LDS Why do Mormons think they are of the Aaronic priesthood?

[ToBeLoved]

Referring to what Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith said both should have the AP received in 1829.
The church was founded on April 6, 1830. At that time neither the AP nor the MP part dwer LDS. Only in 1831 both priesthoods were mentioned. An accident? Or an obvious fraud?

I wonder about that too, because JS said he was visited by both the Father and the Son first. Now if this priesthood thing was true, why would not have Jesus Himself given the priesthood to them? Also, I don't remember anywhere in the Bible where the Father appreared to someone? Do you?

 

[Jutta2]

Seems he really wanted to try to be one of the 12 Tribes didn't he? I wonder how that fit into the story he was trying to create. Maybe drop big biblical names so it sounded official?

To understand why Joseph Smith came to all this, one must understand what was believed then and thought. The United States was a young nation, without its own long history. It was believed, not only by Mormons, that the Indians were among the lost tribes of Israel. There were books published about how about "Views of The Hebrew" from Smith, who was not related to JS.
The "church" who founded JS, needed something that distinguished them from other groups and churches. And so came the matter of the priesthoods that are indeed mentioned in the Bible. Smith completed these terms on their own ideas. Incidentally, at the first time of the LDS a deacon was an adult and married man, which was opened much later for teenagers from 12 years.

 

[ToBeLoved]

To understand why Joseph Smith came to all this, one must understand what was believed then and thought. The United States was a young nation, without its own long history. It was believed, not only by Mormons, that the Indians were among the lost tribes of Israel. There were books published about how about "Views of The Hebrew" from Smith, who was not related to JS.
The "church" who founded JS, needed something that distinguished them from other groups and churches. And so came the matter of the priesthoods that are indeed mentioned in the Bible. Smith completed these terms on their own ideas. Incidentally, at the first time of the LDS a deacon was an adult and married man, which was opened much later for teenagers from 12 years.

I feel that JS ripped the face off of Christianity as a starting point for his new religion, And he needed a god, so why not just borrow Jesus Christ but not call Him God, but the spiritual brother of lucifer. I didn't know until recently that they rewrote a book of Moses.

 

[Jutta2]

I wonder about that too, because JS said he was visited by both the Father and the Son first. Now if this priesthood thing was true, why would not have Jesus Himself given the priesthood to them? Also, I don't remember anywhere in the Bible where the Father appreared to someone? Do you?

If you wanted to sell the 19th century something you had to, as it is today; by any notice something. You have to stand out from others. Joseph Smith told several different versions of the First Vision. Time he saw only angels, then only God, then God and Jesus, and once even a green man. To me this sounds as if he would have taken hallucinogenic drugs.
Regarding the priesthood, so should not only John the Baptist, and the Apostles Peter, James and John have appeared, but also the prophet Elijah and Jeremiah. The latter for the alleged restoration of the temple ceremonies. What does the Freemason Joseph Smith, taken by the Masons, and newly reinterpreted (including the mark on the LDS Garment)

 

[Jutta2]

I didn't know until recently that they rewrote a book of Moses.

And also a "Book of Abraham" (an interesting story) and he "translate" also the Bible (part of it), called the "Inspired Version". One has to be very gullible to believe such a thing.

 

[Jutta2]

The text you quoted directly says that non-Mormons can have the Holy Ghost manifest in them. But the gift of the Holy Ghost is a priesthood blessing.

In the Bible, Old and New Testament, absolutely nothing is the fact that the Holy Spirit is bound as a gift to a priesthood. This is nonsense to say such a thing. It contradicts any theological biblical statement.

 

[Jutta2]

Except you believe everyone's a priest... you're being contradictory again.

Jane, a Christian believes not a priesthood, but the Bible. Mormons believe their leaders without checking their statements with the Bible. Why? Because the Bible has a far less important in Mormon as the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, or the words of the living "prophet". This is already evident from the articles of faith of the Mormons.

 

[Jutta2]

There are many things. But I feel that answering this will completely derail the thread here.

