Question About Joseph Smith Iii

Ray · November 9, 2004

Jenda,

I expect you to know that you are always invited to join us, just as I also expect you to know that you are always invited to join any church. Heh, can you imagine ANY church who would not welcome you or anyone else to wanted to join them? But because I respect your rights to have your own beliefs, and I now understand that you do not accept some of the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I will not mention the fact that you are invited to join us because I also believe your decision to join a church should come from a personal conviction that the church you associate with is declaring the truth.

Or maybe in your case, since you don’t believe there is a church near you that is declaring nothing but the truth, perhaps you should associate with a church that accepts and teaches as much of the truth as you accept. Or maybe you should just start your own church, since trying to change a church from within is basically the same thing but a whole lot harder. Will the RLDS allow you to do that, or will they form a branch near you if you can convert enough people in the CoC?

Anyway, as you can see, I still don't really understand how the RLDS functions, but I appreciate the information you have shared concerning the RLDS and CoC and other "restoration" branches. I appreciate being informed, and I hope you will continue to allow God to guide you in your decisions concerning how and where to worship Him in spirit and in truth.

Amillia · November 9, 2004

Originally posted by Ray@Nov 9 2004, 11:01 AM
Jenda,
I expect you to know that you are always invited to join us, just as I also expect you to know that you are always invited to join any church. Heh, can you imagine ANY church who would not welcome you or anyone else to wanted to join them? But because I respect your rights to have your own beliefs, and I now understand that you do not accept some of the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I will not mention the fact that you are invited to join us because I also believe your decision to join a church should come from a personal conviction that the church you associate with is declaring the truth.
Or maybe in your case, since you don’t believe there is a church near you that is declaring nothing but the truth, perhaps you should associate with a church that accepts and teaches as much of the truth as you accept. Or maybe you should just start your own church, since trying to change a church from within is basically the same thing but a whole lot harder. Will the RLDS allow you to do that, or will they form a branch near you if you can convert enough people in the CoC?
Anyway, as you can see, I still don't really understand how the RLDS functions, but I appreciate the information you have shared concerning the RLDS and CoC and other "restoration" branches. I appreciate being informed, and I hope you will continue to allow God to guide you in your decisions concerning how and where to worship Him in spirit and in truth.

Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?

Jenda · November 9, 2004

Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?

What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?

Ray · November 9, 2004

I don't understand what she meant by that either.

Snow · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Amillia@Nov 9 2004, 10:22 AM

Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?

Starksy,

What does that mean?

Blessed · November 10, 2004

Oh Jenda.... you asked for it... LOL

Now Jenda and I are good friends and please understand I completely disgagree with her assessment of our church. Ya see, Jenda is disgruntled with the church and will not paint it as well as it is. Of course, I am wearing rose-colored glasses she may say or Snow would say... , but that is fine with me.

I will say that I have seen and heard with my own ears and felt the annointing of the Holy Ghost while listening to the leaders speak and they testify to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. I have heard them preach the old time Restoration gospel of Joseph Smith. I have seen many wonderful things the Community of Christ has done... I have been a part of it.

Does the leadership make mistakes? Yes. Do all believe the same way I do? Probably not. But it is not my place to judge them.

Just this last weekend I was at a table with a lady who really brought down the LDS church. I mean the lady just went off and said you all have no idea who Jesus is and la de da da. I asked her if she could see in anyone's heart or if that was something only God could do? That shut her up.

My point in saying that is this... Jenda can say what she wants to say about the leadership and how we aren't sharing the fullness anymore. I disagree as I have heard otherwise. Others can say how we aren't the true church and what have you. God alone knows only what goes in our hearts. He alone can judge us for that.

Community of Christ does what it can to bring the gospel of Christ into the lives and hearts of people. We can do better, but then again anyone who bears the name of Christ can do better as well. It is a eternal effort. One in which the hand should not say to the foot "I have no need of you."

