17 Points To The True Church Of Christ

[prisonchaplain]

I just have to go over the list that prisonchaplain created.

Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14)

Your statement is False: Of course Jesus set up his church. He called Apostles, seventy and all manner of people go forth to preach the word and spread the gospel. Luke chapter 10 is a good example.

My statement was that Jesus did not seem very involved in the organization of his church. Rather, he spent his time teaching, healing, delivering souls from demons, etc. Your response is that Jesus chose his disciples and the 70, etc. OK. I still say that a read through any of the gospels will convince most that church governance was not Jesus' primary activity. To put it in LDS terms, Jesus calling would fit more in the role of missionary than bishop.

You make a good point here, but what is meant is Living Apostles and Prophets. In the original church, there was a line of leadership that ran the whole church. After Jesus was resurrection, the leadership was pasted down the the senior apostle. The point being, each church was not run by individuals, but was overseen by one leadership, on who could give revelation for the whole church and every part of it where ever it may be. That is why there is so much conflict today. When you have Brother Bob's Church, Pastor John's Church, and Rev. Tony's church, each church is run by a different person with different beliefs. Jesus meant it t be one God, one faith and on baptism.

Let's use an example that could prove either one of our points. In Acts 15 there was the issue of how the Jews and Greeks were going to get along in the church. The controversy suggests to me that different localities were handling it in different ways. Only when the issue rose to the level of serious conflict did a council convene to establish guidelines. The result appears to be a compromise--one that the Holy Spirit endorsed. The Greeks (Gentiles) did not have to be circumcised, but out of respect for Jewish sensibilities, they should refrain from eating meat sacrificed to idols.

So, yes, there was some central authority. However, the fact that this conflict grew in the first place suggests that there was a lot of decision-making at the local level.

I'll look to the rest of these in a later post.

[prisonchaplain]

Your right, some churches may come close to having the organization, but name one besides the LDS church that has everything. There is no other church that has a Prophet, Apostles, Seventy, and down the line all the way to Deacon and Teacher. The Catholic Church comes close, but still doesn't have a Prophet or Apostles.

Most Christian churches have people who fulfill these roles. We do not always use the nomenclature of Luke to the same extent, but our missionaries, pastors, presbyters, regional leadership, and national leadership do what the apostles, the 70, and the prophets do.

Most Christan churches do CLAIM authority from God, but where is it? Anyone can claim anything, but authority of God is the Priesthood. I only know of two churches on the earth that claim to have the true authority of God, but as we know on one of them can be correct.

You may want to familiarize yourself with the doctrine of "the priesthood of all believers." This is commonly held to in Baptist and evangelical churches--it insists that Jesus granted priesthood authority to all of his followers.

Paul was not paid because he belonged to the Church of Jesus Christ. Yes, I'm sure Scribes and Pharisees were paid, and other people that in the temples and synagogs. But didn't Jesus spend much of his ministry rebuking these people for their wrong doings? That's why Jesus set up his own church, because man had become so corrupt. Aren't we all to follow the example of Christ? Did he preach to earn a profit? No, he preached the word to call people to repentance so that they my be saved. We should do the same.

It was Paul's personal choice not to be paid. In fact, he defends this choice, implying that most other apostles and church leaders were supported.

You can not except one scripture so closely and forget the rest. For they are all important. Yes, by his grace we will be saved. But don't forget, Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3:5. Baptism was not just something that we can discard, it is an ordnance set for by Jesus Christ himself. It is essential. That is why we need one true church run by a prophet, that is why the book of Mormon, Doctrine and Convenience, and the Pearl of Great Price was brought forth. Because there is so much confusion in what needs to be done, the Lord had to send a prophet to clarify the truth.

The debate over whether baptism is a prerequisite of salvation or one of the first acts of obedience for a soul already saved is an interesting one. At the end of the day though, almost all Christian churches baptize. Apparently these baptisms are at least sufficient to usher souls into the Terrestial Kingdom.

