Three Questions (Split from, ‘Vogel Responds …’)

[drumdude]

How long was it before the Catholic Church went into apostasy?

Over a period of time.

From Wikipedia:

Over time, schisms have disrupted the unity of Christianity. The Catholic Church considers that major divisions occurred in c. 144 with Marcionism, 318 with Arianism, 451 with the Oriental Orthodox, 1054 to 1449 (see East–West Schism) during which time the Orthodox Churches of the East parted ways with the Western Church over doctrinal issues (see the filioque) and papal primacy, and in 1517 with the Protestant Reformation, of which there were many divisions, resulting in over 200 denominations.

Doctrinal issues, once going off the rails, have a very difficult time coming back to any degree of purity on their own

So you didn’t answer my question I asked earlier. Would you care to do so? I’d be interested in your thoughts.

I’m assuming that you are one of those folks that believe the SL LDS Church may have at one time been ‘true’ in its earlier ‘make up’ but then fell into apostasy? And now it’s not true?

In other words, my list provided earlier is more or less a non starter at this point because everything (from your perspective) went to pot (your list)?

Regards,
MG

I don’t believe any church is “true.” Jesus didn’t set up a church, contrary to popular belief. After he died a church was set up around him.

Bart Ehrman is my go-to for distinguishing the historical Jesus from the myth that was created afterwards.

[Morley]

MG, when I say "evidently not," to your claim of modern-day revelation, I'm asking for the evidence that what you say is true.

I'll make it easy for you. What revelations in the last 100 years have the prophets of the CoJCoLDS made that could not have been made by my mother-in-law?

[MG 2.0]

As with a number of others here on this board I’m pretty clear on what you don’t believe but really have no idea what you, canpakes, and others DO believe. What is it that fills your bucket to give your life meaning on a deep level?

Regards,
MG

Pray tell, what is it that I don't believe? (Other than, you know, me probably not believing that modern-day CoJCoLDS prophets receive and disseminate revelation from the Lord.)

Bingo! That’s number one. Number two? Anything to do with God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost? Joseph Smith as a prophet? Church teachings on morality?

And, again, what DO you believe? Your responses are generally very limited and show limited understanding and comprehension. Not to be unkind, but your participation is most often ‘the critic’ rather than moving a conversation forward in a positive way. Nit picking doesn’t really get us anywhere. Victim mentality and taking offense don’t add much either.

The other day I told a couple of posters to “grow a spine”. I say the same to you. At about the point you come into a thread, along with a few others I could name, is the point where the train goes off the tracks.

Again, thanks for your response. As limited and unproductive as it may be.

Notice how drumdude was able, at least for a while, carry on a conversation? And it may be that he will return and answer some questions later. Unless other folks keep going sideways.

Add to the conversation or find something better to do, Morley. Conversation with you rarely goes anywhere besides “pray tell” and the like.

I think we already know that the likelihood of us having a civil conversation is quite low. In my mind I’m often asking, “Why try?”

But then I have high hopes…

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

6. Prophets receive revelation for our day from the Lord.

Evidently not.

...The question at the end of the day... might we look backwards...

I think as we look back over the distance we might conclude...

For all intents and purposes as we look back we can see....

But looking backwards can make all the difference....
[ellipses used to highlight]

Thank you for your opinion on some topic I didn't write about.

None of this is evidence of revelation.

No, it's not. It's nothing more than highly imaginative retconning of the history of the LDS church.

Retroactive continuity,
or retcon for short, is a literary device

in which facts

in the world of a fictional work which have been established through the narrative itself

are adjusted, ignored, supplemented, or contradicted

by a subsequently published work which recontextualizes or breaks continuity with the former.[2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity

Apologetics today seems to be simply an effort to retcon the Book of Mormon, the First Vision, the Book of Abraham, etc., etc., etc..

[Morley]

Pray tell, what is it that I don't believe? (Other than, you know, me probably not believing that modern-day CoJCoLDS prophets receive and disseminate revelation from the Lord.)

Bingo! That’s number one. Number two? Anything to do with God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost? Joseph Smith as a prophet? Church teachings on morality?

And, again, what DO you believe? Your responses are generally very limited and show limited understanding and comprehension. Not to be unkind, but your participation is most often ‘the critic’ rather than moving a conversation forward in a positive way. Nit picking doesn’t really get us anywhere. Victim mentality and taking offense don’t add much either.

The other day I told a couple of posters to “grow a spine”. I say the same to you. At about the point you come into a thread, along with a few others I could name, is the point where the train goes off the tracks.

Again, thanks for your response. As limited and unproductive as it may be.

Notice how drumdude was able, at least for a while, carry on a conversation? And it may be that he will return and answer some questions later. Unless other folks keep going sideways.

Add to the conversation or find something better to do, Morley. Conversation with you rarely goes anywhere besides “pray tell” and the like.

I think we already know that the likelihood of us having a civil conversation is quite low. In my mind I’m often asking, “Why try?”

But then I have high hopes…

Regards,
MG

My beliefs are not part of this topic. If you want to question member beliefs, perhaps you should start another thread.

[MG 2.0]

Over a period of time.

From Wikipedia:



Doctrinal issues, once going off the rails, have a very difficult time coming back to any degree of purity on their own

So you didn’t answer my question I asked earlier. Would you care to do so? I’d be interested in your thoughts.