Okay... off soapbox and taking my box back to my seat in the peanut gallery. :ph34r:

Fatboy · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Blessed@Nov 9 2004, 10:04 PM
Oh Jenda.... you asked for it... LOL
Now Jenda and I are good friends and please understand I completely disgagree with her assessment of our church. Ya see, Jenda is disgruntled with the church and will not paint it as well as it is. Of course, I am wearing rose-colored glasses she may say or Snow would say... , but that is fine with me.
I will say that I have seen and heard with my own ears and felt the annointing of the Holy Ghost while listening to the leaders speak and they testify to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. I have heard them preach the old time Restoration gospel of Joseph Smith. I have seen many wonderful things the Community of Christ has done... I have been a part of it.
Does the leadership make mistakes? Yes. Do all believe the same way I do? Probably not. But it is not my place to judge them.
Just this last weekend I was at a table with a lady who really brought down the LDS church. I mean the lady just went off and said you all have no idea who Jesus is and la de da da. I asked her if she could see in anyone's heart or if that was something only God could do? That shut her up.
My point in saying that is this... Jenda can say what she wants to say about the leadership and how we aren't sharing the fullness anymore. I disagree as I have heard otherwise. Others can say how we aren't the true church and what have you. God alone knows only what goes in our hearts. He alone can judge us for that.
Community of Christ does what it can to bring the gospel of Christ into the lives and hearts of people. We can do better, but then again anyone who bears the name of Christ can do better as well. It is a eternal effort. One in which the hand should not say to the foot "I have no need of you."
Okay... off soapbox and taking my box back to my seat in the peanut gallery.

FB: Blessed, I am glad you have found your faith and have felt the Holy Ghost. I would think that if you have two churches which have the same roots and believe similar things, I would think that it would be difficult to distinquish which is follow 100% and which one is not. Especially when one who is not can receive confirmation by the spirit of truth revealed to them. For what it is worth, I have asked God for knowledge concerning the RLDS, and have not received an answer, but a stupor of thought. Perhaps that is an answer. I have many times received confirmation about truths that we teach that you do not believe in.

I will say this. The LDS church is not for everyone. There will be those who will not ask God if it true. I remember on my mission that we had been teaching a JW. Everytime we went there the spirit of teaching came in and she knew it was right. When asked to pray and ask God, she said that could not because she would have to change. She knew it was true. She told us it was true. Might be hard to understand, but for some people it just is not for them.

Jenda · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Blessed@Nov 9 2004, 09:04 PM
Oh Jenda.... you asked for it... LOL
Now Jenda and I are good friends and please understand I completely disgagree with her assessment of our church. Ya see, Jenda is disgruntled with the church and will not paint it as well as it is. Of course, I am wearing rose-colored glasses she may say or Snow would say... , but that is fine with me.
I will say that I have seen and heard with my own ears and felt the annointing of the Holy Ghost while listening to the leaders speak and they testify to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. I have heard them preach the old time Restoration gospel of Joseph Smith. I have seen many wonderful things the Community of Christ has done... I have been a part of it.
Does the leadership make mistakes? Yes. Do all believe the same way I do? Probably not. But it is not my place to judge them.
Just this last weekend I was at a table with a lady who really brought down the LDS church. I mean the lady just went off and said you all have no idea who Jesus is and la de da da. I asked her if she could see in anyone's heart or if that was something only God could do? That shut her up.
My point in saying that is this... Jenda can say what she wants to say about the leadership and how we aren't sharing the fullness anymore. I disagree as I have heard otherwise. Others can say how we aren't the true church and what have you. God alone knows only what goes in our hearts. He alone can judge us for that.
Community of Christ does what it can to bring the gospel of Christ into the lives and hearts of people. We can do better, but then again anyone who bears the name of Christ can do better as well. It is a eternal effort. One in which the hand should not say to the foot "I have no need of you."
Okay... off soapbox and taking my box back to my seat in the peanut gallery.

Blessed, I think you are not making the distinction between the individual person and the organization. I, myself, have felt the spirit with many of the leadership. What I am saying in no way detracts from their personal relationship with God, I am talking about the organization. Not too long ago you were able to do the same thing, then your vision became clouded and you became unable to distinguish between the people and the organization. I remember the point that happened.

I am not saying that the church is not doing anything good, or that there aren't good people in the church (although that is all that you seem to be able to see me say), I am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches, and the church is laying that task aside to embrace the same task that other churches have assumed, which is, IMO, a lesser task.