Just because the the confirming the Holy Ghost is not mention often, does not mean it is not important. Whey did Jesus tell his Apostle to confirm the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands if it was unimportant? Far too easy do people overlook things of importance. The world has discarded so many essential ordinances set for by Jesus Christ. Can you truly call a church that does not do the ordinances of Jesus Christ the true church of Jesus Christ?

As a matter of broad principle, I agree with you that the Holy Spirit must confirm anything that is done for God. Too often we are prone to do our own thing, and then try to baptize it with God's blessing. If we are not Spirit-led there is a very real possiblity that on the Day of Judgment we shall from Jesus that horrible condemnation, "Depart from me. I never knew you."

Yes, the true church must heal the sick. It is obvious that you do not have a testimony of this, so I don't expect you to understand. But I have a strong testimony of this. I have seen this done, in the name of the Lord, by the power of the holy priesthood. And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. Matthew 10:1. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. James 5:14.

Are you assuming that I and those in my church do not believe in, pray for, and see healings and spiritual deliverance???

As I grew up, my parents jumped from church to church. This was good for me, because I had to opportunity to learn of many different churches and what they believed. This helped me to understand how true the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is. But, I was spent much time attending the Baptist churches, along with the Methodist, and Catholic. Non of these churches believe that the Fater, Son and Holy Ghost were separate. As a matter of fact, I have never attended another church, besides the LDS church that believed so. But the more you read the scriptures, the more it testifies that Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three separate beings, but one in unity working towards that same cause. The Bibles says the we shale leave our mothers and fathers and cling unto our wife, and we shale become as one flesh. We know that his is not literal. You and your wife do now merge into one physical person, but this is a metaphor stating that you two shall work as one, to bring forth what is best for your marriage and for the sake of your children. Did Jesus not pray to his Father in heaven always? Did he not say, thy will be done? All three came forth separately in this scripture. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Matthew 3:16-17. When it was all said and done, didn't Jesus descend into heaven to sit on the right side of his Father?

Trinitarians believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are separate persons, but one being. We recognize much of what you say about each person in the Godhead's personal autonomy. Yet, we insist that there is absolutely only one God. So, you are correct that the LDS teaching stands alone, and either marks you as the only church who is correct, or as being in error on the doctrine of God.

We all know that Jesus was reselected. After the resurrection, Jesus visited this apostles in the flesh. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. John 20:27. So Jesus resurrected descended into heaven. So we know that Jesus has a body of flesh and bone. If the son has a body o flesh and bone, why wouldn't that father? And if you believe in the trinity, then none of it makes sense. This means that you believe that Jesus is the Father, that he is a spirit, but we know that Jesus has a body of flesh and bone.

Again, the Trinity teaches that God is three distinct persons. Jesus has a body because he became God-in-the-flesh. The Father did not. The Spirit did not. Jesus is still one being with the Father, but he alone is the Son, and we believe he is the only person in the Godhead with a body of flesh.

When I received my calling in the position I am in now, a group of people prayed about who to call, and all came together with the same answer by the power of the Holy Ghost. I have had the opportunity to call people into positions, and it is always the same. A group of us will pray, I personally had a strong impression on a name I pondered on, and we all returned with the same exact name. Once one is called, they are set apart by the laying on of hands, with the power of the priesthood, which is the athurty of God, and given the the rights and privileges to perform in that calling. Many people with higher callings, such as a Bishop, will be given keys and authority as well. What other church do you know that does this? Who else do you know that has been called in this manner?

Most Christian churches rely on the Holy Spirit to call individuals. Then, leadership confirm that calling, through prayer, spiritual discernment, and through training.

I think your missing the point. The gospel much be preached to every corner of the Earth and sound in every ear. Are missionaries have helped the church reach into almost every part of the world, and continue to bring more and more people unto Christ and into the water of baptism everyday. And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:15

My point is that most evangelical Christian churches are sending missionaries to all parts of the world. Wycliff Translators believe that the Bible will be translated into every written language within a generation (at least the New Testament). This is not something I heard growing up. So, prophesy is being fulfilled.

