-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Canon
- Thread starter mormonman
- Start date
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
mormonman said:
Well, I am willing to bet you are an adolescent, and do not have the life experience yet to put anything behind that. Remember when the storm blows hardest the trees that survive are the ones that BEND with the wind. The storm passes over them and leaves them behind, still secure in their roots.
Regards,
Scott
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
mormonman said:The faiths that you listed were protestant. They weren't restored, they stemmed from the Catholic faith. A good fruit can't be grown from a dead tree. The LDS religion was not a spin off of any other religion. It restored Christ's true Chuch. Of course a third party can't corroborate our religion's claim to the truth. Once those people believe that our religion is true, then they join, thus not being a third party. How many witnesses do you people want? There were at least 11 people besides Joseph Smith that saw and handled the plates of the Book of Mormon. Here are their testimonies: http://scriptures.lds.org/bm/thrwtnss and http://scriptures.lds.org/bm/eghtwtns. All of the original Three Witnesses aposticized from the Church, but never gave up their testimony of the BoM.
But it's all heresay and opinion -- that's my point! The Christian Church and the Churches of Christ very much view themselves as restorationist. And that's their opinion of themselves. And Martin Luther did not intend to "break away." He was forced out. Ditto for John Wesley. Neither one "intended" to begin a new church.
It's the opinion of the LDS that the Catholic Church is a "dead tree" -- not fact -- just ask any Roman Catholic or Orthodox Christian.
At the end of the day, all you're left with is conjecture, opinion and belief. That may be a valid basis for your purposes, but it definitely is not an absolute, by which any successive theology may be measured as "true" or "real" or even "authoritative." History, and thus, the closest thing we have to documentable "authority" lies on the side of those bodies that are within the Apostolic succession.
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
As to the statements of the witnesses:
Why does the Holy Bible, the Qur'an, the TOrah, the Apanishads, the Avestas, the Getas, etc. manage to convince without having to be prefaced WITHOUT affidavits?
WHen I read my sacred text never is there a sworn witness necessary to convince me the word of God is present in those pages?
Yet the BoM needs all these sworn testimonies . . . . It made me think.
Regards,
Scott
Why does the Holy Bible, the Qur'an, the TOrah, the Apanishads, the Avestas, the Getas, etc. manage to convince without having to be prefaced WITHOUT affidavits?
WHen I read my sacred text never is there a sworn witness necessary to convince me the word of God is present in those pages?
Yet the BoM needs all these sworn testimonies . . . . It made me think.
Regards,
Scott
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Never mind that you could be wrong...mormonman said:
Christ didn't come off as arrogant. Christ exemplified humility. I don't know whether to laugh or cry after reading this post. I would be a person, in Christ's time, following Jesus -- not following the Pharisees!
Narrow-mindedness, vainglory and elitism are not principal attributes of the Christian.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
sojourner said:
May we always have the grace needed to tell the difference between the two.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
dan said:
What exactly do you mean?
Jesus said that they said...
30saying, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.' 31Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 33You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
dan said:
You mean, "That's what Jesus said to the Pharisees" in Matt. 23:30,31.
Are you calling me a liar and a hypocrite for saying, if I had lived in the time of Jesus, I would have followed Jesus and not the Pharisees?
In fact, Jesus had a large number of followers, many of whom were disenfranchised. How does this equate to the LDS, who see themselves as completely franchised?