Amillia · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda@Nov 9 2004, 01:54 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?

If the CofC is the RLDS church today, then it was the break off from the church when BY led the people to SLC. That was a division of Zion. Why is that so hard to understand?

Amillia · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Nov 9 2004, 07:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Nov 9 2004, 07:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Nov 9 2004, 10:22 AM

Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?

Starksy,

What does that mean?

You have a fixation for Starsky/peace...as some other males do here. I find it funny. :lol:

Jenda · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Amillia+Nov 10 2004, 10:06 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Nov 10 2004, 10:06 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 9 2004, 01:54 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?

If the CofC is the RLDS church today, then it was the break off from the church when BY led the people to SLC. That was a division of Zion. Why is that so hard to understand?

You misunderstand like most people misunderstand.

Nobody broke off from BY's group. The church fractured into at least 16 different groups. Each group claimed authority, some had letters from Joseph saying they were the right ones, others had blessings by Joseph, others just claimed it was their right as this specific priesthood holder. Whatever the claim, each claimed authority.

You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.

Ray · November 10, 2004

Jenda,

You misunderstand too, because there WERE people who "broke off" from “Brigham Young”s group”, or what is officially known as the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", and the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" did NOT break up or fracture into 16 different organizations.

And btw, you can truthfully say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was and is “Brigham Young’s group”, because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was and is the "group" that sustained and continues to sustain Brigham Young as one of its leaders, just as it always had and always will.

Got that now?

In other words, the 16 different organizations that “broke off” from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are all apostate organizations, separate and distinct from the organization that has always been known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And even though there are people who were once members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints before they “broke off” from the Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued since the very first day it was organized. Or in other words, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints never did dissolve and then reform as a different organization.

If you doubt my word on it, you can check many official American historical documents to see that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued to exist without dissolution since it was organized on April 6, 1830 in Fayette, Seneca County, New York.

And btw, according to prophecy, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will always remain and continue to fill the Earth.

Amillia · November 10, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda+Nov 10 2004, 11:16 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Nov 10 2004, 11:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Amillia@Nov 10 2004, 10:06 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 9 2004, 01:54 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?
If the CofC is the RLDS church today, then it was the break off from the church when BY led the people to SLC. That was a division of Zion. Why is that so hard to understand?

You misunderstand like most people misunderstand.

Nobody broke off from BY's group. The church fractured into at least 16 different groups. Each group claimed authority, some had letters from Joseph saying they were the right ones, others had blessings by Joseph, others just claimed it was their right as this specific priesthood holder. Whatever the claim, each claimed authority.

You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.

You are putting words into my mouth and taking other words I stated and putting a whole new meaning to them. Stop that!

You state a number as if it eliminates significance or division of Zion. The number of splintered groups doesn't make the fact that they divided the church, any less true.

Then you state that I imply (LOL) that numbers made the group which followed BY the right one. You are the one implying that numbers were significant.

The right one was identified by God, not men and their claims. The people knew who to follow if they were filled with the Spirit to guide them.

Where are all those slintered groups today? Where is the true Zion today? Have you ever heard the song, "We Thank Thee O God for a Prophet?" There is a line which reads: and those who fight against Zion, will surely be smitten at last. I think we have seen that happen with all the splinter groups.

Jenda · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Amillia+Nov 10 2004, 10:56 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Nov 10 2004, 10:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by -Amillia@Nov 10 2004, 10:06 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 9 2004, 01:54 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?
If the CofC is the RLDS church today, then it was the break off from the church when BY led the people to SLC. That was a division of Zion. Why is that so hard to understand?
You misunderstand like most people misunderstand.
Nobody broke off from BY's group. The church fractured into at least 16 different groups. Each group claimed authority, some had letters from Joseph saying they were the right ones, others had blessings by Joseph, others just claimed it was their right as this specific priesthood holder. Whatever the claim, each claimed authority.
You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.

You are putting words into my mouth and taking other words I stated and putting a whole new meaning to them. Stop that!

You state a number as if it eliminates significance or division of Zion. The number of splintered groups doesn't make the fact that they divided the church, any less true.