This is a good discussion. One more point comes to my mind though. The story of the 17 points would seem to grant authority to allegedly objective scholars, who may or may not have even believed in God when they did their studies. While such tales may seem reassuring, we would do better to stick to God's direct words, and to the Spirit's testimony in our hearts. Blessings! :)

[MikeMalone]

Thanks for your reply. I have enjoyed our little discussion. I know we don't always agree, but it has been an interesting one. I have really enjoyed the opportunity to search the scriptures for these discussions. If anything else, it has really allowed for personal growth.

Most Christian churches have people who fulfill these roles. We do not always use the nomenclature of Luke to the same extent, but our missionaries, pastors, presbyters, regional leadership, and national leadership do what the apostles, the 70, and the prophets do.

Most of the churches I have attended, such as baptists and no denominational, do not have national leaders. The church is entirely run by local people. This often creates controversy because a similar Christan church across the street will disagree with their neighbor.

Please correct me if I wrong, but it sounds like you are looking at every Christian denomination as one church. I can agree that every Christian church has truth to it, and if you put them all together they would have almost all of these 17 points; but I don't think it would

be fair to compile all of the denominations and call them one true church. Each denomination will always contend with one another. When my family left the Baptist church to join the Methodist, we were told that the Methodists were false and we were making a horrible choice.

I, being a young man, did not understand how joining another Christian church would make us bad. We still believed in Christ and praised God. But I assure you that this was mild compared to the criticism I receive for joining the LDS church.

And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

You may want to familiarize yourself with the doctrine of "the priesthood of all believers." This is commonly held to in Baptist and evangelical churches--it insists that Jesus granted priesthood authority to all of his followers.

I am not familiar with that. Could you please provide a scriptural reference? It sounds like it conflicts with this scripture. And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. Hewbrews 5:4. As you know, Aaron was authorized to baptize.

that is why the authority to baptize is known as the Aaronic priesthood, or Licaevitl priesthood. Because the tribe of Levi had the same authority. This scripture seems to say that you need to be authorized as was Aaron. So couldn't anyone have baptized Jesus? No, he had to go to

John the Baptist because he was the only one who was authorized at that time, because he was a son of Levi.

The debate over whether baptism is a prerequisite of salvation or one of the first acts of obedience for a soul already saved is an interesting one. At the end of the day though, almost all Christian churches baptize. Apparently these baptisms are at least sufficient to usher souls into the Terrestial Kingdom.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying by any means that those who were baptized in your church will be condemned.

Are you assuming that I and those in my church do not believe in, pray for, and see healings and spiritual deliverance???

Please forgive me if I made it sound like that. I misread your original quote. I would never, nor would I be authorized to judge you or your people. I believe in praying over the sick, but what I was saying, is that we anoint the sick's head with oil that has been blessed and consecrated, like it suggests in James.

Again, the Trinity teaches that God is three distinct persons. Jesus has a body because he became God-in-the-flesh. The Father did not. The Spirit did not. Jesus is still one being with the Father, but he alone is the Son, and we believe he is the only person in the Godhead with a body of flesh.

I have a lot of trouble with this one. It seem very conflicting. You say they are together yet separate, I would very much like to see scripture to back this one up. There doesn't seem to be a lot of scripture that describes God in detail, but we do know that we were made in his image. We having body of flesh and bone, it sounds like his image is the same. And also,

Jesus descended into heaven to sit on the right hand side of his Father. I don't recall seeing anything about them merging together to become one. Again, some scriptural reference would be helpful here. I will do some research on my own as well.

Please read this scripture.

And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us. Luke 9:49-50

It is obvious that we do not attend the same church, nor do we agree on all doctrines. But we are both for Jesus Christ. That being said, thanks for being my fellow, follower of Christ. I wish you the best of luck in all things. I would very much like to stay in contact with you. I have enjoyed our discussions. Peach be with you.

