Question

[Nicodemus]

So exactly how many different denominations have branched off from the LDS church?

I know of the former RLDS, the Restoration, and the Reformation movement. I'm pretty sure I saw an LDS website that listed 61.

[Guest Starsky]

That is probably true....and who knows how many more branched off of those....

But always remembering:

D&C 38: 27

27 ... I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine.

[Snow]

I'd say zero.

It is not like the universal church that had two competing authority bases and split into Roman and Eastern. It is not like 4 or the 12 took there keys and split. I don't know the intricate details of how the early non-mormon mormon groups got going but essesntially, these branch churchs aren't branches at all, they are apostates who start there own churches.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Snow@Jun 6 2004, 10:57 AM

I'd say zero.

It is not like the universal church that had two competing authority bases and split into Roman and Eastern. It is not like 4 or the 12 took there keys and split. I don't know the intricate details of how the early non-mormon mormon groups got going but essesntially, these branch churchs aren't branches at all, they are apostates who start there own churches.

Excellent points Snow! :) I wish I had thought of those...

[DisRuptive1]

There is also all those people that practice polygamy still and don't have any church to go to. So you've got 1 for each group of polygamists.

[Guest Ruthie-chan]

Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Jun 6 2004, 10:55 PM

There is also all those people that practice polygamy still and don't have any church to go to. So you've got 1 for each group of polygamists.

IIRC, there are some people who claim to be Mormon even though they practice polygamy.

They probably go to an apostate mormon group.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Snow@Jun 6 2004, 10:57 AM

I'd say zero.

It is not like the universal church that had two competing authority bases and split into Roman and Eastern. It is not like 4 or the 12 took there keys and split. I don't know the intricate details of how the early non-mormon mormon groups got going but essesntially, these branch churchs aren't branches at all, they are apostates who start there own churches.

Snow, you are familiar enough with church history (I assume) that you know that statement not to be true.

[Maureen]

splinter group n.

A group, such as a religious sect or political faction, that has broken away from a parent group.

A part of an organization that breaks away from the main body, usually owing to disagreement.

Here are 2 links that give a list of the many splinter groups:

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dbowie/restore/r...estoration.html

http://www.tektonics.org/mormondivide.html

My favorite is The Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The title itself is an oxymoron. Pentecostals are one of the more noisier worshippers while IMO, Mormons tend to be too quiet.

M.

[Setheus]

Well Jenda, how is Snow's reply wrong?

Surly you don't mean the RLDS? After all this is a church, not a monarchy.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Setheus@Jun 9 2004, 09:58 AM

Well Jenda, how is Snow's reply wrong?

Surly you don't mean the RLDS?  After all this is a church, not a monarchy.

Well, you should have told that to Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, etc., before God told them that through their seed the earth should be blessed.

What you think about it makes no difference. That God's laws are followed is where the truth lies. And God's laws were not followed when BY assumed command of the church. There was no scriptural justification to it, whereas there was lots (of scriptural justification) for Joseph Smith, III, assuming command. (And BY even admitted it.)

[Setheus]

Then explain all the other prophets that came to be and their fathers were not prophets?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Setheus@Jun 9 2004, 10:21 AM

Then explain all the other prophets that came to be and their fathers were not prophets?

I don't have to explain anything. I just need to look at the commandments given in the scriptures to know that what happened in 1844 on goes against the will of God. (And the commandments are in your scriptures, also.)

[Setheus]

Don't have to explain anything...or you are afraid that I am right and won't explain?

When did leading God's children become a family affair set to only one line?

After all the Jews as a whole are the chosen people not just the biological line of Abraham.

Where is the line of Joseph now? Where is the progress? <--seriously? I don't know.

And that is not a good sign to me.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Setheus@Jun 9 2004, 11:53 AM

Don't have to explain anything...or you are afraid that I am right and won't explain?

When did leading God's children become a family affair set to only one line?

After all the Jews as a whole are the chosen people not just the biological line of Abraham.

Where is the line of Joseph now?  Where is the progress?  <--seriously? I don't know.

And that is not a good sign to me.

Nope, I am not afraid. If you want the scriptural references, I would be glad to provide them.

It became a family affair when God stated as much. D&C 107:18c RLDS (110:58 LDS) and as I said unto Abraham, concerning the kindreds of the earth, even so I say unto my servant Joseph, In thee, and in thy seed, shall the kindred of the earth be blessed.

