Blaine: However, there is obviously much missing from the Bible
Since Joe RESTORED "ALL THINGS"
"This modern dispensation of which I speak fulfills the biblical promise of a 'restitution of all things' (Acts 3:21; see also Rev. 14:6, 7). Russell M. Nelson, "Combatting Spiritual Drift: Our Global Pandemic" "Ensign," Nov. 1993, 104
"Many important points, touching the salvation of man, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled." Jo Smith
Jo did a translation JST
December 30, 1830 - It may be well to observe here, that the Lord greatly encouraged and strengthened the faith of His little flock...by giving some more extended information upon the Scriptures, a translation of which had already commenced. (HC I:131)
April, 1831; Kirtland , Ohio
God commanded Jo to translate till it was FINISHED & PUBLISH it: D&C: 73:3,
4; 94:10; 124:89
letter by Smith and Sidney Rigdon dated 2nd July, 1833: "We this day finished the translation of the Scriptures, for which we return gratitude to our Heavenly Father..." (History of the Church vol., 1, 368).
So did he RESTORE the lost parts? Where are the LOST BOOKS that have been restored? Why doesn't the Church use the JST?
Blaine: Scroll down for my second set of answers.
----- Original Message -----From: "Judy Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 12:41 PMSubject: [TruthTalk] Catholic priests/child abuse victims> Blaine wrote:
> For this reason, I still firmly believe Jesus
> Christ was married, and that this fact--that
> he was married-- has, along with the sexual
> molestation of children, been covered up for
> centuries by the RCC.
>
> DavidM:
> The RCC acknowledges that their celibacy doctrine concerning
> the priesthood did not mature until about the fourth century.
> If there was any "cover up," I think they would try to push
> the origin of the doctrine back to the time of Christ.
>
> Judy:
> My source says the celibacy of the priesthood was decreed by
> Pope Hildebrand, boniface VII in AD 1079, and we should also
> remember that there was no priesthood ordained in the Church
> founded by the apostles. Elders were first called priests by
> Lucian in the second century and from then this heresy escalated.
> Blaine: Jesus himself was called a High Priest, after the order of Melchizedek. Sometimes the High Priest is referred to as simply a "priest." However, there is obviously much missing from the Bible--even John the Apostle admits that what was not written down exceeds what was written, and would fill more books than the world could hold.. The Bible is Obviously not the complete word of God. See John John 21:25
> DavidM:
> If Jesus was married, would we not have some record of it?
> With all the details of the gospels, why would his wife be
> unacknowledged?
>
> Judy:
> What would be the point of him being married? So he wouldn't
> have to burn with lust? He came into this world for one reason
> to do the will of the Father and afterwards die.Blaine: The point of being married would be to set a proper example--besides, men were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth. How could Jesus be perfect, if he failed to keep that basic commandment?
>
> Blaine wrote:
> I cannot believe He--Jesus--would implement a doctrine either
> by example or word, that would end up being so disastrous!!
>
> DavidM:
> Jesus never implemented the doctrine of forced celibacy practiced
> in the Roman Catholic Church.
>
> Judy:
> True - I saw a priest on TV talking about it during one of the times
> a group was trying to have things changed and this man said the
> doctrine was started because the Vatican wanted to keep property
> belonging to the clergy rather than have it stay with their family.
>
> Blaine:
> I interpret this interesting passage differently! First, Jesus had
> just said it was not God's will that men should divorce, or "put away'"
> their wives, although it had been allowed by Moses.
>
> Judy:
> He said Moses allowed it because of the hardness of men's hearts.
> but in the beginning it was not so...Blaine: True
>
> Blaine:
> I recall one man who had been divorced several times and had
> lost his house to the woman each time. He said something similar
> to what the disciples were saying when they asked, "if the case be so
> with a wife, it is not good to marry." He said, "Next time I find a
> woman who just wants a house, I will get one and give it to her,
> instead of marrying her." (:>)
>
> Judy:
> You don't say if the divorced man had children with all these women.Blaine: No, but that was not the point of this discussion. They were talking about divorce.
>
> Blaine:
> Apparently, in Titus' time, it was a commandment to marry
> but one woman. This was also true in BoM times, when Nephi's
> brother Jacob reprimanded the Nephite men for taking plural wives
> (Jacob 2). But probably Titus would have changed his views if he had
> lived in a different time and known of the new revelations JS received
> to take more than one wife.
>
> Judy:
> Be assured Blaine Titus would have discerned what Joseph Smith
> was about - the professing Church was not quite so messed up then.
>
> Blaine:
> I believe he would have received these new commandments since
> he was a disciple of the same Jesus who gave the inspired words
> of his time.
>
> Judy:
> It's not the same Jesus Blaine. Your Mormon Jesus is an 'angel of light'
> who appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Crowdery.Blaine: Who told you that? If you are going to write your opinions, please state tham as opinions. (:>) That is apparently what you have here.
>
> Blaine:
> If the Primitive Church had kept the sayings of Jesus wherein he
> stated that if it was founded on the "rock" of revelation from Jesus
> Christ--the rock--the gates of hell would never prevail against it
> (Matt 16:18), it would not have become corrupted as it eventually
> was.
>
> Judy:
> You need the Holy Spirit to help you discern Blaine, what you are
> calling the Church is not the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. The
> gates of hell will not prevail against the Church that is without spot,
> wrinkle, or blemish and the Lord Himself is still working on that one.Blaine: Well, the gates of Hell did prevail--the Church was basically persecuted and betrayed by evil "wolves in sheep's clothing." It fell, and from its ashes arose the "great and abominable Church," with Satan as its foundation. Otherwise, how is it that there is even now such disarray in Christendom? Satan 's priesthood has "something for everyone."
>
> Blaine:
> Constant revelation ( from the "rock" of the old testament--Exodus 17:6
> -- wherein water--the word of God--gushed forth, and gave temporal
> salvation to the children of Israel.) is needed to maintain the church
> against the adversary.
>
> Judy:
> The revelation is The Word of God Blaine. Jesus is the same "yesterday,
> today, and forever"Blaine: Exactly my point--and since he is the same, he will still reveal his word to anyone wanting to listen, as he always has and always will. . His word has not been changed. All the prophets have been given new revelation for their day. Jeremiah preached long after Isaiah, and Isaiah long after Noah. If Noah had decided the then current word of God was all that anyone needed, we might not be here today. Fortunately he was willing to accept new revelation. He built the ship from new revelation, did he not? Agreed? (:>)
> Blaine:
> Times and circumstances change, so must the word of God change
> to meet new circumstances.
>
> Judy:
> You've got it backward Blaine.. Jesus doesn't change He is the same
> yesterday, today, and forever. God doesn't change He says "I am the
> Lord, I change not. God's Word is eternal also - The Word of the Lord
> endures forever. Actually we are the ones who must do the changing.
> There is no circumstance too difficult for God.
>
> JudyBlaine: I agree, God's word is eternal, and endures forever. I am afraid you do not fully understand what I am trying to say. Noone is trying to change any scripture, Judy, except maybe some of it was changed during the dark ages, as we call them, when the RCC was in full control. BUT scripture has always been added to --not changed--added to! as circumstances have demanded the word of God to guide mankind.As I said, good thing Noah did not take this erroneous stance. He would have not built his ship, and we would not be here today.
>
>
>
> >
> > Peace be with you.
> > David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
> >
> > ----------
> > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
> know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
> http://www.InnGlory.org
> >
> > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
> friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
> >
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