Love, your neighbor, Elder Michael Malone.

[prisonchaplain]

First, I do appreciate the time you take to answers these, and your thoughtful, thorough answers. BTW, are you an internet missionary? I note your title of elder. If so, welcome to the site. I would guess 15-20% of the posters here at any given time are non-LDS--at least amongst active posters.

It sounds like the bulk of your experience is amongst Baptists. You are correct that this denomination is primarily congregational, with decisions made at the local level. Yet, even in this movement there is some national leadership. The national convention appoints missionaries and can have influence in the church-supported schools. Nevertheless, Baptists and non-denominational churches are the main ones that adhere to local decision-making.

The Methodist church you joined, along with most other denominations, generally have tiered leadership. My own fellowship has sectional presbyters, district leaders, and national leaders. There is also an international conference every few years so that national churches can join in fellowship.

In a broad sense, Protestants do have disagreements about some doctrines. Yet, concerning the basics there is a good deal of agreement. Just yesterday I was chatting with a Word of Faith minister and he commented that of course Catholics were "saved"--after all, how could we begin to think that everyone before Martin Luther was destined for hades?

It is sad that some Christians choose to hold so tightly to their pet doctrines that they disparage the faith of other believers. This is frankly not Christian. More and more I am seeing Christians from the various churches recognize that the truths that unite us are sufficient to overcome the disagreements we have.

You comment about priests denying the Holy Ghost is particularly interesting. 100 years ago my spiritual forefathers were deemed cultists. Some were tarred and feathered and run out of town. Local sheriffs sometimes jailed our evangelists for "practicing medicine without a license" (praying for the sick to be healed). Today, even most non-pentecostals admit that the gifts of the Spirit are biblical. They mostly just say it is not so important. Yet, they sing our songs, and prayers for the sick are again becoming common place in churches.

So, I would argue that churches are increasingly EMBRACING the Holy Spirit.

I offer the following article that explains the priesthood of all believers: Is the priesthood of all believers biblical? (the site does not appear to be anti-LDS)

Finally, discussions of the Trinity can often go for dozens of posts here. I'll give you my brief description, and answer any questions. However, I have no expectations that anyone will be converted to Trinitarianism...I'll be satisfied if you simply gain a good understanding of what you are disagreeing with.

Trinity in a nutshell

1. The Father is a distinct person and is God. (The Lord's Prayer includes worship to the Father. Only God gets worship)

2. The Son is a distinct person and is God. (Jesus has all the characteristics of personhood. He weeps, he angers, he loves. Hebrews 1:6-8 has angels worshiping him, and the Father addressing him as God).

3. The Holy Spirit is a distinct person and is God. (Acts 5:3-4 have the Spirit and God used interchangeably. Again, the Spirit grieves, can be lied to, and thus shows the characteristics of personhood).

4. There is only one God. (We join Muslims and Jews in believing that God is one and that this is an eternal truth)

5. So the three persons are the one God.

I hope this helps.

5.

[KevlarH]

I read too that Floyd Weston was not in places he said he was, and I was very disappointed that he had lied..

But I read the list again today, and it sure seems to match things that the Church teaches.. Sure we should dismiss the whole Floyd Weston story. But. Should we, also dismiss the list?

Brother Ray

You say you read that he wasn't in certain places, and insinuate he lied. What and who is your sources who say this? You can't throw that out there like it is a fact without some proof.

I found this on the site (FAIR) and it says that charge came from an anti-Mormon: Criticism of Mormonism/Criticism of "17 Points of the True Church" - FAIRMormon

Edited August 26, 2012 by ldrkholt

[connorbrown26]

the list 17 points was put together by a man named John Dunbar who was looking FOR the true church and looked for almost half his life before finding it. he was a Roman Catholic growing up so i dont think he had much mormon theology base for his upbringing.