Apostasy?

[MormonFriend]

What do Protestants say about repentance? "Not necessary once we are born again, or we can go on sinning any time we have a slack period. .... We should repent, but it is not essential to salvation."

Good gravy, what Protestant churches are you going to? Honestly.

The bible says we need to repent to be saved, and then goes on to say how anyone who's truly in Christ will turn from sin and stay that way. I've NEVER sat in a church on Sunday morning w/ a pastor saying "hey, repentance is good and all, but really, don't feel like you have to bother. Sin all you want, God doesn't mind."

Where do you get this stuff?

Top that off, in your version of the afterlife, I have to truly know Christ and deny him to land in "outer darkness", not hell. Otherwise, I get level 2 or 3 of heaven <since I'm Christian I should get level 2, right?>. Now, how does THAT fall into the "not essential to salvation" stuff? For pete's sakes, you guys don't even believe you have to believe in Christ to go to Heaven, and you're telling me that our pastors don't preach repentance is necessary enough? If ANYONE is saying "repentance isn't necessary" it's the LDS church. Nearly everyone gets level 2 or 3 of heaven, after all. Repentant or not.

Shalia

Greetings Shalia,
Did you read the whole conversation which brought this post in question? Sometimes a little sarcasim comes out of me. ( I was never sarcastic before, I wonder if it is communicable?) Nevertheless, what I said has foundation.

When I say "Protestant", I am referring to all of Christianity that divided from Catholicism. The message I hear repeated from good friends of mine, as well as the people here at CF (and I consider most of them friends), is that repentance is not essential for salvation. Then is it necessary for anything? I keep hearing that repentance is a work, and we cannot work for our salvation. Apparently you are of a different understanding, of which I do agree with on this issue. Without true repentance, we are not born again. I take the following scripture literally.
9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
(1 John 3:9 - 10)

Your information about our beliefs is barely in the ballpark. Before any person comes into any glory of heaven, he/she will have bowed the knee and confessed with the tounge that Jesus is the Christ.

 

[calgal]

This is simply youre opinion. And have we ever claimed that youre church "spits in the face of Almight God"? So please dont make that claim to us.

Pre 1990 "temple endowment" ceremony, Mary and the Lord having carnal relations (Brigham Young speaking as a "prophet") and of course "as man is God once was and as God is man may become" are a good set of starting points.

 

[calgal]

What? We're not Christians because we believe that God continues to reveal His word to us? Would you mind telling us where in the Bible we are told that He has said all He has to say? God's not through talking to us, even if you prefer to think He is.

According to Ephesians 4:11-14, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive…"

Jesus Christ personally ordained Prophets and Apostles. This organization was to remain in effect until we all became unified in the Faith. Do you honestly think that has happened yet? Not a chance. As a matter of fact, there are now over 30,000 Christian denominations in the world. Sounds to me as if a lot of people are being "carried about with every wind of doctrine." Why on earth do you think He would have ordained Prophets if He didn't plan on talking to them after His resurrection?

Oh, and one last thought. You don't speak on behalf of the world's 2 billion Christians. Many of them do recognize us as Christians. But in the long run, it's really not going to matter a whole lot anyway. When I stand before God to be judged, I doubt He's going to be asking anybody else whether I was a Christian or not!

Regards,
Kathryn

Hope and pray your eyes are opened before that day.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

What? We're not Christians because we believe that God continues to reveal His word to us? Would you mind telling us where in the Bible we are told that He has said all He has to say? God's not through talking to us, even if you prefer to think He is.

According to Ephesians 4:11-14, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive…"

Jesus Christ personally ordained Prophets and Apostles. This organization was to remain in effect until we all became unified in the Faith. Do you honestly think that has happened yet? Not a chance. As a matter of fact, there are now over 30,000 Christian denominations in the world. Sounds to me as if a lot of people are being "carried about with every wind of doctrine." Why on earth do you think He would have ordained Prophets if He didn't plan on talking to them after His resurrection?

Oh, and one last thought. You don't speak on behalf of the world's 2 billion Christians. Many of them do recognize us as Christians. But in the long run, it's really not going to matter a whole lot anyway. When I stand before God to be judged, I doubt He's going to be asking anybody else whether I was a Christian or not!

Regards,
Kathryn

The Mormon "church" is not a Christian church because it's teachings and doctrines contradict the Word of God. It is as simple as that. One have to go no farther than the Bible to realize that.

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

What? We're not Christians because we believe that God continues to reveal His word to us? Would you mind telling us where in the Bible we are told that He has said all He has to say? God's not through talking to us, even if you prefer to think He is.