Then you state that I imply (LOL) that numbers made the group which followed BY the right one. You are the one implying that numbers were significant.

The right one was identified by God, not men and their claims. The people knew who to follow if they were filled with the Spirit to guide them.

Where are all those slintered groups today? Where is the true Zion today? Have you ever heard the song, "We Thank Thee O God for a Prophet?" There is a line which reads: and those who fight against Zion, will surely be smitten at last. I think we have seen that happen with all the splinter groups.

Zion, today is not in the LDS church. In fact, I have never heard any LDS person talk about Zion, let alone state that it is important to them today. Once I brought up the topic of Zion on this discussion board, and the whole thread was 3 or 4 posts long. It was shrugged off. Temple ordinances are of much more importance to the LDS than Zion. Whereas, for the RLDS, that is what the church is all about. Zion is the number one priority in the RLDS church because that is what the restoration was called to establish. To that end, the RLDS gathered to Independence, within the same generation, and worked for the first 100 years (or so) to specifically follow those commandments that the Lord laid down regarding the gathering and acquiring lands, etc., to begin to build up Zion. Where are the LDS? They are just now beginning to gather in any number to Independence, and many have said that the Lord changed His mind (something I don't believe the Lord does), and made SLC Zion.

Oh, BTW, we sing that song every time the prophet receives a revelation and it is approved and placed in the D&C. B)

Blessed · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Fatboy@Nov 9 2004, 11:28 PM
I have many times received confirmation about truths that we teach that you do not believe in.

Fatboy,

Could you share some of these truths that you assume I do not believe in or were you saying you as in general terms and not exactly saying that to me. I was kinda confused.

Thank you.

Jenda · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Ray@Nov 10 2004, 10:38 AM
Jenda,
You misunderstand too, because there WERE people who "broke off" from “Brigham Young”s group”, or what is officially known as the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", and the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" did NOT break up or fracture into 16 different organizations.
And btw, you can truthfully say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was and is “Brigham Young’s group”, because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was and is the "group" that sustained and continues to sustain Brigham Young as one of its leaders, just as it always had and always will.
Got that now?
In other words, the 16 different organizations that “broke off” from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are all apostate organizations, separate and distinct from the organization that has always been known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And even though there are people who were once members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints before they “broke off” from the Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued since the very first day it was organized. Or in other words, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints never did dissolve and then reform as a different organization.
If you doubt my word on it, you can check many official American historical documents to see that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued to exist without dissolution since it was organized on April 6, 1830 in Fayette, Seneca County, New York.
And btw, according to prophecy, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will always remain and continue to fill the Earth.

Ray, the only people who broke off of BY's group are those who have broken off since they got to Utah. I know there are a few. But, I was referring, as I assume you know, about the split that happened at the time Joseph Smith was killed. The church most certainly did fracture into 16 different organizations. And most of the groups that splintered continued to call themselves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and did not sustain BY as successor. Only one faction did. In fact, the Reorganization called itself that for years, until the court case that declared them (the RLDS) the true extention of the original church. The judge did say, however, that the RLDS could not use the name because the LDS had used it uncontested for a significant period of time.

And just so you know, your church broke off from mine, and you are apostate.

Blessed · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 08:43 AM

II am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches,

Jenda,

The task God gave our church to do was to be apart of the building of the kingdom of God on earth (Zion) and to be an ensign of peace. That is our task.

Jenda · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Blessed+Nov 10 2004, 06:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Blessed @ Nov 10 2004, 06:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 08:43 AM

II am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches,

Jenda,

The task God gave our church to do was to be apart of the building of the kingdom of God on earth (Zion) and to be an ensign of peace. That is our task.

No, that was not the task. The tasks were (there were two) to preach repentance to this generation and to seek to establish My zion.

Peace and Zion are not the same, depending on how you define it, and the church has decided to define it as worldly peace and not as the peace that God gives.

Isaiah 11:6 was the definition that the church used for a long time for peace, now it seems to be something different.