Then open a new thread, and replied to; what others know about your cult.

 

[Jutta2]

Well then, why have I been honest with you?

You have falsely led me into thinking you believed what I believed and now you say you do not think that we even have Christ because we are ALL 6 Billion on this earth right now, in apostasy.

If you do not say, then all our conversations are over. So you have the choice to speak.

Forgive her, she does not know it better. She is, what a former Mormon named a Mormon robot; a MOBOT.

 

[fatboys]

Then open a new thread, and replied to; what others know about your cult.

Mormons are not allowed to open threads just answer questions

 

[Jutta2]

Mormons are not allowed to open threads just answer questions

It all depends on how you start a topic. For example, by facing two contradictory opinions. Or by telling a story that includes the subject on which you want to write. We are talking for example about the LDS Priesthood, about the differences between Christian and Mormon faith. Were I still in your Church, I would face two opposing positions, and mention that the LDS position have questions, and that you are ready to answer them.

 

[fatboys]

Jane, a Christian believes not a priesthood, but the Bible. Mormons believe their leaders without checking their statements with the Bible. Why? Because the Bible has a far less important in Mormon as the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, or the words of the living "prophet". This is already evident from the articles of faith of the Mormons.

You should not say things that are not true. Mormons believe the bible to be the word of God but it is not innerrorant. Believing the bible is innerrorant is what the Jewish leaders thought at the time of Christ and that God did not need to reveal any more of his word. They had it all. We believe that the bible is less perfect that the Book of Mormon. But neither is perfect. The most perfect would be the doctrine and covenants.

 

[mmksparbud]

You should not say things that are not true. Mormons believe the bible to be the word of God but it is not innerrorant. Believing the bible is innerrorant is what the Jewish leaders thought at the time of Christ and that God did not need to reveal any more of his word. They had it all. We believe that the bible is less perfect that the Book of Mormon. But neither is perfect. The most perfect would be the doctrine and covenants.

Jesus believed in the bible--He did not preach a new religion, He was preaching the word of God as it is without the "addition" of the "wisdom" of the Rabbi's. Christ is the fulfillment of the OT, not a new concept, the realization of the old concept. He wrote no new scriptures. He told nothing new, He reiterated what was always there as it should be read---not adding anything that is scripture Himself. The NT, as was the OT, was written by men, under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The NT is not a brand new religion, it is the culmination of the old, the removing of the Levitical Priesthood and the sacrifices and replaced with Christ as the Priest and the sacrifices combined. No priests nor sacrifices needed anymore. He replaced it all.

 

[fatboys]

Jesus believed in the bible--He did not preach a new religion, He was preaching the word of God as it is without the "addition" of the "wisdom" of the Rabbi's. Christ is the fulfillment of the OT, not a new concept, the realization of the old concept. He wrote no new scriptures. He told nothing new, He reiterated what was always there as it should be read---not adding anything that is scripture Himself. The NT, as was the OT, was written by men, under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The NT is not a brand new religion, it is the culmination of the old, the removing of the Levitical Priesthood and the sacrifices and replaced with Christ as the Priest and the sacrifices combined. No priests nor sacrifices needed anymore. He replaced it all.

And what you just stated is the new gospel you think we are teaching. The thing is you are teaching Christ which is great and wonderful but there has been many truths lost. What you think is a different gospel is actually the restored gospel of Christ.

 

[chandraclaws]

The premise is this:
JS and his friend Oliver Cowdrey were translating the BOM. At one point in the translation, JS translated an event in which men were baptizing people into the church of God. He was suddenly caught up with the thought that he will be baptizing people into the church of God, but he had never been given the right or authority to baptize.

So with that thought in their minds they went into a wooded area and knelt down to pray about what authority was needed to baptize. At that time an angel came to them and he said that his name was John the Baptist, the same John that ministered and baptized the Savior. He was sent from the presence of God to Joseph and Oliver to restore the Aaronic priesthood again to the earth. So he laid his hands on their heads and bestowed the Aaronic priesthood to them and with that authority, they were now authorized by the Lord to baptize people into the church of God.