Read Matt. 23:13-15, for what else Jesus says to the Pharisees. It's real dangerous to use the Bible to point fingers at others. That's not what the Bible is meant for.
sojourner said:
Only one of them follows all the principles laid out in the Bible. To name a few: Prophets, Apostles, Revelation, Scripture, Authority by the laying on of hands by those in authority, etc., etc.
sojourner said:
Oh, so I guess the fifty thousand 19 year old LDS boys and girls out there walking around alone preaching the Gospel to people who hate them makes them more like men than anyone here. I was one of them. I've been stoned, spit on, kicked out of homes and churches, shot at and stabbed at (dude didn't know how to handle a knife) solely because I wore a certain kind of name tag. Does that count as the "real world"? Is that close enough to John 15:18-27 or does it not count because we don't have a disinterested third party? Those that aren't for us are against us, I believe Christ said. Disinterested third party doesn't really fit in there.
sojourner said:
I am not calling you a liar and a hypocritre, I'm just pointing out that liars and hypocritres have made the same claim as you, and they were wrong. You have no way of knowing if you would have followed Jesus or not. That is a completely inaccurate statement for you to make.
Yes, I am 17.Popeyesays said:
Believe me, I have had MANY "storms" that have tested my faith, and you know what? I weathered them out twigs and all. These experiences have given me an unshakeable testimony of God's Church. It has also given me especially strong testimonies of certain aspects of the Church such as, tithing, the power of prayer, and healing. And yes, we have the power to heal. Just because I am 17 doesn't mean I don't know enough to make up my mind about religion. Why do you think, that in a year and a half, I'll be serving a two year mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? Why am I going to do this? It's not because I'm expected to. It's because I feel as Ammon did in Book of Mormon. It makes me extremely sad that not everyone either has a chance to here the Gospel or doesn't accept it. It's because I know the truth and it's my duty to spread it to the world.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
dan said:
1) Nobody else has elders or bishops (Apostles). None of them study the Biblical prophets. None of them find God revealed anywhere in the world today. None of them study and interpret the scriptures. No ordained clergy ever has hands laid on them by those in authnority over them. No one except the LDS. Get over yourselves, please. These things have always been present in the Church under any of a number of different names.
2) None of that has anything to do with what was being talked about here. We're not talking about acts of violence against young men and women. We're not even talking about the hundreds of martyrs of the Faith who were sacrificed and crucified and fed to lions and drawn and quartered and disemboweled. We're talking about authority. I have yet to see any party outside the Chruch's sphere of influence accord any kind of authority to any Church leader. The authority is only effective within the organization that grants it.
Squirt said:
...ah! But, we Christians have to over come hundreds of years of knee-jerk tradition of burning books - when we weren't burning people - and if in these enlightened times we confine the auto da fe to our hearts it is still so much easier to shout "Burn the Heretic" than to say "I see your point and whilst I do not agree at this time, I shall ponder it" ... hmmm? When was the last time you heard anyone say that? ... when was the last time YOU said that?
Growing up in a Protestant Church, I discovered The Apocrypha when, as a child, I was given the Old Testament in cartoon form based on The Douai Bible ... and when I asked grown-ups about it I was Shhhhhshed. Obviously, I was hooked ... I had God's Story laid out like a Superman comic and the added frisson of "Forbidden Stuff" ... so, don't tell my vicar, will you (she wouldn't understand) but I accept happily The Apocrypha (which in my copy of The New English Bible is snuck in between the two Testaments - but in my Jerusalem Bible is embedded in the text).
I must confess, I do wonder about Tobias and the Angel ... but I suppose it is no more fantastic than Balaam's *** or Jonah's fish.
One thing it taught me (when I was old enough to realise what I had been taught) is that if we listen to each other we MIGHT learn something ... we don't necessarily have to agree ... BUT WE DO HAVE TO LISTEN WITH RESPECT (sorry I shouted ... I am probably being brash and nervous in a new environment ... like a fish desperately seeking the water) I hope I haven't offended anyone. ... and I apoligise if I have ... it is/was inadvertent.
I suppose I would now have to define myself as an Anglican Catholic with Evangelical leanings (or vice versa).
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
mormonman said:Yes, I am 17.
Well, I will be 59 this year. More than thirty of those years have been as a Baha`i, and I will tell you flat out - "You ain't seen nothin' yet." I wish you luck, you will need it.
Regards,
Scott
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
dan said:
The same goes for all of us.
That's why I wrote:
Angellous said: