What is the Church?

[Maureen]

All other Christians fail this requirement.

In your opinion?

M.

[Dravin]

In your opinion?

M.

In actuality. Only one organization on this planet operates with the power and authority of God. Maureen, you are familiar with LDS beliefs concerning the apostasy and priesthood. Is there a reason you're playing dumb?

Edited October 13, 2013 by Dravin

[Maureen]

And it came to pass that whosoever was baptized by the power and authority of God was added to his church.

Added to his church, which happened to be the 204 people that had been first baptized.

M.

[Dravin]

And it came to pass that whosoever was baptized by the power and authority of God was added to his church.

Added to his church, which happened to be the 204 people that had been first baptized.

M.

Yep, are they kicking around in your congregation somewhere? You're trying to play games with ancient Christians. You, nor anyone else on this planet is an ancient Christian (unless we're talking about John or the three Nephites). Please, feel free to name the extant congregation or sect, that isn't the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which according to LDS doctrine has priesthood authority to baptize. There isn't any, ergo they all fail that particular requirement.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Dravin

[Maureen]

In actuality. Only one organization on this planet operates with the power and authority of God. Maureen, you are familiar with LDS beliefs concerning the apostasy and priesthood. Is there a reason you're playing dumb?

Dravin, I know that's what you and the LDS church believe; but I don't think that that is how God sees it. I believe God invites and accepts all those who seek him.

M.

[Dravin]

Dravin, I know that's what you and the LDS church believe;

M.

Then why ask me such an inane question?

[bytebear]

In actuality. Only one organization on this planet operates with the power and authority of God. Maureen, you are familiar with LDS beliefs concerning the apostasy and priesthood. Is there a reason you're playing dumb?

Well, I tend to agree on the protestant front, but Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox can at least claim a line of priesthood succession.

But I do reject the notion of "general authority" based on Acts 8:18

18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

This tells me the authority of priesthood was still intact in the NT, and not just given to anyone who believed they had the spirit of Christ with them. For me, the Great Apostasy is very real. Bishops took over and Apostlic authority was lost. And the story of the restoration of those keys is one of the most compelling aspects of LDS church history. That THE church is not just A church is significant. (to me anyway)

Edited October 13, 2013 by bytebear

[Dravin]

Well, I tend to agree on the protestant front, but Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox can at least claim a line of priesthood succession.

Claims do not actuality make.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Dravin

[Maureen]

Yep, are they kicking around in your congregation somewhere? You're trying to play games with ancient Christians. You, nor anyone else on this planet is an ancient Christian (unless we're talking about John or the three Nephites).

I have no idea what you are trying to say here; can you clarify?

Please, feel free to name the congregation or sect which according to LDS doctrine has priesthood authority to baptize. There isn't any, ergo they all fail that particular requirement.

I understand that the LDS church believes that they are the only Church that has and requires the priesthood.

I am trying to understand why LDS members see "the Church" as an organization whose members are people instead of seeing "the Church" as "people" who collectively are that organization. Occasionally someone on this forum will say the Church is perfect but the people are not. But if in actuality, the Church really is "the people" and we know we are not perfect then "the Church" doesn't have to be perfect. "The Church" is the human entity that worships God. God is perfect and "the Church" is striving to become perfect with help from God.

M.

[bytebear]

The church does not exist without authority. Otherwise it's just a bunch of like minded people who get together and do stuff. But that stuff is meaningless without priesthood. The church is people + priesthood. The organization of that priesthood is ordained by God and perfect. The offices are God's established plan. Auxiliary programs, I believe, are approved of by God, but the people are inspired by the times to establish them as their needs dictate. The church is neither more nor less perfect because someone decided to call a primary class the "sunbeams" or perhaps if someone decided they should be the "wolverines"

Edited October 13, 2013 by bytebear

[Maureen]

Claims do not actuality make.

Does this also apply to the LDS church?

M.

[bytebear]

I think claims need to match with scriptural patterns. The notion that one just starts a church without a prophetic calling or a line of priesthood authority is entirely foreign to the Bible. So much so that it is the antithesis of the notion of Godly authority, which is a primary theme throughout.

[Vort]

Does this also apply to the LDS church?

Of course. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the kingdom of God on earth, but not merely because it claims to be so. Rather, it is the kingdom of God on earth because God has ordained it as such.

I do not understand the point of the distinction you are trying to draw. Obviously the Church is a collection of people. Without the people, there is no Church. But the Church is not merely a collection of people; it is an organization ordained of God and possessing his authority.

What exactly is it about this idea that you don't understand? I'm not playing dumb; rather, it appears that I really am dumb about this matter. The usage seems clear to me, and it seems it would be clear to anyone, even those who don't agree with it. Can you explain which part isn't clear?

[Maureen]

The church does not exist without authority. Otherwise it's just a bunch of like minded people who get together and do stuff. But that stuff is meaningless without priesthood....

For where two or three are assembled in my name, I am there among them. (Matthew 18:20)

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8)

I believe these words are speaking to everyone and not just for LDS.

M.

[bytebear]

For where two or three are assembled in my name, I am there among them. (Matthew 18:20)

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened for you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8)

I believe these words are speaking to everyone and not just for LDS.

M.

Jesus was addressing his disciples, presumably baptized members. And Jesus may be present and even witness to people, but they cannot act in his name without receiving authority by the laying on of hands. So I agree that Jesus can allow everyone to receive testimony, but not authority.