I’m assuming that you are one of those folks that believe the SL LDS Church may have at one time been ‘true’ in its earlier ‘make up’ but then fell into apostasy? And now it’s not true?

In other words, my list provided earlier is more or less a non starter at this point because everything (from your perspective) went to pot (your list)?

Regards,
MG

I don’t believe any church is “true.” Jesus didn’t set up a church, contrary to popular belief. After he died a church was set up around him.

Bart Ehrman is my go-to for distinguishing the historical Jesus from the myth that was created afterwards.

So you believe Jesus died, and that was it? No resurrection? If not, that might explain why you might feel/believe that there would not be a church worshipping a living Christ.

I’m just saying that as a matter of fact. Why worship a dead Jesus, right?

A dead Jesus kind of puts the kibosh on some other things. The Book of Mormon teaches of a living Lord. The prophets, including Elder Bednar, whose recent address testifying of Christ I linked you to.

No resurrected Christ. No prophets.

So where do we go from here?

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

Not to be unkind, but your participation is most often ‘the critic’ rather than moving a conversation forward in a positive way. Nit picking doesn’t really get us anywhere. Victim mentality and taking offense don’t add much either.

To my knowledge, I've said nothing critical on this thread. I've asked for evidence for one of the things you've claimed.

[drumdude]

I don’t believe any church is “true.” Jesus didn’t set up a church, contrary to popular belief. After he died a church was set up around him.

Bart Ehrman is my go-to for distinguishing the historical Jesus from the myth that was created afterwards.

So you believe Jesus died, and that was it? No resurrection? If not, that might explain why you might feel/believe that there would not be a church worshipping a living Christ.

I’m just saying that as a matter of fact. Why worship a dead Jesus, right?

A dead Jesus kind of puts the kibosh on some other things. The Book of Mormon teaches of a living Lord. The prophets, including Elder Bednar, whose recent address testifying of Christ I linked you to.

No resurrected Christ. No prophets.

So where do we go from here?

Regards,
MG

We’re in the same boat we have always been. We have to decide how to build the just society. How to create the city on the hill. And if there is an afterlife, we can be judged according to the world we left behind for our children.

It’s the only world we know exists, and the only one we know we are leaving behind for them.

[MG 2.0]

MG, when I say "evidently not," to your claim of modern-day revelation, I'm asking for the evidence that what you say is true.

I'll make it easy for you. What revelations in the last 100 years have the prophets of the CoJCoLDS made that could not have been made by my mother-in-law?

Here is what modern prophets are up against:

The Bible claims that written, inerrant, authoritative revelation ended with Jesus and his apostles:

"You should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord by your apostles" (2 Peter 3:2).
"Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the scriptures..." (2 Peter 3:15-16).
"Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Prov. 30:6).
"You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it" (Deut. 4:2).
"I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life..." (Rev. 22:18-19).
Why is this so important? Because false teachers will inevitably come with a different gospel:

The apostle Paul warns of "another Jesus whom we have not preached... a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted" (2 Cor. 11:4).
Paul also warns: "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" (Gal. 1:8).

The world doesn’t want prophets. A surprisingly large number of Christians don’t. What does that say about everyone else?

In Luke 4 we read:

And they said, Is not this Joseph's son? 23And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also hear in thy country. 24And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.

Prophets have been ridiculed and persecuted throughout history. It is no different now.

So the question might be asked, what do we expect of a prophet in our day? A day in which religion and Christianity are either under attack or looked at as old wife’s tales.

I think a prophet today is the key holder. The one that stands at the head, under the supervision of the Father and the Son to lead and guide the church organization and steer it through to these modern times keeping the ship afloat. The captain. Decisions for course correction and movements one way or the other are directed by the Lord through the prophet. He holds the priesthood keys.

Your question reminds me of those that ridiculed the Savior when they “they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him and said, “Prophesy to us!”

Day to day Jesus went about doing good and healing. Bringing souls to salvation. That is what a prophet spends his time day to day doing.

But, again, if there is a course correction or doctrinal pronouncement or policy change to be made, it will either come through the prophet or be ratified by him.

May I say that I believe your expectations to be unrealistic? Day to day the leaders of the church guide the church. They bless the lives of others. They teach Truth.

If you are looking for something fantastical you might be disappointed. Especially, as I mentioned at the beginning, in a world which would just as well not have a prophet.

A prophet asks people to do things they would rather not do. Pure and simple. Unless they are inclined to faith.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

So you believe Jesus died, and that was it? No resurrection? If not, that might explain why you might feel/believe that there would not be a church worshipping a living Christ.

I’m just saying that as a matter of fact. Why worship a dead Jesus, right?

A dead Jesus kind of puts the kibosh on some other things. The Book of Mormon teaches of a living Lord. The prophets, including Elder Bednar, whose recent address testifying of Christ I linked you to.

No resurrected Christ. No prophets.

So where do we go from here?

Regards,
MG

We’re in the same boat we have always been. We have to decide how to build the just society. How to create the city on the hill. And if there is an afterlife, we can be judged according to the world we left behind for our children.

It’s the only world we know exists, and the only one we know we are leaving behind for them.

Secular Christian. OK.

That’s cool.

Regards,
MG