Guest Gilvisto Posted November 6, 2005 Report Share Posted November 6, 2005 I have found that scripture masteries are invaluable in dealing with Anti-types... A thing I try to do is to link topics together... like... They start attacking the "faith and works" principle (Anti's LOVE to attack with that)... I bring them to the scripture mastery in James 2 (and Revealations 20)... then go from there to baptism (John 3:5), expressing how baptism is a "work" that must be performed, from there to priesthood authority (Hebrews 5:4 and Matt. 16), from priesthood authority to proper structure of the church (Ephisians 4), to the apostosy (2nd Thess.), from there to the Restoration... I bear my testimony of Joseph Smith and there you go... That one is one of my favorite chains, because it is all New Testament Scripture masteries... and they click together so well... A 14 year old farmboy could not have strung all those facts together.... the church must be true. -Val out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Member_Deleted Posted November 12, 2005 Report Share Posted November 12, 2005 Originally posted by Gilvisto@Nov 6 2005, 03:50 PMI have found that scripture masteries are invaluable in dealing with Anti-types...A thing I try to do is to link topics together... like...They start attacking the "faith and works" principle (Anti's LOVE to attack with that)... I bring them to the scripture mastery in James 2 (and Revealations 20)... then go from there to baptism (John 3:5), expressing how baptism is a "work" that must be performed, from there to priesthood authority (Hebrews 5:4 and Matt. 16), from priesthood authority to proper structure of the church (Ephisians 4), to the apostosy (2nd Thess.), from there to the Restoration... I bear my testimony of Joseph Smith and there you go...That one is one of my favorite chains, because it is all New Testament Scripture masteries... and they click together so well...A 14 year old farmboy could not have strung all those facts together.... the church must be true.-Val out←Hey that was good! keep it coming.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilvisto Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 Thank you kindly... and will do. Val out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josie Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 Gilvisto, sounds like you have put alot of thought into that. Also, I think that those are good scriptures to remember. I won't argue with people over the scriptures, if they give me a chance to explain my views, then I am willing, and those could be some good tips. The spirit leaves when we argue, and then nothing can be accomplished. It is a no win situation in that case. I am so grateful for the scriptures and our having a living prophet to guide and direct us. The Lord has blessed us so much... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 Originally posted by Gilvisto@Nov 6 2005, 03:50 PMA 14 year old farmboy could not have strung all those facts together.... the church must be true.Joseph Smith didn't do it. Those issues were common questions of his time between competing denominations. Having attended various sects, and ultimately deciding to join the Methodist church, he got all his information from the Protestants. Even a 10 year old could understand that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josie Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 "Joseph Smith didn't do it. Those issues were common questions of his time between competing denominations. Having attended various sects, and ultimately deciding to join the Methodist church, he got all his information from the Protestants." Joseph Smith did not join the Methodist Church, he said he leaned toward it. He did not get his information from the Methodist Church or any other denomination, because they did not have it. Joseph Smith's education was meager as far as school was concerned, but I know that he did translate the Book of Mormon from the plates. It is remarkable to me that anyone could believe otherwise considering: 1) the Book of Mormon is being used by archiologists to find and uncover ruins all over Central and South America., 2) Ancient tablets or inscripted history are being found all over the Western Hemisphere, that authenticate names for time periods used in the Book of Mormon, and events. This information is being found, not just by members of the Church, but by non members too. These ancient tablets have just started to be translated in the last few years, so there is no way that Joseph Smith could have known about them and what they contained. The names in the Book of Mormon alone are important to its authenticity, because if Joseph had used a name before its time or after its time, he would have made a mistake. But, he did not, and no one had this information till the 20 or 30 years. Joseph Had no way of knowing locations of these ancient cities in Central or South America. Joseph Smith was truly a prophet of God and the Book of Mormon is true. I believe that with all of my heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 Originally posted by Josie@Nov 14 2005, 11:54 AMJoseph Smith did not join the Methodist Church, he said he leaned toward it. He did not get his information from the Methodist Church or any other denomination, because they did not have it. Well he did join a Methodist Church class in 1828 (which would seem in direct violation of the First Vision command to "join none of them".). As for the source of his information, those are all passages out of the Bible, and the last time I checked, the Methodists were still using the Bible. The argument over works versus grace is as old as