:)

The " restoration " was to restore the Church back to the early church days ( before the JS claim of great apostasy and due to the broken line of apostles ) agreed ?

Yes.

Well IMHO ( with a hint of Catholic bias ) the early Church writers do not strengthen the LDS claim at all, Rather drastically weaken it, the early Church writers ( Ignatious, Eusebius, Clemente,Polycrap, etc ) Write nothing at all about this Great Apostasy, In addition, it is my further humble opinion that they also wrote nothing about much of the Mormon Doctrine that is claimed to be restored ( not to mention they seemingly never knew or heard of a Mormon ).

I appreciate your opinion on this. It's not my intention to try to prove to you that an apostasy happened. That is not necessary for unbelievers to accept, when discussing our claims. It's only important to understand that we believe there was an apostasy, and why we believe that; which are facts that I think you understand by now. You know that Mormons believe there was an apostasy, and that they believe it because of the First Vision.

You also understand and agree that if the First Vision did not occur, then we definetly are wrong about our claims. that's how vital that experience is to our church.

" How do I suppose God reveals truth to us "

IMHO, there are many ways, but the primary way that he did was to send his son to tell us directly from his mouth what we needed and should know through his teachings, love, examples,parables,. To be clear I ( Catholic ) believe God was the one who revealed truth to us directly from God ):)

God bless,

Carl

The other thing I was trying to establish with you, is that we can know directly from God the truth. Before talking about that, I wanted to know how you think God reveals truth. So, I thank you for your answer.

You say that there are many ways God reveals truth to us, but the primary way is through his Son; namely his teachings, and example. I agree with that. But what I really wanted to know, is how do you think a person can know that the teachings of Jesus Christ, or the prophets, represent truth?

For example, if you take a Bible to someone who has never seen it before or even heard of Jesus Christ, how can they find out for themselves that it really is the word of God? How do you think?

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[Vanhin]

You know Vanhin,

When I prayed to know that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was the restored Church of Christ, I did get that comfirmation in a miraculous way. Since joining this forum I have had a lot of questions. I've taken all of this to the Lord in prayer. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think I'm getting any definite answers. I'm not bold enough to say what I'm really thinking. But, I do know they are my thoughts right now and not answers to my prayers. Sorry, just rambling. Sometimes it helps me sort out my thoughts.:)

Howdy :)

What was your experience like when you prayed about the Church? Do you mind sharing the story?

Regards,

Vanhin

[Moksha]

Ceeboo -- it's PolycARp, not what you wrote... :-)

HiJolly

I think the items in question of both spellings can be found in Salt Lake County's Jordan River. One requires bait and a hook, the other a net.

[richlittell]

CeeBoo,

Don't let these lifelong Mormons get you down.

I'm a convert to the LDS church and very well understand that other denominations have difficulty with Joseph Smith, and prophets, and revelation and restoration.

We (LDS) claim the need to have constant revelation, while other denominations see no need for it because they have the ultimate, the testimony of Jesus Christ through the Bible. If Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses why could he not just as well have fulfilled all the prophets too? Jesus Christ pretty much gave us the formula for good living and most importantly salvation, any thing more or less than this seemed, well cultish to me before I converted. I mean, come on, a man saying he is a prophet of God? And if some man outside our (LDS) church said he was a prophet of God, what would we Mormons think? We would think that poor man was wacko. It's a tough doctrine.

So how do we know if a man is a prophet? Beats me, inspiration I suppose, but many have prayed and not felt such inspiration. The scriptures say by their fruits you shall know them. So I suppose we could look at that too. But that's not always convincing either.

For me, it was just a need to know more. The Christian doctrines of the several denominations I belonged to simply failed to answer most questions that I had personally about spiritual matters. Why must people who have never heard the gospel burn in hell if God is truly a loving and merciful God? How could a good man who is not a Christian burn in hell while those who are "saved" Christians but not actually good people go to heaven? Why must children burn in hell if they aren't baptized? Exactly what really did happen in those three days after Christ died and before he was resurrected? How can God be three individuals and one at the same time, is he spirit or body? And so forth and so on... Seems the only church doctrines that satisfactorily answered all my questions, after years of study, was the LDS church. And although the Bible doesn't "prove" LDS doctrine, it doesn't disprove it either, so from my perspective the LDS doctrine is still in harmony with the Bible.

For me, I back tracked from there. If these things are true (and I never felt a greater peace in my life than I did when I learned these doctrines), and if the teachings only lead to peace, love, understanding and good, then they must be from God. And where do we get those teachings? From the Book of Mormon and the D&C, (those things the Bible doesn't directly answer). And from where came the B.O.M and D&C.? Joseph Smith. Well, then I started to believe that he was at least an intelligent, spiritual, and inspired man. But wait... what is an inspired man who reveals spiritual truths to those seeking real answers to difficult spiritual questions? That would be a prophet, and that would be ...... Joseph Smith. (And to be honest, from my background, I didn't like that, but as I continued to pray and truly study out all the answers to my unanswered spiritual questions with an open mind to the LDS perspective, after having tried all others, I finally gained a testimony of those teachings, and the source thereof.

Of course, I won't expect you or anyone to believe me. I just like having the chance to tell my own journey.

cheers:)

[candyprpl]

Howdy :)

What was your experience like when you prayed about the Church? Do you mind sharing the story?

Regards,

Vanhin

Well, it's kind of a long story -- if you go to my profile, I have it posted as my conversion story. I got my confirmation about the Church before I actually prayed about it -- it's explained in my story. Everything came together for me -- a peace that I've never felt before. A comfort that I've never experienced before. I told my sisters (who have been members many years) that I feel like I've always known these things. They just smiled because they knew what I meant by that.:)