Randy Johnson · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda+Nov 10 2004, 07:04 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Nov 10 2004, 07:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Amillia@Nov 10 2004, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by -Amillia@Nov 10 2004, 10:06 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 9 2004, 01:54 PM
Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
What does "failed to divide Zion and stand" mean? Why would anyone wish to divide Zion?
If the CofC is the RLDS church today, then it was the break off from the church when BY led the people to SLC. That was a division of Zion. Why is that so hard to understand?
You misunderstand like most people misunderstand.
Nobody broke off from BY's group. The church fractured into at least 16 different groups. Each group claimed authority, some had letters from Joseph saying they were the right ones, others had blessings by Joseph, others just claimed it was their right as this specific priesthood holder. Whatever the claim, each claimed authority.
You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.
You are putting words into my mouth and taking other words I stated and putting a whole new meaning to them. Stop that!
You state a number as if it eliminates significance or division of Zion. The number of splintered groups doesn't make the fact that they divided the church, any less true.
Then you state that I imply (LOL) that numbers made the group which followed BY the right one. You are the one implying that numbers were significant.
The right one was identified by God, not men and their claims. The people knew who to follow if they were filled with the Spirit to guide them.
Where are all those slintered groups today? Where is the true Zion today? Have you ever heard the song, "We Thank Thee O God for a Prophet?" There is a line which reads: and those who fight against Zion, will surely be smitten at last. I think we have seen that happen with all the splinter groups.

Zion, today is not in the LDS church. In fact, I have never heard any LDS person talk about Zion, let alone state that it is important to them today. Once I brought up the topic of Zion on this discussion board, and the whole thread was 3 or 4 posts long. It was shrugged off. Temple ordinances are of much more importance to the LDS than Zion. Whereas, for the RLDS, that is what the church is all about. Zion is the number one priority in the RLDS church because that is what the restoration was called to establish. To that end, the RLDS gathered to Independence, within the same generation, and worked for the first 100 years (or so) to specifically follow those commandments that the Lord laid down regarding the gathering and acquiring lands, etc., to begin to build up Zion. Where are the LDS? They are just now beginning to gather in any number to Independence, and many have said that the Lord changed His mind (something I don't believe the Lord does), and made SLC Zion.

Oh, BTW, we sing that song every time the prophet receives a revelation and it is approved and placed in the D&C. B)

Dawn,

Having been born and raised in Independence...I can tell you first hand....that the cause and hope of Zion is alive and well among the LDS people! Thats a fact.

I have heard and read many talks about Zion from the General Authorities of the Church. Zion has not..and will not be moved out her place.

The Church has aquired tens of thousands of acres of land in and around Independence. This has been on going and will continue to. The LDS church is growing nicely here...both in terms of convert baptisms and those members who are choosing to move here.

The importance and sacredness of Independence has not diminished one wit. The HQ's of the Church will stand here one day.

We believe in the gathering to Zion and to her stakes. We may have a different view on how it is to take place...but we believe in the gathering as passionately as do the Restorationists. The gathering is first...."spiritual" meaning joining the Lord's true church....and secondly, the gathering is literal....meaning to gather physically. As they say...timing is everything. It will happen....have NO doubt about that!

Dawn.....the Restorationists are on very sandy soil when they keep espousing the notions of "disorganization"...."usurptation of power by BY"....etc. As has been stated in one of the posts above...and that is verified from the Kirtland Temple and Independence Temple lot cases....the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was never in any state of disarray or disorganization.

In the words of W.W. Blair (I believe) in his testimony in the Independence Temple lot case....when asked about why he and others did not go west...he simply said...."We simply withdrew ourselves from them...thats all". Dawn...thats pretty straight forward....and he was speaking the truth when he testified of such.

The LDS church NEVER skipped a beat after the death of the Prophet. Other than those who had a "beef" with the Quorum of the 12 for whatever reason....give some practical examples which would demonstrate that the Church in 1844 was in such a state of disarray and disorganization as claimed by the RLDS/CoC....that would give anyone the impression that the church couldnt not move forward with its mission??

randy

Snow · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Amillia+Nov 10 2004, 10:08 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Nov 10 2004, 10:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Snow@Nov 9 2004, 07:21 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Nov 9 2004, 10:22 AM

Wouldn't it be interesting to have the CofC admit they have failed to divide Zion and stand?
Starksy,
What does that mean?

