Does the King James Bible support the ongoing need for Prophets and Apostles?


jcob
 Share

Recommended Posts

Come on folks. There's no reason to doubt cobbettj's claim that his new church is not the source of his latest question. Anyone can spend 30 seconds on google and come up with this very old, very tired response to the truth claims of the LDS church.

Cobbettj, I will say this. Wherever you got this list of scriptures, their source isn't a very good source of valid beefs against my faith.

Another 30 seconds on google, and I found two answers:

Didn't Christ Say there would be no more prophets after John?

How can there be modern prophets? Isn't that a nonbiblical heresy? There were to be no more prophets after Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Okay, okay. Let's give the OP a chance and just talk doctrine, alright?

We're not all experts on the Bible here. LDS or not. There are those who are still in Pre-Kindergarten. So, yes, humor us Pre-K'ers and don't bash us for being ignorant. Enlighten us instead.

If you feel that you can't answer the question without being snarky, then just don't answer the question. I saw the OP as a valid question. Not a trolling commentary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldnt get the first URL to work. The second one used Mathew 23:34 & Amos 3:7 as justification for modern prophets.

Mathew 23:34 Jesus is speaking to the Jews. He said that he would send them Prophets who they would persecute and kill. He did send them the apostles who were persecuted and killed. Read vs 36 for context.

Amos 3:7 The word "nothing" must be interpreted by the context. Amos 3:1-7 refers to God bringing judgment against His people Israel because of their sin. And He says He will do "nothing" (to punish or judge them) without warning them through his servants the prophets first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From his own mouth, the words of a man who, by his own account, would not trust himself.

So you would actually put your trust in a man?

"That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God" - 1 Corinthians 2:5

"It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." - Psalm 118:8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I acknowledge that this was my error. Always good to learn. But still interested to hear your take on the rest of the scriptures. I understand the Church was built on a foundation of prophets and apostles, but does a foundation keep building?

When the apostles replaced Judas, they specifically chose two disciples who were witnesses from the time of John the baptist to the resurection (see Acts 1:15-22). When Paul was called to be an apostle, he became a witness of the resurection. It seems that their testimony was very important in their roles. Should not everyone who claims to be an apostle share the same "eyewitness" testimonies so that we know they arnt following cunningly devised fables? (see 2 Peter 1:16)

Respond to my post!

Regarding the foundation, I would say that we also need walls, doors, windows, a ceiling, etc. The building was not done. That verse just really doesn't preclude modern-day prophets.

The modern apostles are special witnesses. We actually do not know if all or some of them have an "eyewitness."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ephesians 4:11- "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets" "Till we all come in the unity of the faith" (See Galatians 3:28)

When applied to the entire scriptural passage your interpretation rules out any church that purports to have, not only apostles and prophets, but also (according to the scripture) evangelists, pastors, and teachers. If we truly have come to the "unity of the faith", then there's no reason we would still need those while rendering prophets and apostles extraneous.

Well done. In one fell swoop you've debunked pretty much all of institutional Christianity.

And of course, the argument that the prophets ended with John facially contradicts the Biblically-documented existence of early Christian prophets (at least three of whom are mentioned by name in the New Testament); and this specious "well, only until Jew and Gentile are united" argument doesn't resolve that fundamental contradiction. Did the prophets end with John the Baptist, or did they not?

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would actually put your trust in a man?

"That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God" - 1 Corinthians 2:5

"It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man." - Psalm 118:8

Now you're just playing games. I think you know very well that Vort wasn't remotely referring to trusting a man in lieu of God. It is you who are asking us to trust your (misleading) scriptural interpretations in place of the revelation we ourselves have claimed directly from God.

20 For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:

21 That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The apostle John saw two prophets that in the last days give their prophecy in Jerusalem during Armageddon. The apostle Paul knew a prophet named Agabus, who prophecied AFTER Jesus Christ.

Clearly, there are prophets after New Testament times, as the scriptures say there will be. Does this mean no one else can be moved upon to prophecy, as in Joel? No. It is like the man who prophecied in the camp, during Moses' time. Moses wished all could be prophets. Yet, he was THE prophet, in charge of the Law and Testimony, the Tabernacle, and so many other very important things that the prophet in the camp did not have authority over.

Until all people (Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, etc), come "to a unity of the faith", there will be need for apostles and prophets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're just playing games.

The mods appear not to have appreciated my pretty picture, JaG, but... Really, I think we all see what's going on here. Only the blind could miss it. Listen and you'll hear it. 'Less I'm just too darn subtle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what issue you're having with www .lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/prophets_john.htm . The link works fine for me.

But if you want to argue with mormons about who is right, Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board may be more to your liking. Right now, I hear you saying things like:

still interested to hear your take on the rest of the scriptures

...

