Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 6280
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -376
|
Jaye wrote:Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Don't beleive me then on Baptism for the dead, believe the references to non LDS scholars.
as far as the Priesthood, as I said, no other Christian faith I know of even claims to have the Priesthood, much less understand what it is and what they do with it. Christ gave the priesthood to his 12 apostles. As he always wanted it to be.
Really? Thats as He always wanted it to be? Only 12 to hold the priesthood at any given time?
Then that would tend to put the lie to the LDS practice of ordaining LDS males to the priesthood when they reach 12 years of age.
If this was as Jesus always wanted it to be...then every last worthy member of the LDS Church might as well kiss their priesthood authority nighty-night...except of course for the Quorum of the Twelve.
Don't play the idiot Jaye, although you do it well. Christ instituted the 12 apostles, and gave them the Preisthood. You know this, (at least I think you do  ) He never said it would change, it hasn't.
I beg to differ Kent. The fact that you stated that Christ gave the priesthood to 12 men...12 Apostles, as He always wanted it to be...and the fact that the LDS Church ordains EVERY worthy LDS boy to the priesthood when he reaches 12 years of age...puts the lie to your comment.
And since you claim that Jesus never said that this would never change...and it hasn't...you are either a downright liar, and prevaricator...or you are simply uninformed.
Play the idiot all you want, I think it was clear by my designation of "12" apostles, I was speaking of them having the priesthood. For the non senile, I think it was clear.
What has been crystal clear, for nigh on every participant of this forum...is that your opinion bears less weight than a toad's fart.
Within the 4 gospels...Jesus gave priesthood authority to His chosen 12 Apostles.
Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up.
He only gave this gift to 12 individuals. When did this change?
Jaye, answer this, do you believe we have every thing or word Jesus ever said and did in the Bible?
No Kent...I don't. I believe that what we have is every word and deed that a number of His followers heard him say, or saw him do, or heard about him saying or doing... and remembered to relate.
The gospel of Luke and Mark are based upon hearsay evidence which these two men heard about Jesus from other men.
And in the case of Luke...his account contains rather important stories that were not included in the accounts of the two who actually walked and talked with Jesus during His life and ministry.
But there were other disciples who's words regarding the life and ministry of Jesus Christ were disregarded and left out of the Holy Bible.
There in lies the rub you don't get cliffy, We dont' have the whole organization nor list of all who recieved the priesthood, how, where, or why. So for you to question where this happened, then admit we don't have all that happened, shows your logically not thinking.
Your grammar sucks...figuratively speaking. Until you address your errors, and work on the manner in which you think, and communicate...you have no room to accuse anyone else of 'logically not thinking'...or did you mean to say...'lack of logical thinking'?
Let me re-phrase. You admit we don't have all of Christ's nor the apostles deeds and words in scripture.
But then ask the question
"Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up."
See the contradiction cliffy? You admit on one hand we don't know all Christ did, on the other you question that "nothing is mentioned"
Is it possible it was and was taken out as part of the "plain and precious parts" that were removed from the Bible? Or do you not believe this scripture either?
That is an unacceptable argument, period. It allows anyone anytime to decide what is acceptable or not with the remark, "well, it must have been one of the 'plain and precious parts' removed long ago from the Bible." Simply unacceptable.
Yet, that is what has caused the confusion to begin with, the Bible.
You can't even be logical enough to agree that we don't have all that Jesus and the apostles said and did in their life in the Bible?
Hey gumball, if we don't have it, how do you know it was necessary?
If we don't have it? Huh, WE do have it, that's the point dar dar.
If you have it...it should be relatively easy to PROVE it.
Huh? Do you claim to have it? Can you prove it?
No...and that's why I do not profess that the LDS Church is the one true Church, nor the only path to salvation.
So now you don't profess to have the priesthood anymore?
Never said that Kent.
As far as I'm concerned...the LDS Church is true enough for me. I don't concern myself with whether or not it is the only truth for everyone.
That is between everyone...and everyone's Creator.
I asked if you claim to have it, you said "NO"
So do you or don't you claim to have the priesthood? If so, what is it for you to you?
I have never stated that I didn't have the priesthood. I've never NOT had the priesthood since the year I turned 12.
You said this cliffy in answer to my question...
dubs said...Huh? Do you claim to have it?...
Jaye said...."No"...and went on to explain that this is why he believes the LDS church is not the one true church.
What am I missing Jaye?
So if you now claim to have it, but don't believe it is what the church claims it is, that is the "authority to act in Gods name" What is it to you?
What you are missing is the fact that my resounding 'NO' was in answer to your question as to whether I could prove the Church's claim to having priesthood authority.
Not entirely surprising...as you miss just about everything else. There was two questions was there not? So if you meant one and didn't specify which one you were answering, that's your poor communication via written word. So what about the other question, going to answer or pull a Wren/Blogan/Uncle/etc?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My ignore list... The The The The Betz, Kitcat, and the blonde. They have nothing of substance to say anyway, but just like to add smarmy comments to the conversations, so why bother with the the constant smariness?
Wren would like to think he's ignoring me, but he can't, won't and will not.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Betzz (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 5558
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 13
|
Dubbs wrote:Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Don't beleive me then on Baptism for the dead, believe the references to non LDS scholars.
as far as the Priesthood, as I said, no other Christian faith I know of even claims to have the Priesthood, much less understand what it is and what they do with it. Christ gave the priesthood to his 12 apostles. As he always wanted it to be.