You have a fixation for Starsky/peace...as some other males do here. I find it funny. :lol:

No

I am not fixated. Simply put, you, Amilia, used to go by the name of Starsky, and before that Peace. That I call you by a name you yourself used does not make me fixated.

Randy Johnson · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda+Nov 10 2004, 07:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Nov 10 2004, 07:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Blessed@Nov 10 2004, 06:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 08:43 AM

II am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches,
Jenda,
The task God gave our church to do was to be apart of the building of the kingdom of God on earth (Zion) and to be an ensign of peace. That is our task.

No, that was not the task. The tasks were (there were two) to preach repentance to this generation and to seek to establish My zion.

Peace and Zion are not the same, depending on how you define it, and the church has decided to define it as worldly peace and not as the peace that God gives.

Isaiah 11:6 was the definition that the church used for a long time for peace, now it seems to be something different.

Dawn,

WHOA there sister!!! Hold on there!!

There was NO such decision given stating that the RLDS church was the true successor to the original Church!!

This is probably THE most tossed around urban legend there is among the RLDS/CoC/Remnant churches!

As I showed the folks on the Center Place discussion board....there is NO Civil Court in the United States of America that can litigate and render judgements or rulings with respect to ecclesiastical and doctrinal disputes!! Period...end of story!!!!

The LDS church was never even a party to the litigation. There was never ANY evidence presented from the LDS church...why? Because we were not a party to it!! The very fact that in the inititial pleadings to the court....the issue of "who was the "original" church was never even stated. So....EVEN IF a civil court could litigate such matters...WHICH THEY CANNOT....the judge in this case STILL couldnt because it was not part of the "pleading to the court"!

So....really...you need to spread the word.....try not to keep this notion alive...the facts of the court case in no way support the conclusions that the RLDS/CoC keep implying.

randy

Jenda · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Randy Johnson+Nov 10 2004, 06:42 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Randy Johnson @ Nov 10 2004, 06:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by -Blessed@Nov 10 2004, 06:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 08:43 AM

II am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches,
Jenda,
The task God gave our church to do was to be apart of the building of the kingdom of God on earth (Zion) and to be an ensign of peace. That is our task.
No, that was not the task. The tasks were (there were two) to preach repentance to this generation and to seek to establish My zion.
Peace and Zion are not the same, depending on how you define it, and the church has decided to define it as worldly peace and not as the peace that God gives.
Isaiah 11:6 was the definition that the church used for a long time for peace, now it seems to be something different.

Dawn,

WHOA there sister!!! Hold on there!!

There was NO such decision given stating that the RLDS church was the true successor to the original Church!!

This is probably THE most tossed around urban legend there is among the RLDS/CoC/Remnant churches!

As I showed the folks on the Center Place discussion board....there is NO Civil Court in the United States of America that can litigate and render judgements or rulings with respect to ecclesiastical and doctrinal disputes!! Period...end of story!!!!

The LDS church was never even a party to the litigation. There was never ANY evidence presented from the LDS church...why? Because we were not a party to it!! The very fact that in the inititial pleadings to the court....the issue of "who was the "original" church was never even stated. So....EVEN IF a civil court could litigate such matters...WHICH THEY CANNOT....the judge in this case STILL couldnt because it was not part of the "pleading to the court"!

So....really...you need to spread the word.....try not to keep this notion alive...the facts of the court case in no way support the conclusions that the RLDS/CoC keep implying.

randy

Randy, I don't know if you noticed it or not, but I was responding to this comment of Ray's.

If you doubt my word on it, you can check many official American historical documents to see that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued to exist without dissolution since it was organized on April 6, 1830 in Fayette, Seneca County, New York.

Besides, you base your "knowledge" of that case on a false conclusion contained in a book that has been popular in LDS circles. I have talked with someone who has intimate knowledge regarding the case and he has written (or is writing) a more realistic book regarding the issue. I can get back to you with some of that information if you want, or you can continue to believe faulty information. Your choice.

