This is part 2 of recent updates with Chris Ralph’s Journey out of Mormonism. Chris is a fascinating guy who has a very fair perspective on Mormonism despite the many historical issues he is facing which is ultimately leading him out of the Church. Part 1 can be found here.
Also just below. is the audio from a recent interview Chris did on BBC Radio Bristol, Trevor Fry’s “Sunday Starts”. Looking at the history of the Mormon church in Bristol, very interesting discussion.
Chris Ralph BBC Radio Bristol, Trevor Fry’s “Sunday Starts”
A CONTINUING JOURNEY OF LOYAL DISSENT (Part 2):
It is no secret that my testimony has been challenged enormously in recent years by information which is increasingly available on the internet and elsewhere. Some of the principle building blocks of that testimony have been found, upon close examination, to lack substance, and to be unfit for the intended purpose. That isn’t my fault, although I know some may choose to attack me for it, for I am merely the quality controller, not the manufacturer. Never again, for example, will I be able to view Joseph Smith as God’s ordained prophet now that I have seen for myself that his translation of the Book of Abraham from an Egyptian papyrus was ludicrously at variance with its authentic meaning. I do not see how one Egyptian glyph which we know translates as “water” can be mistakenly translated by God’s true messenger as: “It was made after the form of a bedstead, such as was had among the Chaldeans, and it stood before the gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, and also a god like unto that of Pharaoh, king of Egypt. That you may have an understanding of these gods, I have given you the fashion of them in the figures at the beginning, which manner of figures is called by the Chaldeans Rahleenos”?
It just isn’t tenable, no matter how much I might wish to believe it is. Now, whether Joseph Smith knew in 1835 when he supposedly translated the Book of Abraham that he was foisting upon the world an out and out deception, or whether he was completely swept up in the mesmerism of his own charisma, (which I personally suspect he was), hardly matters in the end; the fact is inescapable that his “translation” has misled millions in the name of divinity, and that cannot be dismissed as a trivial matter. (Yes, I have read the apologists’ explanations in my vain attempt to salvage something from the wreckage, but their spiritual contortionism is unconvincing and only saps confidence further). The conclusion that Joseph Smith was not the prophet I wanted him to be was not mere speculation on my part on a bad day, but was soundly supported by a higher quality of evidence than that required by criminal courts of law to condemn men to gaol. It is widely available evidence, obtained from multiple sources, which takes us far beyond all reasonable doubt. When I first confronted that evidence, and realized what it meant, my stomach turned. I felt physically sick. I so wanted Joseph Smith to be the prophet I had believed him to be for over 35 years. But pretense is not my forté.
The CJCLDS, (which, supposedly through divine revelation, canonized the Book of Abraham in the 1880s), has for over forty years possessed primary evidence of this deception in its vaults, but has done little or nothing about informing its tithe-paying membership of the historical realities of the matter. That non-response is for me the much greater concern, because, if institutional integrity means anything to God, that silence is surely indefensible. Why is this not by now headline news in every ward and branch of the CJCLDS throughout the world? Why is there not a frank and open discussion of these matters in General Conference? If there has been a major error of judgment, then the only right thing to do is to confess the error and seek forgiveness for it. Or are the Brethren not bound by the same laws which are incumbent upon rank and file members?
You see, had I, as an individual, knowingly misrepresented crucial facts about my credentials for the purpose of obtaining significant financial gain, (the CJCLDS apparently receives billions of dollars in tithing each year, much of it donated trustingly by the poor and needy), and had I done so over the course of forty years, it would rightly become a matter which would bar me for the time being from holding a temple recommend; it might even lead, with full justification, to action being taken against me because of my un-Christian conduct, and the possible loss of my membership. One might ask therefore why the institutional church, and those directing it, are not subject to the same spiritual and moral laws as ordinary members. Is the silence due to lack of courage, or lack of conscience?
The uneasy question also arises, if Joseph Smith couldn’t translate regular Egyptian in creating the Book of Abraham in 1835, how well qualified was he to translate so-called Reformed Egyptian six years earlier, when he produced the Book of Mormon, the keystone of the Mormon religion? It too, has been scrutinized of course, (not that the average member would know it), and with what results? So far academic research into native American linguistics, anthropology and archaeology, stylometric analysis of the text, and molecular DNA analysis, offers nothing of substance which supports the proposal that the Book of Mormon is an ancient record, despite the best efforts of Mormon apologists to suggest it does.
Put simply, the pieces just don’t fit. I have done enough research in my time, albeit into local and family history, to know that when enough pieces of the puzzle don’t fit, the hypothesis is flawed, even though our most heartfelt wishes and personal loyalties may be invested in it. In the real world, which is where, by divine decree we find ourselves, facts must inform feelings, and not vice versa. Anyone who doggedly insists that feelings may override facts, has already surrendered the argument, and also their ability to think critically. Sadly, there are many good but frightened LDS members caught in the jaws of this cruel dilemma, and I can only see those numbers escalating in the years to come. Historians may, I suspect, look back upon this decade as the era of the great Mormon meltdown in the British Isles. We can only hope and pray that growing disillusionment will not turn to utter despair. I am learning daily that God is far bigger than I previously ever understood, and there is everything still to hope for.
So, in summary, investigation reveals that some of the building blocks acquired during my long years of LDS membership, consist of a very fragile substance which crumbles under scrutiny. I wish it were not so, (I really do), but it is, and honesty must be valued above loyalty. That doesn’t take anything away, however, from the many good people I have been privileged to know within Mormonism, or from my own gains in having lived within that circle for so long, and it certainly doesn’t erase my sense of shared identity with Mormon friends. I so hope those friendships and associations will continue, for they are part of me. The apostle Paul was as committed a Christian as any, but he was also a Jew and a Roman citizen. His Jewish and Roman identities did not cause him to align himself personally with the judgments of Caiaphas or Pontius Pilate. Likewise I wish to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ for the rest of my earthly life, but my acquired identity is undeniably with the Mormon people, and I still count myself a fellow citizen with them for family and cultural reasons, even though the evidence in my view invalidates LDS theology. The theology won’t matter much with the passage of time. It is only certain that it will change as it has done in the past; it is going to have to in order to accommodate the 21st century blizzard of information which challenges many of its past assumptions.
It’s going to be a very rough ride in years to come, and many LDS will seek shelter from the storm as they stumble over the shocking truths for themselves. I think of my own children and grandchildren for example, and hope that they will find a safe haven. It’s a journey I am ready to make with them, but this journey can only be a journey of loyal dissent. Whether it is a journey I will be permitted to continue unimpeded has yet to be decided by those appointed to judge such things for the good of the membership. I will only say I feel encouraged though. If my Stake President is in any way representative of the main body of believers, then some ears will be ready to listen, and some sensitive, caring hearts and minds will be ready to consider the sincere newly found narratives and experiences of bruised and battered truth seekers like me. Perhaps Christian inclusiveness and unquestionable openness will yet come to characterize modern Mormonism.