And we are grafted into the seed of Abraham when we become covered in the waters of baptism. (That is classic restoration teaching, why don't you know it?)

The RLDS church has been experiencing technical difficulties and cannot be reached at the present. Please try back later. B)

Seriously, there is one male heir (that I know of) who is not president of the church, but who was blessed for that task by his grandfather, Israel A. Smith (one of the prophets of the church). But he was still a child, and Israel's brother assumed control of the church. (Actually, men who wanted control of the church assumed control of the church through Israel A's brother (W. Wallace Smith) as he was a weak leader. These men, in turn, led the church astray, hence the internal disruption of the last few years. Those who remained faithful to the gospel have broken away, and are waiting for the Lord to cleanse the church as he promised in the scriptures.

D&C 105:9-11b RLDS (112:23-26 LDS)

9a Verily, verily I say unto you, Darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.

9b Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth--a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation--and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.

10a And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord.

10b First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

All this, though, has nothing to do with the fact that what happened historically is contrary to the commands of God.

[Guest curvette]

Can someone please explain to me how this phrase can possibly be grammatically correct?

" and gross darkness the minds of the people"

Where's the verb? Maybe I'm reading it incorrectly, but shouldn't it read something like:'

"and gross darkness encompass the minds of the people"?

Am I just being picky, or is there really some literary justification for this?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by curvette@Jun 9 2004, 02:17 PM

Can someone please explain to me how this phrase can possibly be grammatically correct?

" and gross darkness the minds of the people"

Where's the verb? Maybe I'm reading it incorrectly, but shouldn't it read something like:'

"and gross darkness encompass the minds of the people"?

Am I just being picky, or is there really some literary justification for this?

I read it to mean this "Darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness covereth the minds of the people"

[Maureen]

Jenda – Would you know the names of JS III’s progeny available now that could take over when W. Grant McMurray steps down. Are any women? Do you think the CofC would ever give the job to a “Smith” woman?

M.

[Ray]

Jenda,

Surely you know that there must be an explanation for everything. Don’t you know that you’re not the first person who has raised that issue? Have you ever checked into what Brigham Young and succeeding prophets in the Church have said regarding how they justify having the authority to lead the Lord’s church? I don’t have a nice little quote or link ready for you right now, but I do have a simple answer for how and why they could and can continue to do it. The thing you need to know is: Who has the keys? Did Joseph Smith 3 have any keys? No. The keys were given to Joseph Smith Jr, and he never did pass them on to his son, because our Lord never told him to do that. Joseph Smith Jr. passed them on to the apostles, just as the apostles have them today. But the apostles only use their keys when they are authorized to do so by the President of the Church, or when the President of the Church dies and they then appoint the next President, by unanimous consent supported by revelation from our Lord. The keys of the kingdom are never passed along according to the patriarchal order because a son isn’t always as righteous as his father, and the Lord will not give an unrighteous man free reign in His kingdom.

Anyway, at least you have that information now, if you didn’t have it already. I don’t expect you to accept it just because I think it makes sense, but at least there is a rational explanation for it, and you should at least be able to accept the fact that it makes sense.

[Ray]

Those who remained faithful to the gospel have broken away, and are waiting for the Lord to cleanse the church as he promised in the scriptures.

According to those scriptures you quoted, what is your understanding of how the Lord will cleanse His church?

Are you saying that some people who are remaining faithful to the gospel (as the RLDS understand it) are waiting for a righteous great, great, great… great grandson of Joseph Smith to be born to cleanse the church, or reorganize it according to the will of our Lord?

Are you saying that you believe the true church of Christ is no longer on the Earth, except as a small splinter group who broke away from the true church of Christ that was restored through Joseph Smith?

And that the true church of Christ thrived only as long as Joseph Smith Jr. was alive?

How depressing those thoughts must be to you.

Is this really what you believe our Lord expected when He restored the true church of Christ through Joseph Smith Jr.? That it would only be around for a short time, and then essentially be gone again? What was the whole point of it, by your reasoning? Merely to give the world the Book of Mormon and the inspired teachings of Joseph Smith Jr. ?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Maureen@Jun 9 2004, 03:13 PM

Jenda – Would you know the names of JS III’s progeny available now that could take over when W. Grant McMurray steps down. Are any women? Do you think the CofC would ever give the job to a “Smith” woman?

M.

I do know that there are many of JS, III's progeny hanging around, some named Smith, some with other names. Some descended through his sons (and sons of sons), and some through his daughters.