Kathryn,

Have you ever read the James Barker's: "Apostasy of the Divine Church"? He was an LDS author who died just before his book was published in the 1960's. Here's an interesting quote he uses to justify Christian apostasy:

The changes which have been made in doctrine, organization and government were made after all revelation had ceased, by men, who were not divinely called, who did not enjoy the companionship of the spirit of revelation, who were not divinely directed, who interpreted and "developed" doctrine with only human resources, and who invoked and received the help of the might of the state to impose their doctrines on the church and the world.10 Roman Catholic historians note the changes which have been made, but they maintain that these changes were a "legitimate development" and not an "apostasy." It must be apparent that doctrines divinely given would not have needed "development" by men, but were as the Lord wanted them to be when first given. . . Any change made by man is a great presumption. Of such changes, the Savior, speaking of the religious leaders of Israel at the time of His ministry on earth said: ‘Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.’ (Barker 661)

Here's my #10 footnote for the above paragraph:

" 6 Sept. [1938], First Presidency appoints coordinator of church’s first anti-polygamy surveillance team which obtains information on Mormon Fundamentalists and turns it over to excommunication courts and to law enforcement agencies. Surveillance coordinator reports to first counselor J. Reuben Clark." (Quinn’s The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power, p. 826. underlining and emphasis mine.) " 16 Oct.[1940], Salt Lake City police department begins furnishing to First Presidency police surveillance information on suspected polygamists." (Quinn 827, underlining and emphasis mine.) " Mar. [1944], coordinated raid by FBI and local police to arrest polygamist men." (Quinn 830, Underlining mine.) "2 Oct.[1944], head of church’s anti-polygamy surveillance testifies in court." (Quinn 830) LDS Church sponsorship of anti-polygamous surveillance and espionage continued until the climax year of 1953 with the famous Short Creek raid (now Colorado City) which occurred in Arizona on July 26th, 1953. This was the last time the Church helped the State Government in any major fashion. Nevertheless, some zealous members have continued on their own initiative to report to Church authorities any suspicious activities relating to plural marriage.

Jesus Christ personally ordained Prophets and Apostles.

There's no evidence of him ordaining "prophets". A prophet is not an office, but a gift.

This organization was to remain in effect until we all became unified in the Faith.

What makes you believe that?

Do you honestly think that has happened yet? Not a chance. As a matter of fact, there are now over 30,000 Christian denominations in the world. Sounds to me as if a lot of people are being "carried about with every wind of doctrine." Why on earth do you think He would have ordained Prophets if He didn't plan on talking to them after His resurrection?

Again, show me where Christ ordained anyone to be a prophet?

 

[A New Dawn]

This organization was to remain in effect until we all became unified in the Faith.

What makes you believe that?

Do you think Christ would set a structure in motion He did not wish to continue? And what was it that he preached? The Kingdom. The Kingdom. The Kingdom. It was His favorite theme.

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

Do you think Christ would set a structure in motion He did not wish to continue? And what was it that he preached? The Kingdom. The Kingdom. The Kingdom. It was His favorite theme.

He ordained Apostles. That's it. They then established a structure.

 

[A New Dawn]

He ordained Apostles. That's it. They then established a structure.

He ordained the seventy. He instituted baptism as a requirement. He blessed children. He healed the sick. He instituted the sacrament. He called "the church" (or the Kingdom) His bride.

Gee, this is all sounding familiar. At least to me.

 

[unbound]

Do you think Christ would set a structure in motion He did not wish to continue? And what was it that he preached? The Kingdom. The Kingdom. The Kingdom. It was His favorite theme.

The Jews already had the priesthood, so we know it is not that thing which he came to set in motion.

However, you claim that it is the thing Jesus came to establish, and also somewhere along the line, the priesthood failed, and then Jesus had to make an appearance and re-establish the thing he failed to do in the first place.

I dont believe your version. I believe Jesus established his kingdom, and the next time he shows up, he will walk with us all again, not just Joseph Smith.

The only person who ever took the priesthood into heaven with him is Christ. He is the priest that never changes, we have overcome the flesh,He is our priest forever.

 

[unbound]

He ordained Apostles. That's it. They then established a structure.

Correct.Jesus and the apostles are the foundation, the Kingdom is the structure. Once the correct foundation is laid, one does not have to go back again and lay another one.

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

He ordained the seventy. He instituted baptism as a requirement. He blessed children. He healed the sick. He instituted the sacrament. He called "the church" (or the Kingdom) His bride.

Gee, this is all sounding familiar. At least to me.

Technically, it says that he "appointed" seventy-two (or seventy) others to preach the gospel. Did they have the same authority as the apostles? Yes. So we can infer that he ordained the seventy-two others.

But there was no "first presidency". There was no "seventies quorums" or "elders quroums" or "teachers quorums".

He didn't say "build temples" either.

 

[Fit4Christ]

Do you think Christ would set a structure in motion He did not wish to continue? And what was it that he preached? The Kingdom. The Kingdom. The Kingdom. It was His favorite theme.