The door, I sense, is presently open ajar, and, as long as those in higher places have the wisdom and humility not to slam it shut, there is, I think, yet real cause to hope that two-way fellowship and constructive dialogue will have important parts to play. Perhaps it will be finally accepted that people like me, who care deeply, are going to be of greater value commenting within the necessary processes of change, than would be the case if they were excluded or shunned. It should amount to this really: what would Jesus do? The name “Jesus Christ” may appear large in the title of the LDS church, but who will honestly dare to suggest that Jesus would approve of institutional cover-ups? Surely his message would always be that error should be confronted, acknowledged, rooted out, and repented of, and rebirth sought in line with truth.
Therein, I think, is found the Way, the Truth, and the Life which is genuinely worth following. The Lord has never needed anyone to lie for Him.
Chris’s story really resonates with my own, and with many others who are researching Mormon history and are finding that the past doesn’t match with what is presently taught. Most, like me, seem to accidentally come across some information that they weren’t aware of before and finding that the bishop can’t help with your concerns because he’s as much in the dark as you, is worrying.
Then being instructed that you must not discuss your findings with other members is highly disconcerting! Why?? We were taught in lessons and manuals that “lying by omission” was still lying. Bit by sorry bit, the one true church that I’d loved and believed in, crumbled with each new previously unknown fact, now revealed. Not anti-mormon information but documented historical facts from the church’s own history books.
LDS prophet Gordon B. Hinckley said the following:
“Well, we have nothing to hide. Our history is an open book. They may find what they are looking for, but the fact is the history of the church is clear and open and leads to faith and strength and virtues.”
~ Dec. 25, 2005 interview with The Associated Press
If the above statement was true, I ask again, why was I told to not discuss it with other members and why is it causing the mass exodus of members that is currently taking place?
To other LDS members, I would say, do not take anyone’s word, including mine. Check for yourselves. Do not be afraid to research thoroughly. Remember the Saviour’s admonition to seek for truth.
http://mormonthink.com/
My name is James Baker. I was good friends with Chris in the 70s….we both attended the Bath Branch…..he was my young mens president…I remember once going to Rainbow woods and having a stone throwing battle!!…I would love to contact Chris…..if anyone has his e mail or contact details could they send them to me at: [email protected]
Thanks for that James, I have made Chris aware of your comment.
When will Chris and all the others who are believing the twisted facts about the Church put out by books published by signature books, by such authors as D Michael Quinn, Todd Compton, Dan Vogel, and a host of others come to realise that it is these men who’s sole aim is to sell books, who are the ones deceiving gullable people.
I have proved to you ,Bobby, that Todd Compton twisted, added lies and missed out things concerning Lucy Walker, this shows the true character of the authors of the books which are being believed. Everyone needs to check the sources of the so called history which is being “covered up” by the Church. I would not trust any publication put out by signature books who’s sole aim is to sell books and also to vent their spleen against the Church that disciplined them. Jeff Walsh
Hi Jeff many people who have found out the truths about Mormonism actually wish you were right, but sadly there is too much validated information out there, and that sadly leaves you as another Mormon with your head in the sand refusing to face up to the fraudulent nature of your faith,
yes you showed that one website didn’t fully quote a story, but you have a long way to go if you think you have proved otherwise for all the rest of what is out there which is vast.
And to say they have only left because they have been disciplined by the church is also massively short sighted and makes me wonder if you have even read the above story, if not why not?
Jeff, unfortunately for the church, the vast body of scientific evidence, the church’s own proclomations, and reliable historical records, (not to mention plain old ‘common sense,’) do not fall into the category of:
“Publications put out by signature books who’s sole aim is to sell books and also to vent their spleen against the Church that disciplined them.”
Bobby,
The only validated information which has been issued by the Church is found in the standard works of the Church, they are the Bible, the Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, which includes Official Declarations.
Any other “validated information” does not come from the Church it comes from people who do not speak for the Church, their words are either commentary or speculation, they speak for themselves.
So Bobby who are the ones who’s heads are stuck in the sand, are they the ones who take the words of living prophets as their guide, or the ones who find it fits in with their own interests to believe the words of ex Byu professors and other dissidents who have their own vested interests to follow.
You say that there is a vast amount of evidence out there to prove the fraudulent nature of our faith, well let us again examine where this evidence comes from.
In your “My Influences” column you mention Mormon Think, and Utah Lighthouse Ministry.
Mormon Think pretends to be run by administraters who say they are seeking after truth. They sight evidences from books written by D Michael Quinn, Todd Compton, Dan Vogel etc who “reveal” details of “hidden” secrets which the heirarchy of the Church do not want the members of the Church to know about. They are so anxious to pin anything which shows the Church and particulary Joseph Smith in a bad light, they resort to inuendo and even tell lies to do this. As for these authors claiming they are still active members of the Church, how can they be when they say that Joseph Smith only pretended to see God and Jesus Christ, that the Book of Mormom was Joseph’s own invention, the Church was run by wicked immoral men, who do they think they are kidding?
Is this the “validated informaation” and the source of the “vast amount of evidence” which you claim is out there
Or does it come from Utah Lighthouse Ministry who I understand you are affiliated with. Jerald and Sandra Tanner have been for a long time violently opposed to the Church, are they providing the “validated information and the vast amount of evidence”. If these two sources are typical then I cannot see any reason to investigate the other “Influences”
I think it is you, Bobby and your organisation who need to get your head out of the sand and investigate the AUTHENTIC message of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. Breath the pure air of TRUTH.
The true Church of Jesus Christ is built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets, with Jesus Christ being the Chief Cornerstone. This is the Church which Jesus Christ founded and which was carried to the world by His Apostles following His Death.
In closing this post let me ask you Bobby, who started your Church? Did they receive revelation from God to preach the gospel? , Where did they get the authority from to run your church,
do you claim that your church is the Church of Jesus Christ. Lets have some answers from you for a change.
PS I have read the above story by Chris Ralph and there is a complete answer to the question of where the Book of Abraham came from, but again it is Chris that needs to also get his head out of the sand and accept the Book of Abraham came by inspiration form God. You and he need to read “The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri” by Hugh Nibley, especially the preface why Brother Nibley was prompted to write the book Jeff
James
Have you read any of the books written by Quinn, Compton, Vogel etc etc., these are the books published by Signature Books, they are the ones who are directors or contributors and therefore have a vested interest. By the way what is this vast body of scientific evidence that the Church needs to be afraid of? Jeff
Jeff when I stand back and look at what you just said I realize you havent said anything other than Anti-Mormon people are all wrong, the church is right, thats really all you have said with no basis at all, you havent dealt with anything that Chris Ralph said other than just saying he is wrong. I would challenge you to look at the two latest posts on my blog, the interview with Tom Phillips and/or Chris’s response to a recent letter from the area presidency. Lets see you actually deal with issues rather than just say how wrong people are all the time without much interaction with what they are actually saying.
Regarding who started my church I am not sure on an individual level, however I know that in the bible Jesus said where two or more are gathered thats where I will be, Jesus said He would build His church and the gates of hell would not over come it, Jesus sent His people out in twos right across the world to make disciples (and presumably build churches) in the Bible we have a model for how church should be with local elders etc, we follow that, Christ is with us and as believers in Him we have all the authority that we need.
Hi Bobby,
Yes that is exactly what I am saying, they are wrong, when one stands on the platform of truth, no matter what is thrown at the Church that platform remains solid and just like the story of the Baal priests, these enslaughts will eventually come to nought.
