He actually believes in the very same scriptures the rest of do.
DAVEH: As I understand DavidM, he believes prophets exist today. Is
that the way you believe as well, Bishop?
From your posts, I was under the impression that you believe the
heavens are closed, and there is no need for prophets today. Am I
reading you wrong on this?
He didn't get it right the first time.
DAVEH: How do you read that in LDS theology? We certainly don't feel
nor believe that way. We believe he revealed the Word of God to the
Primitive Church, but do to the doctrines of men, and the grievous
wolves, there came to be a famine of the Word of God. Which is one of
the reasons why the Church needed restoring.
the Mormon Church is so very different from the first and
pre-apostate church found in the First and PreApostate Scriptures.
DAVEH: I'm not quite sure why you see it that way, John. From our
perspective, Protestantism seems to be so very different from the
first and pre-apostate church. What is it that bothers you about
Mormonism being so very different?
you have apostrate trouble
DAVEH: LOL........Good one, JD!
:-D
if we dug up some document that made it clear the Mormon church was
no longer in the good graces of God. How would you respond?
DAVEH: That would be hard to do for somebody who doesn't believe God
continues to reveal things. What other document could possibly be as
authoritative as one from God?
Upon what authority would you reject such a document?
DAVEH: Isn't there only one authority that is
absolutely trustworthy....God's revealed word. As I read the Bible, I
cannot see the same conflict between it and LDS theology that you see.
But...that is understandable, since you are unwilling to accept that
God may have revealed things that are not included in the Bible.
Therefore, it seems the position you have to take is that God does not
reveal his will to Prophets in a post Biblical era. Am I correct in
concluding you believe such?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't get too excited, DH. Miller is just having another one
of his "wherefore art thou" moments. He
actually believes in the very same scriptures the rest of do. He
just wants to be differenct from me.
Where you see the myopic, I see the the ability of God to get
things done and the power to sustain what He has given to us. Where
you make the argument for God re-establishing the church, I see the
Mormon doctrine as saying that He didn't get it right the first
time. I say that because the Mormon Church is so very
different from the first and pre-apostate church found in the First and
PreApostate Scriptures. In short, I think you have apostrate
trouble. And, boy do I have a supposi ------------------ sorry,
I will move on.
What if we dug up some document that made it clear the
Mormon church was no longer in the good graces of God. How would you
respond? Upon what authority would you reject such a
document? I am curious to see if your answers are different
from the ones we (editorially speaking, of course) might give to you.
jd
--------------
Original message --------------
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It is perhaps perplexing to them why you would so adamantly argue that the
Scriptures have been closed.
DAVEH: Yes DavidM, that is correct.....Such does perplex us. I'm
suspect there may be other reasons as well, but it almost seems that
the argument for closure is just a knee jerk reaction because of JS's
contribution of post Biblical revelations. From our perspective, it
appears that Protestants have truly put the blinders on in an effort to
avoid hearing anything God might want them to know that is not included
in the Bible.
Apparently, the only thing that is going to be accepted in a post
Biblical sense, will be Jesus.....and that only after he shows the nail
prints in his hands.
If God felt the need to reveal his will through the apostles and
prophets of Bible times, it truly does seem strange to us (LDS) that
many Christians in this era would reject the idea that God could/would
do the same today. To think that God revealed everything we need to
know several thousand year
s ago, and that it has been 100% recorded in what we know as the
Bible.....seems a bit more than myopic.....it might even be insulting
to a Lord whose methods are claimed not to change.
It appears that such dogma comes out of
convenience rather than conviction.
DAVEH: To me, it seems more a matter of stubbornness, rather than
convenience. To allow God to reveal more than he has currently
revealed would simply upset the applecart, so to speak. Protestantism
has invested heavily in both time and effort building a framework of
theology that stands apart from Catholicism, and has adopted a no
change policy that would prevent anybody from making waves.
IOW.....Why would they (Protestants) want to take a chance on finding
out that some of their basic premises are wrong! It is much easier to
assume correctness of theology, and refuse to hear anything that might
be contrary. Hence, they stubbornly reject anything God might reveal
outside the Bible.
David Miller wrote:
As for the Scritpures being closed.... I have expressed in this forum many
times in the past that my perspective is that I do not expect more
Scriptures to be forthcoming. Nevertheless, there is no mandate or decree
that closes the Canon. It is only an assumption we have that there will not
be any more Scriptures written until Christ himself returns. I suspect
those just before Christ came the first time thought the same thing.
Nevertheless, Christ did come, and soon more Scriptures were written. The
only reason such a point is necessary is honesty in approaching the subject.
I'm sure to the Mormons, who believe that other Scriptures have been
written, you appear unable to think outside your little theological box. It
is perhaps perplexing to them why you would so adamantly argue that the
Scriptures have been closed. It appears that such dogma comes out of
convenience rather than conviction.
|