You might also wish to remind Ray that BY had everyone re-baptized once they got away from Nauvoo, thus creating a new organization (and I might add, one with different rules and regulations than the original). That they kept the same name is beside the point. The RLDS accepted everyone from the early church on the original baptism and ordination, so in that sense (also), they are the original church.

Snow · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 10:16 AM

You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.

That is a complete misrepresentation of my position.

Might may or may not make right but my position is not based on popularity. Here is a summary (without considering the merits of individual succession claims, ie, who did JS want to succeed him):

1. In August 1844 the Nauvoo Church voted to accept the Quorum of the Twelve to act for them. The mechanics of how BY succeeded JS came later

2. When BY addressed the Church prior to the vote, many in attendance reported a miraculous and spiritual experience where the mantle of JS settled upon BY confirming him as the person to follow.

3. In that meeting Rigdon had the chance to assert his claim and asked William Phelps to speak on his behalf. Phelps said in his talk: "If you want to do right, uphold the twelve."

4. Following the death of JS, numerous schism groups formed. The Church itself, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, was not a schism group. The official RLDS church historian (Howard, Church Through the Years) wrote, "Utah Mormonism hardly qualifies as a schismatic group."

5. No other group formed in the immediate wake of the succession crisis has amounted to anything of greater than triffling consequence.

6. With the exception of Rigdon, William Smith, Lyman Wright and John E. Paige, the entire Church hierarchy at the time of Joseph's death supported Brigham Young

6. The RLDS was not formed in the wake of JS's death but came much later at the hands of men who had bounced around from one schism to another including two other men who had not even belonged to the Church prior to Joseph's death. They ordained JS III who had previously persued Methodism - a tradition reintroduced by current RLDS President - and spiritualism and phrenology. Smith III rejected The Church of Jesus Christ LDS out of hand because of his revulsion to polygamy brought about because his mother, Emma had lied to him regarding the origin of plural marriage and Joseph, his father's role in it.

7. Today, none of the Mormon derived movements amounts to a hill of beans except the LDS Church (they are so fragmented, disjointed, inconsequential, odd, bizzarre, or unsuccessful that is is impossible to see how they could in any way represent "God's" earthly vehicle for bringing institutional salvation to the worlds inhabitent, with the possible, remotely possible, exception of the RLDS Church but even the RLDS is hardly Mormon anymore and certainly is not doing much of a job in spreading the gospel. I am sure the CoC/RLDS/Restoration groups make a tremendous addition to the lives of their adherents - they just aren't doing much for the larger restoration of the gospel thing.

The reason I didn't list the validitiy of individual succession claims is because JS blessed, ordained or designated as his successor: David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, Hyrum Smith, JS III, David Hyrum Smith, Samuel H. Smith as well as laying the foundation for succession claims of Sidney Rigdon, William Smith, Lyman Wright, William Marks, James L. isn't-that-Strang, Alpheus Cutler and the Quorum of the Twelve. The RLDS claim to succession is far from unique; it is one of many and not even the strongest claim. Those closest to it choose. Better to focus on what happened, not which of the many claims might have been best.

Randy Johnson · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Jenda+Nov 10 2004, 08:16 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Nov 10 2004, 08:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Randy Johnson@Nov 10 2004, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by -Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by -Blessed@Nov 10 2004, 06:11 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 08:43 AM

II am saying that God gave the church a specific task, a different task than other churches,
Jenda,
The task God gave our church to do was to be apart of the building of the kingdom of God on earth (Zion) and to be an ensign of peace. That is our task.
No, that was not the task. The tasks were (there were two) to preach repentance to this generation and to seek to establish My zion.
Peace and Zion are not the same, depending on how you define it, and the church has decided to define it as worldly peace and not as the peace that God gives.
Isaiah 11:6 was the definition that the church used for a long time for peace, now it seems to be something different.
Dawn,
WHOA there sister!!! Hold on there!!
There was NO such decision given stating that the RLDS church was the true successor to the original Church!!
This is probably THE most tossed around urban legend there is among the RLDS/CoC/Remnant churches!
As I showed the folks on the Center Place discussion board....there is NO Civil Court in the United States of America that can litigate and render judgements or rulings with respect to ecclesiastical and doctrinal disputes!! Period...end of story!!!!
The LDS church was never even a party to the litigation. There was never ANY evidence presented from the LDS church...why? Because we were not a party to it!! The very fact that in the inititial pleadings to the court....the issue of "who was the "original" church was never even stated. So....EVEN IF a civil court could litigate such matters...WHICH THEY CANNOT....the judge in this case STILL couldnt because it was not part of the "pleading to the court"!
So....really...you need to spread the word.....try not to keep this notion alive...the facts of the court case in no way support the conclusions that the RLDS/CoC keep implying.
randy