the Protestant movement itself. If there really was a controversy in 1820 between the various denominations, they certainly involved the question of works vs. grace. The rest of your post had nothing to do with either my reply, or the OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Member_Deleted Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 Well he did join a Methodist Church class in 1828 (which would seem in direct violation of the First Vision command to "join none of them".). Joining a class would not constitute joining a church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilvisto Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 I agree with what was said concerning contention... that is true... but when a questioned is asked, I prefer to have some scripture behind me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 Originally posted by Please@Nov 14 2005, 05:51 PMWell he did join a Methodist Church class in 1828 (which would seem in direct violation of the First Vision command to "join none of them".). Joining a class would not constitute joining a church.←I was playing it safe. Most critics say that he actually joined the Methodists officially. I believe that the jury's still out on that one, so I didn't want to make it out like it was an uncontestable fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serg Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 It would be logical for him to join some "çlass" just as we(at least i) do when im not near any of our churches, i just want to hear something that resembles the truth at least, than hear nothing at all. But he didnt join the organization he assisted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moroni Posted December 12, 2005 Report Share Posted December 12, 2005 very well said will try on investigaters if works i will post back :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maureen Posted December 14, 2005 Report Share Posted December 14, 2005 Originally posted by Josie@Nov 14 2005, 10:54 AM...It is remarkable to me that anyone could believe otherwise considering: 1) the Book of Mormon is being used by archiologists to find and uncover ruins all over Central and South America., 2) Ancient tablets or inscripted history are being found all over the Western Hemisphere, that authenticate names for time periods used in the Book of Mormon, and events. This information is being found, not just by members of the Church, but by non members too. These ancient tablets have just started to be translated in the last few years, so there is no way that Joseph Smith could have known about them and what they contained. The names in the Book of Mormon alone are important to its authenticity, because if Joseph had used a name before its time or after its time, he would have made a mistake. But, he did not, and no one had this information till the 20 or 30 years.Joseph Had no way of knowing locations of these ancient cities in Central or South America. Joseph Smith was truly a prophet of God and the Book of Mormon is true. I believe that with all of my heart.This is a little OT but because Josie brought it up I would be curious to get some sources for her claims. Josie, do you have any links that prove your information above - or any books, articles, essays, etc. Thanks!M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenRaines Posted December 14, 2005 Report Share Posted December 14, 2005 Here is a good site for those wanting to do some research.http://farms.byu.edu/I have always felt if I wanted to know something about someone I would not ask their enemies about them but others that know them. Not necessarily their best friends but others that knew them.From this site you can study what has been researched and compare with other research out there.National Geographic has some great stuff on Central and South American ruin digs also.I don't believe that there will be anything discovered that will prove without a doubt that the Book of Mormon is true. If it were so then we would not have to have faith.Faith is the first principle of the gospel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josie Posted December 15, 2005 Report Share Posted December 15, 2005 Thank you Ben. This is a wonderful site that has much information on it and I agree with you that we must go on faith. I do know that much information has came out about ancient civilizations that have been found with the help of the Book of Mormon, including a movie by the church. Thank you for this website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilvisto Posted December 21, 2005 Report Share Posted December 21, 2005 You cannot prove the Book true. It is impossible. You must ask God to prove it. Only he can give you that conformation. Moroni 10:4-5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GRR8 Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Originally posted by Gilvisto@Dec 20 2005, 11:45 PMYou cannot prove the Book true.It is impossible.You must ask God to prove it. Only he can give you that conformation.Moroni 10:4-5←If my memory serves me correctly, didnt J. Smith use a hat and a crystal rock to magnify characters on plates in question? Also, I have not read any sensible excuse why Negroids were denied the ability to recieve the two Priesthoods that were found sacred in the Church in its beginnings, and that this practice of exclusion remained doctrine through 1979. I have suspicions that this doctrine was placed in the beginning as a sort of protective shield as the Negroes were trying find safe shelter in the Northern territories from the Slave owners of the Southern territories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.