As far as Chris Ralph is concerned, if you and he would consult the book I asked you to read, you and he would realise that I had answered his main concern ie the origin of the Book of Abraham.
I would encourage you and he to further consult the documented history of the Church and find out how the scrolls came into the possesion of the Church which were bought from Michael Chandler and what they consisted of. The Prophet Joseph Smith said that when the whole of the Abraham Scroll was translated we would need a volume much larger than the Bible to contain it all.
Joseph Smith never said that he translated the Book of Abraham from the fragments of papyri, he began to translate from the large scroll, it is this small part of the large scroll from which we get the Book of Abraham.
As far as Tom Phillips is concerned, he will have to answer to the Lord for what he purports to have done, but I will listen to the story and get back to you with my conclusions.
Thank you for your explanation of where your church comes from, and in the light of what you said, let me ask further questions.
You refer to the occasion where the Saviour asks Peter “Who do men say the I the Son of man am”, Peter eventually says, “Thou art the Christ the Son of the Living God,
then the Saviour says, “Blessed art thou— for flesh and blood hath not revealed it (this knowledge) unto you, But My Father which is in Heaven”. And the the Saviour makes it plain that it is upon this rock (of revelation) that His Church is to be built. And the gates of hell (or even Anti-Mormons) shall not prevail against it.
Now Bobby I need to ask you if you believe in revelation from God today? Does your leader receive revelation from God to run your Church
When the Saviour called his apostles he said “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit. Who called you Bobby, and also who ordained you and gave you authority?
Also we find in the 5th chapter of Hebrews further explanation of how one is chosen and ordained. Verse 1 explains that men are called to the priesthood by ordination.
Verse 5 explains that no one takes this honour unto himself, one has to be called to this authority as was Aaron, if you turn to Exodus 28:1, Aaron was called of God through His living prophet Moses, he was instructed to ordain his brother Aaron to the priesthood. This proceedure has not changed so let me ask you again were you called by revelation by a living prophet, who was he? and if and what were you ordained to.
I should explain that The Schofield edition of the new Testament translates Matt 7:23 as saying “Be off with you, you illegal practitioners, I never authirised you!!!!!!.
I ask you frankly Bobby who’s Church is fraudulent the one that is built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone, or the ones built upon other foundations. Jeff
Right Jeff, I think its safe to say that Chris has done some consulting and Tom Phillips is certainly suffering for his loss of faith now as you will see when you listen to it, but no rush it is very long.
So regarding your comments on all things Church.
Regarding revelation all of the revelation we need for the Christian life and Godliness is given in the life and teachings of Christ and the Apostles in the Bible, what I will do is explain further my position on Prophets.
So in the Old Testament as you know we have Prophets that hear very clearly from God and as a result wrote scripture, LDS people often quote the verse that surely the Lord God does nothing Unless He reveals His secret counsel. To His servants the prophets.
Luke 24:27 says And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
So the Prophets existed ultimately to point people to the coming Messiah and also to give revelation to the people of Israel at the time, Mormons have often said to me do I not think that God loves me as much as he did people back then? I obviously say yes and then they say well dont I think He loves me enough to give me Prophets too? Heres my answer.
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”
This is how much He loves me, so anyway I will (finally) answer the question about Prophets. Simply we do not have old Testament Prophets anymore.
Hebrews 1:1-2 in the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
In the past He spoke through the Prophets, today He has spoken through Jesus, I have never done this before but I looked UP the difference between Spoke and Spoken, spoke is the past tense of the verb there is also a parable Jesus tells which goes like this:
Matthew 21:33-46
There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet [1]
Lastly He sent His Son, what do you take from that?
However people still speak prophetically today and hear from God absolutely however the Church does not stand or fall on that Prophetic speaking as Jesus has come, salvation is open to ever nation tribe and tongue, He who knows the Son is righteous and free indeed and has the Spirit indwelling and leading them, His laws are wrote on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:31-34) we are no longer dependant on human Prophets, there is more I could add but I have already gone on a while.
Regarding Priesthood Hebrews is absolutely the letter to turn too, I will state my position and then comment further in response to your comments, I dont like to leave people a comment thats too long (though I am sure you can handle it) however I just know it takes time.
Ok Aaronic Priesthood, is only for the sons of Aaron Numbers 18:7
melchizedek priesthood, is only for melchizedek and Jesus, here is why.
Hebrews 7:23-28
23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
Old Testament Priests continued as long as they were alive, died and then were replaced, this here is saying that because Jesus lives forever and has offered up one sacrifice that covers all sin there is no longer need for this Priesthood, the LDS church does not have a Priesthood that is the same as the Old Testament and has a redundant false Priesthood. In the Old Testament Priesthood wasnt the authority people had by which to act for God it was there as a mediation between sinful man and God, priests offered up sacrifices for Sin so people could be forgiven. Jesus is the ultimate eternal high Priest, taking away the need for Priests and ultimately creating a priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9) in the great Commission Jesus said all Authority has been given to Me, therefore go….. He is also the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5) this was by no means the case in Old Testament times, this is a big change.
If Jesus were speaking in Mormon terms would He not have said all authority has been given to you therefore go? I appreciate you wont think that way but thats the issue I see. Its because Jesus has all supremacy that we as believers can heal the sick, baptise, raise the dead and so on, Jesus is the Prophet, Jesus us the Priest, Jesus is the King and believers through their connection with Him can Prophecy etc.
So the foundation of Prophets and Apostles of the Church is in place, and Jesus is leading His church until the end of the age like He said He would. Interestingly Jesus in no way in the New Testament sets up any kind of organization as such but rather those who trust in Him, this reminds me of when the disciples said they were rebuking people that were doing things in Jesus name that were not specifically in their group, what did Jesus say about that?
The real sad story here is that because of one church misleading people and badly representing the prophet Joseph Smith and his works people are forgetting about Mormonism all together. The LDS church may be the biggest Mormon Church in existence but they have done more to damage people’s opinion of Mormonism that any other faith because they are the biggest. I am not an LDS Mormon I am a Latter Day Mormon and leader of the Latter Day Church of Jesus Christ based in England. I don’t agree with much of what LDS history says is right and I don’t agree on their view of Joseph Smith and the early church, but I do believe in Brother Joseph and Mormonism. I would say to anyone looking deep in to Mormon history to go to the actual source of your concern. What I mean by that is for example if you have a problem with something that has rumoured to have been written or said by the Prophet Joseph Smith then don’t look for an answer in LDS books instead go to the source such as a journal or papers written by the actual person about said subject in question.
I know that God lives and that the book of Mormon is true and that Joseph was a prophet of God, but that doesn’t mean that I have to believe in the LDS church, just in Mormonism and that God is still speaking to Prophets today and leading his people and giving new revelation to lead us.
Hi Matthew
I am intriuged by your post, could you give me some background to your Church, who succeeded Joseph as prophet? do you have apostles in your church?
Where are you based? do you have a temple, are you involved in Family History?, do you accept the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price?
There are many other questions I could ask but maybe these will do to be going on with. Kind regards Jeff
Hi Jeff I will obviously let Matthew answer for himself there but in the meantime here is a written interview I did with him
http://mormonisminvestigated.co.uk/2011/02/20/interview-with-a-prophet/
Hi Bobby, because the blog did not allow me to reply to your long post. I assume that because you seem to have ended rather abruptly you had not finished the reply.