And who, pray tell, is the King of said Kingdom?

 

[Fit4Christ]

He ordained the seventy. He instituted baptism as a requirement. He blessed children. He healed the sick. He instituted the sacrament. He called "the church" (or the Kingdom) His bride.

Gee, this is all sounding familiar. At least to me.

Baptism is a requirement for what? The only "requirement" is to believe in Christ as your Lord and Saviour. After you do that, then He gave us 2 commandments:

37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[2] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[3] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

 

[A New Dawn]

And who, pray tell, is the King of said Kingdom?

Joseph Smith.

Who do you think it is? It is Christ.

 

[Fit4Christ]

Joseph Smith.

You and the lds wish!

Who do you think it is? It is Christ.

Just checking to make sure you haven't lost all your marbles!

A Kingdom can only have 1 ruler, right? So, if Christ is King in His Kingdom that He talked so much about, and He told us how to get into His Kingdom, then why oh why is there a need for a prophet today??? We know what God's word is and by it we know how to get into heaven and what we are supposed to do in the mean time (love God and one another). How is what a prophet says today, yesterday, or 175 years ago going to change what Jesus said about how to get into His Kingdom?

 

[fatboys]

Technically, it says that he "appointed" seventy-two (or seventy) others to preach the gospel. Did they have the same authority as the apostles? Yes. So we can infer that he ordained the seventy-two others.

But there was no "first presidency". There was no "seventies quorums" or "elders quroums" or "teachers quorums".

He didn't say "build temples" either.

FB: They have the same authority to preach the gospel, but they do not have the same authority to receive revelation or administer in the church as the apostles. We believe that we hold the same priesthood authority that the aposltes have. We do not have the keys that open specific ordinances, rites or endowments. So the same priesthood authority, but not the same rights. To receive this one has to called of God and receive the keys as all prophets and apostles did.

 

[A New Dawn]

A Kingdom can only have 1 ruler, right? So, if Christ is King in His Kingdom that He talked so much about, and He told us how to get into His Kingdom, then why oh why is there a need for a prophet today??? We know what God's word is and by it we know how to get into heaven and what we are supposed to do in the mean time (love God and one another). How is what a prophet says today, yesterday, or 175 years ago going to change what Jesus said about how to get into His Kingdom?

We don't believe that what is given today should contradict the Bible, or any other existing scripture. If something is given that does, we consider it disjunctive, and don't accept it. In our church, many have stopped attending and/or started new churches because they feel that the revelations that have been given in the last 20 years have been disjunctive.

What was the point of having a prophet like Ezekial or Daniel or Jonah, or anyone else after God gave Moses the Mosaic Law? To remind the people that they must try to live up to the word. That they must change their hearts and accept Christ or bear the consequences. What did Isaiah preach?

 

[A New Dawn]

Baptism is a requirement for what?

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

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

John 3:1-5
1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 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.

The only "requirement" is to believe in Christ as your Lord and Saviour. After you do that, then He gave us 2 commandments:

Those aren't the only two, those are the greatest two.

Matthew 22:34-40
34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
35 Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question], tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Jesus tells us that the greatest commandment is to love Him. Then He tells us that if we love Him, we must keep all His commandments. Baptism is one of His commandments.

 

[Fit4Christ]

We don't believe that what is given today should contradict the Bible, or any other existing scripture. If something is given that does, we consider it disjunctive, and don't accept it. In our church, many have stopped attending and/or started new churches because they feel that the revelations that have been given in the last 20 years have been disjunctive.

Is what you believe about "what is given today" different than what was given over the last 175 years? If JS gave a revelation back then and it contradicted the Bible, would it be considered "disjunctive"?

What was the point of having a prophet like Ezekial or Daniel or Jonah, or anyone else after God gave Moses the Mosaic Law? To remind the people that they must try to live up to the word. That they must change their hearts and accept Christ or bear the consequences. What did Isaiah preach?

Did any other OT prophet ever give new "laws", change or add on to the Mosaic Law, or change a previous revelation based on man's laws? Or were they just revealing God's word and His intention based on the Mosaic Law?

What did Isaiah preach about what? He has 66 Chapters, so I'm assuming he preached a lot. Please be more specific if you'd like my response.

 

[ZealouS]

So all you people who think that baptism is a requirment tell me something. Where do you think Moses, David, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Joseph, Daniel, Ezekiel, Isiah and all the OT prophets and leaders are going to be if baptism is a commandment? The answer is simple. Baptism is symbolic of your old self dying and your new self emmerging from the water. It is also symbolic of the ressurection. True baptism comes from within. None of the OT prophets were baptized by immmersion in water to my knowledge and yet do you think they are not going to enter into the Kingdom of God?