Randy, I don't know if you noticed it or not, but I was responding to this comment of Ray's.

If you doubt my word on it, you can check many official American historical documents to see that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has continued to exist without dissolution since it was organized on April 6, 1830 in Fayette, Seneca County, New York.

Besides, you base your "knowledge" of that case on a false conclusion contained in a book that has been popular in LDS circles. I have talked with someone who has intimate knowledge regarding the case and he has written (or is writing) a more realistic book regarding the issue. I can get back to you with some of that information if you want, or you can continue to believe faulty information. Your choice.

You might also wish to remind Ray that BY had everyone re-baptized once they got away from Nauvoo, thus creating a new organization (and I might add, one with different rules and regulations than the original). That they kept the same name is beside the point. The RLDS accepted everyone from the early church on the original baptism and ordination, so in that sense (also), they are the original church.

Dawn,

Whether a book is popular or not is not material. What is material is the facts of the case. The law is the law. A judgement is a judgement.

The book is one of several I have about the Kirtland Temple and Independence Temple lot cases. The one I have referenced is entitled the "The Reorganized Church and the Civil Courts". It is a very exhaustive look at both those court cases...written by a seasoned and experienced lawyer...specializing in estate/title litigation.

I will look forward to reading your friends work. You...however....are making a grand assumption...in claiming I am accepting bogus information, this after I have read the court cases..the judgments rendered...and the errors made during the course of the trials. Other than Elbert A. Smiths pamphlet on this subject...what books have you read concerning them? Since you have not read this particular book which I have referenced...how can you make the statement you made?

I dont suppose this individual you mention has any more access to the facts of the case...than any other person who has a desire to look at the details thereof. As Sgt. Friday always says...."just the facts ma'am"!

Yes...by all means...I want you to share with me...any and all info...ASAP on this subject!!!!

The Restorationists have always made the comment that they embrace the "original" beliefs and tenents of the church founded by JS. Also..as you have mentioned in your previous post...you subscribe to Judge Phillips "opinion" NOT ..."judgment" that the RLDS church was "similar" to the original church.

In this same "opinion" in commenting on the alleged departure from the faith of the people of the Church of Christ at Independence, the judge declared...."they repudiate the doctrine taught by the Church in general after 1833, 1834 and 1835; and also the law relating to "Tithes and Offerings", and the doctrine of Baptism of the Dead, which were taught by the mother church. They also seem to reject the law relating to the Presidency, and of the "twelve----Traveling High Council", and also the "Quorum of Seventy Evangelists". (60 Federal 956)

Judge Phillips showed throughout the Independence Temple lot case that he was not in any way sufficiently knowledgable about the differences between the LDS and the newly formed RLDS church. His ignorance of the foundational beliefs of the LDS church led to him making many erroneous and error filled conclusions during the case.

But....I do find it telling that he specifically mentioned the practice of Baptism for the Dead as being an original belief and practice of the "original" church. So...it goes without saying...that at least to that degree...the RLDS/Restorationists have departed from the original beliefs and practices of the original church.

Dawn....I have already explained to you my position about the "rebaptisms". They were simply a voluntary affirmation of the covenants they had made with their Lord. Also...because baptismal records had been lost or destroyed during the persecution of the Saints...as well as during the exodus. Also...in some instances...the ordinance had never been recorded to begin with...so this afforded an official record to be made.

randy

Jenda · November 11, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Nov 10 2004, 08:59 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Nov 10 2004, 08:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 10 2004, 10:16 AM

You imply, as does Snow, that because BY took the largest group, that they were right. But might doesn't make right. It just makes another claim, no better or worse than the others.