Hebrews 6:2

2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

1 Timothy 4:14

14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

Old Testament has 73 references to the practice. The New Testament has 34 references. Clearly it is important, and I believe required to claim authority.

Edited October 13, 2013 by bytebear

[Dravin]

I have no idea what you are trying to say here; can you clarify?

You appeared to be trying to play games, "Well, these ancient Christians were baptized therefore obviously not just the LDS Church has authority." I actually deleted the post before you responded because in hindsight, and because you didn't quote anyone directly, I suspected you may have actually been directing it towards Vort.

I am trying to understand why LDS members see "the Church" as an organization whose members are people instead of seeing "the Church" as "people" who collectively are that organization. Occasionally someone on this forum will say the Church is perfect but the people are not. But if in actuality, the Church really is "the people" and we know we are not perfect then "the Church" doesn't have to be perfect. "The Church" is the human entity that worships God. God is perfect and "the Church" is striving to become perfect with help from God.

M.

When people talk about the Church being perfect they're talking about its organization and design, they aren't talking about the people. I refer you to my post earlier in the thread explaining how people can talk about different aspects of the same thing. Here you seem to be insisting that, "the Church" can only ever mean the people. Which is akin to insisting that "America" can only refer to a geographical region.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Dravin

[Leah]

In actuality. Only one organization on this planet operates with the power and authority of God. Maureen, you are familiar with LDS beliefs concerning the apostasy and priesthood. Is there a reason you're playing dumb?

The same reason behind pretty much any other post she makes.....to try to pick away at LDS beliefs. She just goes about it in a different way than do others who come here to bash the church.

[Maureen]

I think claims need to match with scriptural patterns. The notion that one just starts a church without a prophetic calling or a line of priesthood authority is entirely foreign to the Bible. So much so that it is the antithesis of the notion of Godly authority, which is a primary theme throughout.

Priesthood authority in the OT was an inherited office. And I would venture to say that those who might feel that they are called into a ministry today, might see it as personal and inspirational. Who are we to tell someone that their calling is not valid?

M.

[bytebear]

Priesthood authority in the OT was an inherited office. And I would venture to say that those who might feel that they are called into a ministry today, might see it as personal and inspirational. Who are we to tell someone that their calling is not valid?

M.

Acts 3

1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Seems to me that Paul disagreed that anyone could just go around baptizing people based on their own understanding. Notice in the next verse, Paul gives them the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands AFTER baptism.

Edited October 13, 2013 by bytebear

[Maureen]

....I do not understand the point of the distinction you are trying to draw. Obviously the Church is a collection of people. Without the people, there is no Church. But the Church is not merely a collection of people; it is an organization ordained of God and possessing his authority....

Even in the Lutheran church I went to growing up the Pastor acknowledged that "the Church" is "the people" and therefore not perfect. IMO, an organization that professes to be perfect, is going to have problems when the imperfect people that make up that organization do imperfect things. By acknowledging that "the Church" is "the people", this unrealistic expectation of perfection is quashed. The goal of "the Church" is to follow Christ and become like him, we are not there yet.

M.

[Maureen]

The same reason behind pretty much any other post she makes.....to try to pick away at LDS beliefs. She just goes about it in a different way than do others who come here to bash the church.

Sources - please quote one of my posts that have bashed the LDS church.

M.

[Maureen]

...Seems to me that Paul disagreed that anyone could just go around baptizing people based on their own understanding. Notice in the next verse, Paul gives them the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands AFTER baptism.

The Great Commission

So the eleven disciples went to Galilee to the mountain Jesus had designated. When they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:16-20)

There are many Christian denominations that follow the great commission; they feel it is their duty to teach and baptize. The authority is the scripture itself.

M.

[bytebear]

The Great Commission

So the eleven disciples went to Galilee to the mountain Jesus had designated. When they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:16-20)

There are many Christian denominations that follow the great commission; they feel it is their duty to teach and baptize. The authority is the scripture itself.

M.

Yes but they weren't given that authority. Those that now claim authority without being given that authority directly from those original disciples are just like the disciples of Ephesus who baptized without authority, and those baptized had to be re-baptized by Paul. Of course you disagree, but I think the Bible is clear that your example is countered quite clearly by Paul.

Hebrews 5:4

4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

Edited October 13, 2013 by bytebear

[Maureen]

This thread is not about authority but about "What is the Church?". But since the question can have many answers, lets talk about how the priesthood relates to "the Church". But first I wish to mention how I view subjective claims.

Faith and beliefs are subjective. If I make a claim that God is three persons it is subjective, I can't prove that God is three persons; it is my belief. I can show you through scripture why I believe that God is three persons, I just can't prove it. The same happens when one claims spiritual authority. The LDS church claims their authority comes from a restoration that happened through Joseph Smith. Other churches claim that their authority comes from biblical scripture; scripture that is God breathed. Both claims are subjective because they cannot be proved.

This is an LDS forum and I know what LDS members believe about priesthood authority. One of the posts mentioned that the priesthood and the people make up "the Church". Is the priesthood perfect or does it have limitations because it involves imperfect people?

M.

[Guest]

anatess, would you say then that you see "the Church" as an entity that has existed since the pre-existence?

M.

No. It was organized/planned in the Pre-existence, with Jesus Christ chosen to lead it and instituted after the fall of Adam.