I want to reply and address the points you raise so I will compile this and get back to you either tonight or tommorrow, just a point though, it is very easy to choose scripture and come to conclusions which seem to back up ones viewpoint and I do not want this to degenerate into the “messy” situation you have warned others to avoid. This would lead us to the conclusion that the scriptures talk about of “ever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.
I have come to respect you and I know that both of us are seeking for that truth, because as the Saviour said, that truth would make us free. Free to find out the path that leads us to our Heavenly Father’s presence.
Looking at Matthews interview with you, and eventually finding his web site, I am not surprised that there does not appear to be any comments on the blogs he puts out. Jeff
Hi Jeff it should allow you to respond just fine, if there are more problems with that let me know, sometimes if people put a lot of weblinks on there post it will go in the pending queue for me to moderate but there is nothing there now.
If it seems I ended abruptly its probably because there is more I wanted to say but I just didnt want to leave too long a reply for you to have to reply too, I know I dont love it when I have pages and pages to get through, but even with this in mind write as much as you want to.
With Scripture Jeff we need to reach conclusions that are based as purely on scripture as possible, I try and use many verses to show that this is what I am doing, please by all means do the same and I will as honestly and fairly as I can in my mind look at them and take them on board. I dont think that scripture can be spoken for, it actually speaks for itself, unless you quote it and come up with a conclusion that is not at all based on what the quote actually said, if you feel this is something I have done please by all means point that out.
I do appreciate your comment about respecting me and that honestly goes for you too from me, I know we disagree and I know we both think that the other would gain massive eternal blessings from switching our Spiritual allegiance, however I love it when these discussions can hold onto the fact that it is a person that is truly loved by God that you are having dialogue with, and therefore should be loved by me too, not only in sharing what I believe to be true but also in the manner that I share it, so anyway yeah thanks for that.
I dont think Matthew allows comments on his site as I tried before, but please check that in case I am wrong or it has changed.
talk soon
Hi Bobby,
Thanks for your comments in the last post ref repecting each others stance.
I do not think we should dismiss the importance of the principle of God’s revelation to man through his prophets, because as Jesus Christ said it was upon this foundation he would build His Church (Matt 16:13-19).
In a very detailed way the old Testament reveals God’s hand in showing His great love for His children from Adam through to the birth of His Only Begotten Son in the flesh, Of course he took oportunity to urge the children of Israel to look forward to the coming of Christ, but to dismiss the importance of the old Teatament and the way He demonstrated His love and care for them is to miss a very important principle showing why he chose prophets and spoke to them.
I believe that the main reason the old Testament has been preserved and has come down to us is that it is standard practice for God to speak to mankind through His chosen prophets commanding them to record His word. I believe that this type of revelation is needed today. I fully accept that the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself, and the teachings of the apostles following His death contain excellent guidance for us today, This is explained by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians:-
“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling
One Lord, one faith, one baptism
One God and Fatherof all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all”
“And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and som evangelists, and some
Pators and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ;
Till we come to a 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. (Note well Mr Quinn, Compton, Palmer, Vogel,Signature Book
etc. etc.) (Eph 4:4-6, 11-13)
Bobby you asked me to point out to you if I thought you had given a wrong interpretation to a scripture, well if we look at John 3:16, surely when the Saviour said, “God so lived the world, that he gave His only begotten Son”, the context of the passage of scripture was speaking of the crucifixion, resurrection and atonement, not whether we need prophets in our day.
I agre we do not need old Testament prophets today, because we are not living in Old Teastament times or even in the times when the Saviour walked the earth, we are living in the 21st century, a whole lot different and more complex time. If ever there were a time we needed revelation and guidance in our wicked world it is surely now. Where wars and rumors of wars are raging, where young men and women are being encouraged to strap explosives around their waists and go into crowded places and kill themselves and many others, with the promise that if they do so they will go immediately to heaven. A time when it is common legal practice to abort millions of babies in the womb, where governments are being urged to legalise same sex marriages, need I go on??
I would point out another, in my opinion, wrong interpretation of Heb 1:1-2, When Paul was speaking to the Hebrews concerning “these last days”, he was talking about his time, not the last days preceeding the return of the Saviour.
Let us now look at the parable of the wicked husbandman, a careful reading tells us that the chief priests and pharisees came questioning and tempting the Saviour, I understand that the householder was our Heavenly Father, the husbandmen are the wicked chief priests and pharisees (v 45), these men had beat one of the servants of God, killed another (John the Baptist?) and stoned another. Heavenly Father then sent other servants and they treat them the same way, the parable then says that the householder then sent his son, and because of His foreknowledge He knew that they would kill Him. The outcome of the parable was that the Jewish nation would lose the Kingdom of God, and it would be given to other nations represented by the nations that the apostles, following the Saviour’s death, would take the gospel to.
Your next paragraph seems to me to be based on your understanding that the word of God given through Jesus Christ in the new Teastament is the total revelation we need and we do not need any more revelation from God. Well I come back to the fact that God revealed His mind and will to all ages from the creation and does not play favorites with His Children, I accept that Jesus Christ taught the Jewish nation as He was instructed by His Father, but cannot you see that God is still mindful and cares for His children living today. I think it is the height of arrogance to assume that we do not need divine direction today, because we are sufficient unto ourselves.
You say that the Melchizedek Priesthood is only for Melchizedek and Jesus, could you tell me therefore which priesthood Jesus ordained the apostles to? (John 15:16), they were not Levites so they could not be ordained to that order.
Who told you Bobby that the LDS Church has a redundant and false Priesthood? Oh, and remember you do not believe in modern day revelation.
You say the Aaronic priesthood had not the authority to act for God, I cannot understand your logic!! was the priest acting without authority then when he once a year made the atoning sacrafice ? Where does it say that Jesus took away the need for priests?
Where did you get the interpretation of 1 Pet 2:9 from? Peter was speaking to new converts to the Church, please read the context in which Peter was speaking, no where does it say that Peter was creating a priesthood of all believers.
Of course Jesus Christ is the Mediator between God and man, He was was given that role when Adam and Eve fell and were cast out of the garden, since that time we address our Father through Him and do all things in the name of Jesus Christ. The priest in old testament times was performing the ordinance as a type and a shadow of the great and last sacrifice the Saviour would make when He would work out the atonement.
Are you saying that as believers you can heal the sick, perform baptisms, raise the dead, and prophesy without priesthood authority. Where is the revelation authorising you to do these things?, again I remind you of Heb 5:4, and the warning in the Schofield edition of the new testament.