Some months later, JS and Oliver were again praying to the Lord, and He sent Peter, James, and John to them, who were apostles of Jesus Christ. They too, laid their hands on their heads and bestowed the Melchisedec priesthood to them, which gave them the power and authority of the Melchisedec priesthood, which is the power and authority to preside over all the affairs of the church.

So the premise is that priesthood power was given to JS by heavenly messangers sent from God and JS now had the power and authority to do what was necessary to operate the church according to the will of God.

If JS does not recieve priesthood authority it is all over.

But it is all over. "It is finished."

 

[ToBeLoved]

If you wanted to sell the 19th century something you had to, as it is today; by any notice something. You have to stand out from others. Joseph Smith told several different versions of the First Vision. Time he saw only angels, then only God, then God and Jesus, and once even a green man. To me this sounds as if he would have taken hallucinogenic drugs.
Regarding the priesthood, so should not only John the Baptist, and the Apostles Peter, James and John have appeared, but also the prophet Elijah and Jeremiah. The latter for the alleged restoration of the temple ceremonies. What does the Freemason Joseph Smith, taken by the Masons, and newly reinterpreted (including the mark on the LDS Garment)

I so appreciate your opinions knowing that you are an former Mormon.

Interesting that you brought up the free-mason connection as I just found out about that and that gives me serious cause for concern. Is the mark that you are referring to a backward 'L' and a 'V' that might be not upstanding?

 

[ToBeLoved]

Then open a new thread, and replied to; what others know about your cult.

I'll start a new thread 'Why Mormons believe all Christians are in apostasy' Jane said she would give a detailed explanation, so I'm sure she will.

 

[Jutta2]

You should not say things that are not true. Mormons believe the bible to be the word of God but it is not innerrorant. Believing the bible is innerrorant is what the Jewish leaders thought at the time of Christ and that God did not need to reveal any more of his word. They had it all. We believe that the bible is less perfect that the Book of Mormon. But neither is perfect. The most perfect would be the doctrine and covenants.

It was Joseph Smith himself that said once:

“I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.)

More correct than the Bible? You can identify places that are mentioned in the Bible. Where they were, as their population was, etc. But there is no place in the Book of Mormon; was identified. Items that were mentioned in the Bible, were found, are so evident historically. Objects that have been mentioned in the Book of Mormon, were not found, will also never found, because the Book of Mormon is a fictional story.
So, which of the two books is correct?

 

[Jutta2]

Jesus believed in the bible--He did not preach a new religion, He was preaching the word of God as it is without the "addition" of the "wisdom" of the Rabbi's. Christ is the fulfillment of the OT, not a new concept, the realization of the old concept. He wrote no new scriptures. He told nothing new, He reiterated what was always there as it should be read---not adding anything that is scripture Himself. The NT, as was the OT, was written by men, under the influence of the Holy Spirit. The NT is not a brand new religion, it is the culmination of the old, the removing of the Levitical Priesthood and the sacrifices and replaced with Christ as the Priest and the sacrifices combined. No priests nor sacrifices needed anymore. He replaced it all.

AMEN, Sister! I agree 100%.

 

[Jutta2]

And what you just stated is the new gospel you think we are teaching. The thing is you are teaching Christ which is great and wonderful but there has been many truths lost. What you think is a different gospel is actually the restored gospel of Christ.

The Christian Jesus is another Jesus than the Jesus of Mormonism. It begins again with the fact that Mormons believe that Jesus Christ in the premortal life existed as Yahweh, something that is absolute nonsense, what everyone who is versed theology, recognizes as an error.
You say that the LDS is the "restored gospel"? To restore something must have been something lost or destroyed before. Well, it will surprise you, but at least since the beginning of our era, the gospel was on the earth. It was not always understood why there are so many sects and cults today. In the Bible it says:

He who has ears, let him hear "

Apparently Mormons are deaf because they do not hear the gospel, but run a Pied Piper by masquerading as a prophet; but from which not a single prophecy was fulfilled.