However, in the direct male line, there is one male that could make a direct claim. However, since women are now able to hold priesthood in the RLDS church, there are many women who could become president if they are ordained (and I have no idea who of them are ordained and who are not.)

As for your last question, I doubt that, without God intervening, there will ever be a Smith (of any derivative) in the role of P,S,R, and PHP again.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Ray@Jun 9 2004, 04:06 PM

Those who remained faithful to the gospel have broken away, and are waiting for the Lord to cleanse the church as he promised in the scriptures.

According to those scriptures you quoted, what is your understanding of how the Lord will cleanse His church?

Are you saying that some people who are remaining faithful to the gospel (as the RLDS understand it) are waiting for a righteous great, great, great… great grandson of Joseph Smith to be born to cleanse the church, or reorganize it according to the will of our Lord?

Are you saying that you believe the true church of Christ is no longer on the Earth, except as a small splinter group who broke away from the true church of Christ that was restored through Joseph Smith?

And that the true church of Christ thrived only as long as Joseph Smith Jr. was alive?

How depressing those thoughts must be to you.

Is this really what you believe our Lord expected when He restored the true church of Christ through Joseph Smith Jr.? That it would only be around for a short time, and then essentially be gone again? What was the whole point of it, by your reasoning? Merely to give the world the Book of Mormon?

No, I believe that there is still a great and marvelous work to do among the children of men, and the RLDS church will lead that work. That work being the establishment of Zion, God's kingdom on earth.

I believe that the true church is still in existence, I don't think it died with JS,Jr., but I believe that what was restored was the New Testament church, the one Christ established, and the LDS doesn't resemble that church because it incorporates too many practices that were not part of the NT church. The RLDS church is the one that more closely resembles that church because it was patterned after the church as organized in 1830.

I think that you confuse "true" with numbers and amount of time before "X" happens. That because the RLDS church is small, and because it didn't last too long (in your opinion), that it can't be the true church. If I recall the NT church history correctly, that it didn't last too long either, yet it was the true church because Christ, himself, established it. And it's numbers were small and very persecuted.

And I would not presume to make a guess as to how Christ will cleanse His church, nor know who He will set as head of it, although I have some guesses.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Ray@Jun 9 2004, 03:14 PM

Jenda,

Surely you know that there must be an explanation for everything.  Don’t you know that you’re not the first person who has raised that issue?  Have you ever checked into what Brigham Young and succeeding prophets in the Church have said regarding how they justify having the authority to lead the Lord’s church?  I don’t have a nice little quote or link ready for you right now, but I do have a simple answer for how and why they could and can continue to do it.  The thing you need to know is:  Who has the keys?  Did Joseph Smith 3 have any keys?  No.  The keys were given to Joseph Smith Jr, and he never did pass them on to his son, because our Lord never told him to do that.  Joseph Smith Jr. passed them on to the apostles, just as the apostles have them today.  But the apostles only use their keys when they are authorized to do so by the President of the Church, or when the President of the Church dies and they then appoint the next President, by unanimous consent supported by revelation from our Lord.  The keys of the kingdom are never passed along according to the patriarchal order because a son isn’t always as righteous as his father, and the Lord will not give an unrighteous man free reign in His kingdom.

Anyway, at least you have that information now, if you didn’t have it already.  I don’t expect you to accept it just because I think it makes sense, but at least there is a rational explanation for it, and you should at least be able to accept the fact that it makes sense.

Ray, I understand, intimately, what the LDS believe regarding succession in the presidency from the Nauvoo period. I used to work in historic Nauvoo, and the historians drilled into my head, not just our (the RLDS) history, but also the LDS history. So I know what happened in Nauvoo, both before and after JS,Jr. died, and what happened in Utah and everything in between.

Unfortunately, I believe that you (your church) don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to scriptural justification of what happened. Not only does modern day revelation give Joseph Smith the right to designate his successor, it states that he, Joseph Smith, holds the keys through out the entire dispensation of time. At no time does he pass those keys on. He does pass on the oracles and the presidency to his successor.

D&C 87:2a RLDS (90:3-4 LDS)

2a Verily I say unto you, The keys of this kingdom shall never be taken from you, while thou art in the world, neither in the world to come; nevertheless, through you shall the oracles be given to another; yea, even unto the church.

[Guest Unorthodox]

[Snow]

Originally posted by Jenda+Jun 9 2004, 04:39 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Jun 9 2004, 04:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Jun 6 2004, 10:57 AM

I'd say zero.