OK we are nearly at the end, I now come to the most astonishing claim that your organisation is the Church of Jesus Christ, seeing that Paul says to the saints, or members of the church in Ephesus, that the Church which Paul organised was the Church of Jesus Christ bulit upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, with Jesus Himself being the chief cornerstone. (Eph 2:19-21)
It could be argued that maybe Jesus Christ did not, as such, organise churches, but his apostles certainly did. John the beloved in his book of Revelation addressed the revelation to the 7 CHURCHES in Asia
Another reference then I will close, remember that John the Baptist said that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand and identified the Saviour as the one who brought it with Him to the earth.? Entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven was baptism, (oh and by the way John the Baptist was of that lineage therefore he had the authority to baptise, he did not assume he had the right to do this) as Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3:1-5). Surely the apostles and John the Baptist would recognise that the organisation of the Kingdom of God on the earth would be called the Churh of Jesus Christ. (of former day Saints)
I think I have said enough, I will spend some time now listening with great sorrow to the 4 hour plus saga of Tom Phillips explaining his reason for doing what he did. . Kind regards Jeff Walsh
Now then Jeff, thanks for that, lots to get through, what I will do is number my points as upon reflection I noticed there was a thing or two on your comment before that you have repeated here that I did not initially respond too, I find numbering points really helpful as then when you respond you can know that nothing has been missed too, you dont have to do it this way but I will.
(1) Regarding the Old Testament obviously I agree with you on its mass significance, however to say it is still there today to show that Gods model for communication with people has not changed is an area I would challenge, 1 Peter 1:25 says that Gods word endures forever, I would echo that fact in relation to why I feel the Old Testament is still with us today, I would also say it is a massive expansion and support for the New Testament gospel, we see the Bereans turn to it in Acts 17:11 and find that the gospel Paul was preaching is authentic, however that does not mean that the way God did things in the Old Testament is how He does them today, hence the lack of animal sacrifices for a start.
(2) Ok you said this:
I agre we do not need old Testament prophets today, because we are not living in Old Teastament times or even in the times when the Saviour walked the earth, we are living in the 21st century, a whole lot different and more complex time. If ever there were a time we needed revelation and guidance in our wicked world it is surely now. Where wars and rumors of wars are raging, where young men and women are being encouraged to strap explosives around their waists and go into crowded places and kill themselves and many others, with the promise that if they do so they will go immediately to heaven. A time when it is common legal practice to abort millions of babies in the womb, where governments are being urged to legalise same sex marriages, need I go on??
I would point out another, in my opinion, wrong interpretation of Heb 1:1-2, When Paul was speaking to the Hebrews concerning “these last days”, he was talking about his time, not the last days preceeding the return of the Saviour.
I know you quoted the Ephesians 4 Ministries before this which does absolutely include Apostles and Prophets, I will give my thoughts on this shortly.
What I meant by Old Testament Prophets was Prophets like thise that directly hear from God and write scripture, which is exactly what the LDS church claims, we see in an Ensign magazine here that “Joseph Smith had been called by the Lord to be a prophet “like unto” Moses”. This is what I am saying is no longer the case, while you are right about the need for clarity in the face of the issues you state I would ask 2 questions.
1, Is the bible silent on those issues? You have to agree it isnt as thats why Evangelical Christians fully agree with you on them, have they been sneakily listening to Monson on this or has the bible already given sufficient clarity on those issues?
2, What has your Prophet revealed on those issues that we did not already know?
Regarding the Hebrews verse your explanation does not change the fact that it starts by saying that in the past God spoke through Prophets, why does it say that? My answer is because it goes on to say how God has spoken to us today, and that speaking Christ is all sufficient, the Apostle Paul says this:
1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified
He sought to know nothing among them but Christ and Him crucified, this is the heart of the Apostle Paul but is the very opposite of the heart of Mormonism.
As well in Jeremiah we see this:
Jeremiah 31:31-34
31“The time is coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
32It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband tod them,e”
declares the Lord.
33“This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.
“For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”
This is the new covenant, no longer do we need to look to Prophets as Christ is our all in all and if that was not enough God writes His laws on our minds and hearts, He directs us personally, this shows why Hebrews 1:1-2 says what it does.
(3) However this still leaves the issue of the Ephesians 4 Ministries, that says we have Apostles and Prophets, I have a lot to say on the Apostles issue but for the sake of space I will stick with Prophets,
Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
We can see here that this is a Prophecy of something to come, as it is saying it will come to pass afterwards, (please do read the chapter for full context) so in the days of Old God did not fill everyone with His Spirit it was just selected people however today all who are in Christ have the Spirit (again hence the lack of need for Old Testament Prophets (or like unto them)) so now all of us can hear from God, all of us can be Prophetic, all of us are complete in Christ and so on.
In the New Testament as you may know there is little to no mention of active prophets, however recently I did find one.
1 Corinthians 14:26-33
26 How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. 28 But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. 29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. 30 But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.
This passage assumes there will be 2 or 3 prophets in the meeting prophesying, also the others should judge what they say, this is a million miles from Mormonism where we have one Prophet that authoritatively speaks and I have heard plenty of cases of what happens when people judge them.
However today we have masses of prophets who hear from God and can share with others what they feel He is saying, however Christians are to judge what they say according to Gods revealed word and make sure it lines up with that, this is the New Testament prophetic ministry.
(4) I guess this one is going to have to fall into a matter of interpretation however it does say
And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. 36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them.
For me this is a potentially large number of people (though we dont know) I dont have any problem with one of them being John the Baptist however for me this is clearly reffering to Old Testament Prophets that were clearly mistreated by Gods people and so finally He sent His Son, interestingly in the LDS King James bible the Hebrews 1:1 cross reference c takes you to that very passage, as does my bible I think this is because the Hebrews 1:1-2 passage and this story are both saying the same thing.
(5) Ok John 15:16 says
Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
I think this is one of your points I missed before sorry about that.
Ok there is no mention here of Jesus ordaining anyone with Priesthood of any kind, unless you can show me otherwise this is simply you adding LDS notions to a place where they are not given, in which case my explanation of Hebrews 7 very much still stands. Like I said to you before true biblical authority is the power we have in the name of Jesus, He has all authority therefore we go and act in His name, He is the ultimate high priest as His sacrifice (which the sacrificial system of the Old Testament is a foreshadow of) is sufficient eternally for our sins, no longer do we need Priests to make sacrifices for us, which is Priests are actually for.
(6) Ok you said:
You say the Aaronic priesthood had not the authority to act for God, I cannot understand your logic!! was the priest acting without authority then when he once a year made the atoning sacrafice ? Where does it say that Jesus took away the need for priests?
Where did you get the interpretation of 1 Pet 2:9 from? Peter was speaking to new converts to the Church, please read the context in which Peter was speaking, no where does it say that Peter was creating a priesthood of all believers.
Firstly Jesus did not ordain People to the priesthood (I know you think He did but it just doesnt say that) and again I would point you to Hebrews 7 and the fact that the Aaronic Priesthood is only for the Sons of Aaron, those things together tell us this.
I am not sure the bible reffers to Priesthood as authority but rather a role, however I could be wrong on that.
Regarding the 1 Peter verse the context fits what I said just fine, Peter was speaking to the church and also this is the only time in the New Testament that the Priesthood is being reffered to anyone other than Jesus in a New Testament context, we all have it because we are in Him.
(7) You said this
Of course Jesus Christ is the Mediator between God and man, He was was given that role when Adam and Eve fell and were cast out of the garden, since that time we address our Father through Him and do all things in the name of Jesus Christ. The priest in old testament times was performing the ordinance as a type and a shadow of the great and last sacrifice the Saviour would make when He would work out the atonement.
I could not agree more, however the application of this does not give you the LDS Priesthood system, people in the Old Testament did not do this in Jesus name though as they did not know it, this is a massive Book of Mormon Anachronism and something we will come back to I am sure.