Im just interested to expand my knowledge

...

Rather then sidestepping the issues can we talk about the doctrine

But we also hear you arguing with us and telling us our answers aren't sufficient for you and your new interpretations. Not the right setting for that. The folks who fund this site aren't interested in having that happen here.

This site is set up for folks who want to understand what mormons believe, and why we believe it. It is not a debate board. It's not a place where you tell us where we're off base or not in harmony with how other people interpret the bible. If you don't find our reasons persuasive, that's fine. You don't get to use this forum to try to show us where we're wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luke 16:16 "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached"

Everything you are getting at here kind of falls apart with this scripture. Loudmouth pointed out that the phrase means the Hebrew Bible. If we were to follow the same logic you used when thinking it refered to prophets, we would have to conclude that the Hebrew Bible was done away with and ought not to be used anymore. But it was used by apostles and others after the death and resurrection of Christ. It is still used by Christians today. To remain consist you would have to concede that this sort of language doesn't necessarily mean a cessation of prophets either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we also hear you arguing with us and telling us our answers aren't sufficient for you and your new interpretations. Not the right setting for that.

Thats fine. Again, I only wanted to talk doctrine. But one last sincere question for everyone.

What if anything would it take for you to no longer believe that your organization is true? Does evidence even matter once you begin to trust in your feelings?

Edited by cobbettj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

Thats fine. Again, I only wanted to talk doctrine. But one last sincere question for everyone.

What if anything would it take for you to no longer believe that your organization is true?

This Really Ought To Terminate.

Link to comment

Thats fine. Again, I only wanted to talk doctrine. But one last sincere question for everyone.

What if anything would it take for you to no longer believe that your organization is true?

The Result: One Lame List.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does evidence even matter once you begin to trust in your feelings?

Of course evidence matters, Spock. There is more than one way of interpreting evidence, as well as feelings and also the workings of the Holy Ghost, which aren't always synonymous with mere emotions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats fine. Again, I only wanted to talk doctrine. But one last sincere question for everyone.

What if anything would it take for you to no longer believe that your organization is true? Does evidence even matter once you begin to trust in your feelings?

O Cobbet, how be it that you are so easy to forget your revelations? Those great and glorious revelations you received, even miracles. The time is nigh that you recall those revelations that were poured upon you. A man so easy to forget the treasures greater then this world can not be called a disciple of the Lord. Search your mind and pray mightily to recall, even relive, those memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

Of course evidence matters, Spock. There is more than one way of interpreting evidence, as well as feelings and also the workings of the Holy Ghost, which aren't always synonymous with mere emotions.

So in the original temple ceremony, when you are required to make motions as though you are slitting your throat.. that wouldnt come under "Abstain from all appearance of evil." - 1 Thessalonians 5:22?

Does this sound like something Jesus would be a part of?

Please dont get upset as though I am talking about something sacred. It obviously wasnt important if it was removed.

Link to comment

Thats fine. Again, I only wanted to talk doctrine. But one last sincere question for everyone.

What if anything would it take for you to no longer believe that your organization is true? Does evidence even matter once you begin to trust in your feelings?

Revelation from the Most High God, via the Holy Spirit, as experienced (inter alia) by the signals identified in Galatians 5:22-23, is evidence.

My experience is that empirical research tends to enrich and deepen faith in a person who is open to the possibility that it can do so. But the core of my faith revolves around one fundamental truth:

I talk to God. And He talks back.

I'm sorry you weren't able to get that kind of experience out of Mormonism. You should not, however, make the mistake of believing that the rest of our endeavors to commune with the Divine within the constraints of the LDS Church have been as fruitless as yours seem to have been.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well since God told me it was true, through the Holy Ghost, then my list is 0.

The Bible says not to believe every spirit. When I read Galatians 1:8 it seems apparent that that even an angel from heaven could preach something false. How did he tell you? Was it a feeling?

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? - Jeremiah 17:9

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bible says not to believe every spirit. When I read Galatians 1:8 it seems apparent that that even an angel from heaven could preach something false. How did he tell you? Was it a feeling?

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? - Jeremiah 17:9

Tell me, EXACTLY where it says to not trust the Holy Ghost? Do NOT insult me saying I am listening to an evil Holy Ghost. Begone Satan!

.. goes to find some Mothers Of Invention music. arg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bible says not to believe every spirit. When I read Galatians 1:8 it seems apparent that that even an angel from heaven could preach something false.

Did Paul say belive NO spirit? If so, that would force us to reject his writings and consider them as ironical as Bob Dylan's "Don't follow leaders!"

How did he tell you? Was it a feeling?

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? - Jeremiah 17:9

Are you sure that the idiom meant the same thing that it does to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share