It is not like the universal church that had two competing authority bases and split into Roman and Eastern. It is not like 4 or the 12 took there keys and split. I don't know the intricate details of how the early non-mormon mormon groups got going but essesntially, these branch churchs aren't branches at all, they are apostates who start there own churches.

Snow, you are familiar enough with church history (I assume) that you know that statement not to be true.

Of course it is true, no offense to you or your beliefs Jenda, but yes, it is true that there are no legitimate branches of the LDS Church.

I assume that you are talking about the Community of Christ Church, so let's start there and for the time ignore the Cutlerites and the Strangites et al.

With the death of Joseph Smith the Church had a succession crisis. Various factions had various claims of validity. Without hammering out all the nitty details, the body of the church selected Brigham Young. Losing factions lost and the Church moved forward.

Some 16 years later, the predecessor to the Community of Christ Church (RLDS) was founded in 1860. To understand their connection to the Church of Jesus Christ let's follow the trail of one of it's key early authorities:

Willaim Marks:

-Marks, a succession candidate to Joseph Smith and Stake President of the Nauvoo Stake initially considered backing Sidney Rigdon, then wound up repudiating Rigdon and acknowledging the authority of the Quorum of the Twelve.

-Marks was released from his calling as Stake President.

-Marks dropped out of the Church and spent some time with Sidney Rigdon's new movement until 1846.

-Marks then joined with the Strangites where he served as counselor to Strang 1849-50.

-Marks then joined the Jehovah's Presbytery of Zion and became First Chief of the Quorum of Travelling Teachers.

-In 1855 Marks helped form an organization with FORMER general authorities John C. Gaylord and John E. Page.

-Over the next few years some of the leaders of that group began defecting to what was to become the RLDS (which a century and a half and some change later became the CoCC.

-Marks finally joined the RLDS group in 1859.

-During the time between when Marks first left the Church and when he joined the RLDS group, Joseph Smith III (who would be made the RLDS Church President) first attended the Methodist Church with his mother. Then he studied phrenology and astrology. From 1850 to 1852 he practiced spiritualism later rejecting it.

-In the fall of 1859 Smith III agreed to join and become President in the RLDS Church.

-Smith III was ordained by William Marks mentioned above, William W. Blair and Samuel Powers, who had never belonged to the LDS Church prior to the martyrdom and Zenas Gurley who had been endowed in the Nauvoo temple and follow the LDS Church part way to Utah.

In short, no one with any authority, let alone keys, ordained Joseph Smith III.

If your theory was that there should be a blood lineage in the Church, need I remind you that the Community of Christ Chruch doesn't even believe that.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Unorthodox+Jun 9 2004, 05:10 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Unorthodox @ Jun 9 2004, 05:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Jun 9 2004, 12:08 PM

Those who remained faithful to the gospel have broken away, and are waiting for the Lord to cleanse the church as he promised in the scriptures.

Wow...

So the LDS believed that all the other Churches were in Apostacy and restored Christ's true church. But then the RLDS believed the LDS fell into apostacy, so they followed a different line of Prophets...but then a few years ago, the RLDS Church fell into apostacy, so now you and a few others remain faithful to the original RLDS Church. Why not just split off into another Church again? If the RLDS split from the LDS, can't you just split from the RLDS?

I guess some people stay in a church even if they believe it is in apostacy. I think someone on this board said that she believed the LDS Church was in apostacy, but that she stayed in it anyway.

I think the chances are that we are really all in apostacy from the teachings of Christ.

The RLDS did not split from the LDS anymore than the LDS split from the Strangites.

Look at it this way. Say that the church was a piece of glass, and someone drops the glass. What is the result? A bunch of fragments (factions). They were all part of the same piece of glass, but they can never be used for the same purpose as the original piece of glass. That is how the church was. Joseph Smith was killed and the church fractured into at least 16 groups, each claiming authority. None was more right than the others, IMO, except some did follow scriptural commandments. Those are the ones, IMO, who continued carrying the oracles (since the keys were not passed on.) Breaking the Lord's commandments entitles you to lead His church? I think not! That is why the LDS, IMO, is not the true successor.

The RLDS church is not in apostasy, it takes a lot more than what has happened for the church to be in apostasy. Once the Lord cleanses his church (as the scriptures state He will do), we who have continued to believe in the restored gospel will be free again to worship in His church.