(8) You said
Are you saying that as believers you can heal the sick, perform baptisms, raise the dead, and prophesy without priesthood authority. Where is the revelation authorising you to do these things?, again I remind you of Heb 5:4, and the warning in the Schofield edition of the new testament.
Jesus said in the great commission this:
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[c] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.[d]
There is my authority anyone who is in Christ is a new creation and has this authority, no problems with the Hebrews verse, for me the LDS system has as much of a man made authority than anyone as leaders in the church have to lay hands on you for you to have it, in biblical Christianity it is a transaction directly between you and Christ.
(9) Oops I just realised I missed a big point you made.
Who told you Bobby that the LDS Church has a redundant and false Priesthood? Oh, and remember you do not believe in modern day revelation.
Well biblical revelation and funnily enough Mormon history, David Whitmer wrote in his book an address to all believers in Christ the the Priesthood was Sidney Rigdons idea and Smith went along with it, he saw this as Smith apostatising, while this in itself can be shrugged off its interesting that the original D&C (or book of commandments) in the original section 27 (which I have copies of) makes no mention of the supposed encounter with past apostles, this was added in later, presumably after Smiths talks with Rigdon, again more on this I am sure but the evidence is there.
(10) Ok I will try and scoop together your last couple of points, firstly you are right about John the Baptist, he was the last one to hold the Aaronic priesthood, we then see from then on believers having their authority in Christ, right through the new testament people perform healings etc in the name of Christ, that is new testament power and authority.
Absolutely churches were formed but not one specific organization but merely believers in Christ, I see all other Christian denominations as the wider church of Christ, and of course I do not accept for a second that baptism is essential for salvation, Jesus said to the peasant woman in Luke 7:50 “Your faith has saved you go in peace”.
I think my goal of doing short posts is going out of the window, talk soon bud.
Hi Bobby thanks for taking the time to reply in detail.
I do think though we have a big problem which I cannot see can be solved by exchanges in this way. I wonder if maybe we could meet up some time in the future and speak face to face rather than swapping ideas like ping pong backwards and forwards in this way. We are looking at things from different viewpoints, you from the perspective of believing that the total revelation from God culminated with the Saviour coming to earth and since that time we have no need for further revelation and guidance. I for myself look at this differently because of information we have which gives us a wider view of creation and added revelation which tells us what we were doing before we came to earth to gain our physical bodies, and the purpose of earth life and also what will happen to us following our physical death, what hapens to us in the spirit world, the judgement and then where we will spend eternity.. This knowledge comes to us from revelation received by our Prophets, which obviously you would reject. This wider perspective also gives me a different view of the Bible because I see the Bible as being a history of God’s dealings with mainly the House of Israel and the peoples living around the Holy Land with a short history of a few other nations that were taught the gospel by the apostles following the Saviour resurrection.
We also accept that the gospel has been taught throughout other dispensations with period of apostasy in between. We read in Exodus for instance that God wanted to restore the gospel and make of Israel a kindgdom of priests, or in other words give them the higher laws of the gospel, but following the exodus from Egypt the Israelites showed their reluctance to accept this by their disobedience and turned to idolatry. Therefore God gave them a lesser law called the Law of Moses, to bring them back,. as Paul explained to the Lord. Therefore the higher laws of the Gospel was restored by Jesus Christ who said that He had come to fulfil the Law of Moses. it is with this understanding that following the Saviour death and resurrection the apostles were told to go into the world and teach the restored gospel and establish the Church of Jesus Christ, which they did. History tells us though that they were one by one killed which meant that the Church which was built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets and which was sustained by revelation from God through the medium of the Holy Ghost ceased and the world again was plunged into the dark ages for many centuries, during which time many religions and many different ideas which came from the Council of Nice. The conclusions from this council determined in great measure the doctrines which are accepted by mosy of the mainstream Churches today.
With this understanding it should not have come as a great surprise that to prepare for the second coming of Christ and the thousand year millenial reign God would restore again the Gospel of Jesus Christ’
Now Bobby I am sure that you will not accept much or very little of the foregoing, but this is where I am coming from, and by the way, I am not authorised to speak for the Church, this is my understanding of what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints teaches.
I think I know where you are coming from and respect your position but I do not think that either one of us of our selves will convince each other so what I will do is to give some points in answer to your numbered points and then if you want to reply please do so then maybe afterwards we ought to leave things there and maybe arrange this meeting.
Oh and before I forget did you get the two papers I sent to you, I have wondered because you have never mentioned receiving them.
1. As I said above a careful reading of the Old Testament shows that different dispensations of the gospel are given, To Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham. and to Moses, then followed 1400 years where the Law of Moses, a lesser law was lived.. I would repeat though God;’s dealings with His Children set a pattern for all time and why should He change, the scripture you quote
1 Pet 1:25 saying that God’s word endures forever surely means that what God speaks is eternal truth, unlike science which is forever being modified. Also it is a little foolish to say that God’s way of doing things cannot be the same as the Old Testament, because of the lack of animal sacrafice!! Surely you must know that animal sacrifice was required under the Law of Moses, which was fulfilled by the Saviour.
2. Could I say before addressing this point that I am slightly offended that you show disrespect to one I look to as a reveered and respected leader of my Church. I would not refer to you as Gilpin if you are the leader of your organisation, so please even if you do not recognise him as I do at least call him by his christian name Thomas if you cannot bring yourself to call Him President Monson.
I cannot see the point you are making, proves that prophets like unto Moses, and Joseph Smith, are no longer needed today where is the proof you refer to.
2.1 Yes the Bible does condemn wicked practices, Thou shalt not kill (or even abort?), the Bible speaks out boldly against the practice of .homesexuality. But what do we see today, the Anglican Churches actually performing same sex marriages. When was the last time you heard a mainstream church other than the Catholic Church actualy condemning abortion?.It is about time for them to join with us in speaking out about this.
2.2 Yes God did speak through prophets in the Old Testament, and when the Saviour began His public ministry, He spoke through Jesus Christ, I fully agree, but to stretch this to mean that God revealed everything through Jesus Christ and He would never reveal anything else for ever is not justified. By the way just a thought does the Bible say anything about going over to Utah, as you do regularly or do you use prayer to ask for guidance, if as I suspect you do, does not this mean that maybe revelation has not ceased???. I think that Paul was teaching the saints in Corinth that he was there not to teach them from his own wisdom and thought but his commission was to teach them the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Prophet and apostles receive revelation from God and the mission of Mormonism is to teach that same gospel
Jeremiah, who do not forget was under the lesser law of the Law of Moses, received revelation from the Lord saying that the time would come when they would no longer live under the lesser law but a new covenant, the higher laws of the Gospel would be retored through Jesus Christ, which happened in the meridian of time, and what Jeremiah saw also that men would be able to pray to the Lord and would give them testimonies of the truthfulness of the Gospel, just as we can today. Again I believe you are stretching the meaning when you say that God will not reveal anything more.
3 I am glad that you quote Joel because He was commissioned by the Lord and was shown a vision of the events that would transpire just before the second coming of Jesus Christ.
I believe that again you have misunderstood, the time has not yet arrived even now for all the calamities that are prophecied will happen Joel 2 talks about the cleansing of the earth of all the filthyness and dross, this is to happen just preceeding the beginning of the millenium. So I think your conclusions about all have prophetic powers are wrong, please YOU read the chapters.
As far as 1 Cor 14, my understanding about this is that in our Sunday School classes we do not, as Quinn and his cohorts say, have sanitised lessons we are encouraged to discuss points of doctrine from the lessons and I believe this is what Paul was referring to . The point you make inferring that we are led by a despot is a million miles from the truth, we have our free agency and we are encouraged to discuss points of doctrine in our priesthood classes. Indeed President Brigham Young said that it was his greatest fear that the saints would take what he said as truth, just because he was the Prophet, he said we should go and ask the Lord to reveal to us the truthfulness of his teachings, then we would be better placed to assist the Lord in His work. To answer the last comment I refer you to the last paragraph you are assuming prophetic powers without any authorisation.
4. I stand by the comments I made in my last post, this parable says that the chief priests and pharisees were the one’s who killed and persecuted the messengers from God.
5. Bobby you cannot take one verse of scripture in isolation, Jesus ordained the apostles with power and authority, Heb 5:4 has also to be taken into account, no one can assume priesthood power unless they are called of God, this is exactly what was happening with the calling and ordination of the apostles. Jesus said you have not chosen me I have chosen you, we cannot arbitarialy take upon ourselves this honor, once again I refer you to Matt 7:22-23:-
“Many shall say to me in that day, Lord Lord, have we not prophisied in thy name, and in thy
name have cast out devils , and in thy name done many wonderful works? (KJV)
And then I will tell them plainly, be off with you, you illegal practitioners, I never authorised
you (Scofield Edition)..
6 I never said Jesus ordained ordained People to the priesthood, the house of Levi was separated from the other tribes to act in the Aaronic or Levitical Priesthood, the direct descendants of Aaron were the leaders of this order. The reference to Pet 2:9 does not say he was setting up a universal priesthood, you have made a false assumption.
7 Where ever did I say that the Aaronic priest offered the atonement sacrifice in Jesus’s name. I have no idea of this ceremony or the words used. They of course were authorised to perform this ordinance by God, through his prophet.
8. That commision was given to the apostles who HAD been ordained and authorised by the Saviour, not to the general public, for you to assume this gives you authority is just plain wrong, no man can take unto himself this honour. Joseph Smith received the power and authority from Peter James and John, and whether you accept this or not, this priesthood has been passed down from his time to now. Just another point how on earth can a book give you authority, the Bible does not have magical power, the new testament had not been compiled when the apostles were ordained so they did not get their authority from the Bible.
9. You are guilty of accepting what Quinn and his cohorts say as truth, and besides David Whitmer had apostasied from the Church when he gave this address. You are also guilty of not reading the preface to the revelation, this says a portion of this revelation was given in Aug 1830, the remainder in September following. Also if you had read Joseph Smith’s official History you would have known that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey were given the Melchizedek Priesthood by Peter James and John 4 weeks after they were given the Aaronic Priesthood by John the Baptist on the 15th May 1829. Joseph Smith did not apostasies he lived and died as a great Prophet of God, and maybe, just maybe you may have to beg his pardon for your unbelief some day.
10 I refer you to earlier comments about what happens to Churches and organisations not authorised by God.
11. So here we have it all roads lead to Rome hey, well Paul said that there were churches in his day that departed from the pure gospel of Jesus Christ, what did he say, let them be accursed. He also told the saints at Corinth:-
“Now I beseech you brethren , by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye all
speak the same thing, and there be no divisions among you, but that ye be
perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment.
For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren by them which are of the
house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of Apollas, and I of
Cephas, and I of Christ.
Is Christ divided?. was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptised in the name of
Paul (1 Cor 1:10-13)
Paul also said there is “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”
10. Bobby I cannot believe that you would say, I do not believe for one moment that baptism is essential for salvation. You are taking one short passage of scripture and assuming that proves your assertion. Well consider this, why was Jesus baptised, it could not be for the remission os sins, he did not have any. So there must have been another reason, He told John, “suffer it to be so now , for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Jesus Christ is our great exampler so he would not ask us to do something that He was not prepared to do. John 3:1-5 tell us we cannot enter the Kingdom of God, entering the Kingdom of God is salvation is it not? If you do not accept these reasonings consider this:- The Lord said unto them:-
Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved , but he that believeth not shall be
damned (Mark 16:15-16)
Here I will make an assumption, maybe the Saviour told her to seek one athorised and be baptised.
I have listened to most of the interview of Tom Phillips, there is not one of the reasons that he gives for leaving the Church, most of them coming from books published by Signature Books, that cannot be answered by accepting the fact that he has been deceived by men who the Prophet Joseph Smith called “evil-disposed and designing persons” JSH 1:1.
Well there it is Bobby, lets get together soon. Jeff Walsh
ordained and set apart the
Thanks Jeff, I certainly do understand that we are coming from different perspectives please be assured of that, and to be fair in a discussion like this I am not overly expectant that I will convince you away from Mormonism but I think its a chance at least for you to see that issues Mormons seem to assume Christians do not know about such as ongoing revelation or the apostasy etc are issues we can answer biblically even if the answers are not convincing for you. I think meeting up is a good idea, I am in the Middlesbrough area, Im not sure where you are but maybe email me on that sometime.
(1) The animal sacrifice example was just an example I do obviously know that you do not still engage in those, however my background knowledge of Mormonism is that you believe (and I could be wrong here) that the Laws and Ordnances of the gospel are eternal and do not change, in fact God is even bound by them and has to follow those eternal laws, as such there was not as big a difference between the Old and New Testaments as Evangelicals often think, is that right?
(2) No offence intended in referring to Thomas Monsen as Monsen, your comment is noted.
2.1 Just in the last year someone in my church went on local radio speaking out against abortion, I dont expect you to know that but I think its rather small minded to assume people are not doing this.
2.2 You said a lot here but you could not actually answer my question, Mormons go on about latter day revelation but I dont see your Prophets revealing all that much, the only thing that has made it into the D&C in the last 35 years is that black people should stop being punished for being black, why is there not more than this? Why did you quote issues such as suicide bombing, abortion etc in reference to latter day revelation when you cant show me anything useful they have said on the matter?
Oh and regarding Utah yes I did have God tell me a number of years ago to go, as I said I totally believe God speaks to people today and that is a great example of it, I can still remember where I was when this happened.
(3) Well obviously we disagree on the Joel matter seeing as I evidenced this in the 1 Corinthians 14 verse in action. I would still be interested to hear your thoughts on, a number of prophets words judged by the people, what do you think that is saying?
I will pick up on something early on here, you mentioned Quinn and his cohorts (signaure books etc) and you mention this a few times as though this is where I am getting all my information, you did this last time with Jim Whitefield and the Mormon delusion, believe it or not I have not read much signature books at all and I have not used what they say in this discussion at all, you seem to get a bee in your bonnet over certain authors and spend full discussions mentioning them all the time, sadly you are mistaken here.
(4) Ok fair enough, still interesting about that cross reference though.
(5) He did but to act in His name not any giving of Priesthood authority. And that reference you quote at the end is spot on, I see this as people who focus on many works but do not truly trust in and know Jesus, I fear that Mormonism is leading people into this position.
(6) ok my assumption was that you were saying when Jesus ordained people that was into the priesthood, is that not the case?
Regarding 1 Peter 2:9 my point is that all that are in Christ are connected to the ultimate high priest, as such the only priesthood that exists is a universal Priesthood of all believers, you can tell me I have made a false assumption all you like but this does talk about such a Priesthood.
(7) Yep your right I misread what you said there.
(8) I certainly dont take this to apply to just the general public but certainly all that are in Christ, while you are right that this was said to the disciples the sentiment is still the same that Jesus said “All authority has been given to Me, therefore go…” This is the same thing that applies to Christians today, I am still yet to have you deal with what I have said about Hebrews 7 but I have certainly explained why I feel the priesthood is gone.
(9) Yeah here is why I mentioned Quinn etc earlier, I have not read quinns words on the subject but I have read David Whitmers book, an address to all believers in Christ. I was not aware of what you said about the into to this section, in fact I just quickly checked and could not see that, here is where I have done a post on the issue http://mormonisminvestigated.co.uk/2011/02/01/changes-to-the-doctrine-and-covenants/
(10) Give me some credit buddy I am not saying for a second that this verse alone proves my point I was conscious of how much I had wrote already so was just kicking off the issue. Anyway the New Testament is littered with the teaching that our faith alone saves us (Ephesians 2:8-10, Romans 11:6 etc) this is merely a case where Jesus puts this in action, even the verse you quoted shows that it is the lack of believing that leaves us damned, not baptism, however baptism is a start of a life of obedience so I am sure both you and I would be quoting James 2, to the believer that refuses to follow this.
I guess there is not much else you can say about Tom Phillips, however he certainly does not strike me as a horrible anti-mormon he said numerous times how much he wished he could still believe.
Oh and regarding those documents you sent me I do have them I think, when you sent me them before you cut off our email discussion shortly after I recieved them so I never bothered reading them, I will find them and give them a look soon.
Just doing a bit of follow up as you got me thinking on the great commission issue, its never been pointed out to me before that this was only to the 12 Apostles, with you being right on that I looked up the greek for the word “world” as in Jesus saying He will be with them till the end of the world in the KJV and to the end of the age in other versions.
the word is αἰών (Gtr. aion) meaning ‘ever’ or ‘age’ Strong’s 165.(http://www.logosapostolic.org/greek_word_studies/165_aion_age_ever.htm)
The same word is used in this verse.
Matthew 6:13 And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For yours is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
and here
13:49 So shall it be at the end of the age: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the righteous,
and here
Hebrews 13:8 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.
So when Jesus is saying this He is by no means limiting what He is saying just to the individuals listening.
Also sorry for the additions here, I can see that in the up to date version of D&C 27 it does say that more was added later, but obviously not in the original, obviously I would say this is very convenient however you are right it does say that.
Bobby, Hi,
Thanks for your last posts, I live in York so it should not be a big problem getting together, maybe we could arrannge to meet sometime, I was wondering if maybe you would like to come down with a couple of your friends and have a meeting in our chapel, where we could discuss where we stand on our views of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Would this be completely out of the question?
Just to answer a few questions you asked:-
1. We do believe that there are eternal laws which govern this and other worlds, it is my understanding that the same Plan of Salvation that we have been given is a universal plan on all other worlds. The Old and New Testaments are not seperate they are part of the canon of scripture given to us by our Heavenly Father. They show His mind and will and are evidence of the way He is guiding the affairs of His children through the Plan of Salvation, This plan is known to us today as the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As already pointed out the law we are living today is the higher law, the Mosaic law was given to the children Isreal was a lesser law given because of disobedience as Paul explained, but this law was fulfilled or came to an end when the Saviour began His public ministry.
2. Try again Bobby his Name is Thomas Spencer MonsOn, not MonsEN.
2.1 Thank you I stand corrected, the general feeling though in the world is to disregard the commandments of God, and the churches in general today seem to be changing their positions to come in line with public thinking.
The Doctrine and Covenants were not things that the Prophet Joseph Smith made up, they are revelations from God given for us in our day, and in general were given to re-organise the Church of Jesus Christ in our day and dispensation, which dispensation is called the Dispensation of the fulness of Times. This says to me that this is the last time the Gospel is to be restored therefore His Church will not be taken away again, notwithstanding the onslaught that is being raged today to destroy it!!!!!. You are right that apart from the Revelations giiven to Wilford Woodruff and President Spencer W Kimball there have been no formal revelations given which need to be approved and voted on by the Church. However we belive that when our PROPHET speaks in General Conference we are hearing the mind an will of our Heavenly Father being given today. Oh and by the way, our Heavenly Father put the restriction of witholding the Priesthood on the descendants of Cain, and He lifted this restriction in 1978, if you want to question why, please address the question to Him. President Kimball was just following instructions, thus evidencing the need for revelation being needed today. I am glad you experienced this too.
3. We are all encouraged not just to be blindly obedient, for example once a month in Priesthood and relief Society Meetings we discuss one of the talks given in the last conference and invite discussion, Maybe Paul was explaining this principle of discussing before accepting the words of the Apostles, (by the way, we sustain the 1st Presidency and Quorum of the 12 As Prophets Seers and Revelators today,) they would have done the same in Paul’s day.
The reason that I mention Quinn, Compton and his cohorts so much is that the web sites such as Mormon Think and Staylds.com, Utah Lighthouse Ministry etc is that invariably they use the “so called” evidences ( including the words of David Whitmer point 9) which attack Joseph Smith,These are the web sites that our members are encourage to look at to get information about “the hidden early history”. So Bobby although if you have not read the books these dissidents if you are relying on these web sites to give you information about the Church then you are believing this stuff.
5 I refer you to D&C 93:1. Does this sound as if we are being lead away form Christ?
6, Not to people in general but specifically to the Apostles.
8. You will have to explain to me the expression “all who are in Christ” when we meet .
Hebrews 7 is Paul explaining the difference between the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood and the Higher laws which involves the Melchizedek Priesthood. This would also be a good topic we can spaek more about when we meet.
10 We need to discuss being saved by faith, Faith in what? Lets discuss this further when we meet…
Thanks Jeff
Hi jeff humble apologies on the spelling issue and meeting sounds interesting, could you email me your phone numbet and we could talk to arrange thanks
Hi Bobby, I have just being reviewing our exchanges and a thought have just struck me, on another post you asked that other people seeing my post hang back so that the waters would not get muddied.
I am surprised that others like Matthew Gill would also have contributed to this conversation, Maybe I am a little cynical but where are all the others who frequent your site, are they under instructions not to contrubute? Jeff
No not at all Jeff, matthew has commented only once or twice and i dont think he has ever responded when someone asks him a question. As for others there are a few that comment here and there but none have been asked not to comment here apart from that one time I asked them to hang back, i guess They have not seen this or they are just watching the discussion.
Ok, just seems strange thats all. Jeff
No problem im sure theres an anti-mormon conspiracy to be found
On every site :)
I think you are getting paranoid.
Haha maybe
I’ve got to go out now, tell Vicky I would love to have her comments on the Apostasy posts. Cheers Jeff
No problem Jeff have a good day and Vickys response is not far off now.