Really? Thats as He always wanted it to be? Only 12 to hold the priesthood at any given time?
Then that would tend to put the lie to the LDS practice of ordaining LDS males to the priesthood when they reach 12 years of age.
If this was as Jesus always wanted it to be...then every last worthy member of the LDS Church might as well kiss their priesthood authority nighty-night...except of course for the Quorum of the Twelve.
Don't play the idiot Jaye, although you do it well. Christ instituted the 12 apostles, and gave them the Preisthood. You know this, (at least I think you do ) He never said it would change, it hasn't.
I beg to differ Kent. The fact that you stated that Christ gave the priesthood to 12 men...12 Apostles, as He always wanted it to be...and the fact that the LDS Church ordains EVERY worthy LDS boy to the priesthood when he reaches 12 years of age...puts the lie to your comment.
And since you claim that Jesus never said that this would never change...and it hasn't...you are either a downright liar, and prevaricator...or you are simply uninformed.
Play the idiot all you want, I think it was clear by my designation of "12" apostles, I was speaking of them having the priesthood. For the non senile, I think it was clear.
What has been crystal clear, for nigh on every participant of this forum...is that your opinion bears less weight than a toad's fart.
Within the 4 gospels...Jesus gave priesthood authority to His chosen 12 Apostles.
Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up.
He only gave this gift to 12 individuals. When did this change?
Jaye, answer this, do you believe we have every thing or word Jesus ever said and did in the Bible?
No Kent...I don't. I believe that what we have is every word and deed that a number of His followers heard him say, or saw him do, or heard about him saying or doing... and remembered to relate.
The gospel of Luke and Mark are based upon hearsay evidence which these two men heard about Jesus from other men.
And in the case of Luke...his account contains rather important stories that were not included in the accounts of the two who actually walked and talked with Jesus during His life and ministry.
But there were other disciples who's words regarding the life and ministry of Jesus Christ were disregarded and left out of the Holy Bible.
There in lies the rub you don't get cliffy, We dont' have the whole organization nor list of all who recieved the priesthood, how, where, or why. So for you to question where this happened, then admit we don't have all that happened, shows your logically not thinking.
Your grammar sucks...figuratively speaking. Until you address your errors, and work on the manner in which you think, and communicate...you have no room to accuse anyone else of 'logically not thinking'...or did you mean to say...'lack of logical thinking'?
Let me re-phrase. You admit we don't have all of Christ's nor the apostles deeds and words in scripture.
But then ask the question
"Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up."
See the contradiction cliffy? You admit on one hand we don't know all Christ did, on the other you question that "nothing is mentioned"
Is it possible it was and was taken out as part of the "plain and precious parts" that were removed from the Bible? Or do you not believe this scripture either?
That is an unacceptable argument, period. It allows anyone anytime to decide what is acceptable or not with the remark, "well, it must have been one of the 'plain and precious parts' removed long ago from the Bible." Simply unacceptable.
Yet, that is what has caused the confusion to begin with, the Bible.
You can't even be logical enough to agree that we don't have all that Jesus and the apostles said and did in their life in the Bible?
Hey gumball, if we don't have it, how do you know it was necessary?
If we don't have it? Huh, WE do have it, that's the point dar dar.
If you have it...it should be relatively easy to PROVE it.
Huh? Do you claim to have it? Can you prove it?
No...and that's why I do not profess that the LDS Church is the one true Church, nor the only path to salvation.
So now you don't profess to have the priesthood anymore?
Never said that Kent.
As far as I'm concerned...the LDS Church is true enough for me. I don't concern myself with whether or not it is the only truth for everyone.
That is between everyone...and everyone's Creator.
I asked if you claim to have it, you said "NO"
So do you or don't you claim to have the priesthood? If so, what is it for you to you?
I have never stated that I didn't have the priesthood. I've never NOT had the priesthood since the year I turned 12.
You said this cliffy in answer to my question...
dubs said...Huh? Do you claim to have it?...
Jaye said...."No"...and went on to explain that this is why he believes the LDS church is not the one true church.
What am I missing Jaye?
So if you now claim to have it, but don't believe it is what the church claims it is, that is the "authority to act in Gods name" What is it to you?
What you are missing is the fact that my resounding 'NO' was in answer to your question as to whether I could prove the Church's claim to having priesthood authority.
Not entirely surprising...as you miss just about everything else.
There was two questions was there not? So if you meant one and didn't specify which one you were answering, that's your poor communication via written word.
So what about the other question, going to answer or pull a Wren/Blogan/Uncle/etc?I think you are overly exhausted and really need to get some sleep. He also answered the other question when you started bitching at him about it. Where did the "eye roll" smiley go, dangit! I really need it here! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proud to be a wicked witch and uppity wench.
Words for Dubbs from an apostle: "More regrettable than the [LDS] Church being accused of not being Christian is when church members react to such accusations in an un-Christlike way," Apostle Robert D. Hales said on the second day of the two-day conference. "Surely our Heavenly Father is saddened - and the devil laughs - when we contentiously debate doctrinal differences with our Christian neighbors."
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Jaye (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11590
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 6
|
Dubbs wrote:Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Don't beleive me then on Baptism for the dead, believe the references to non LDS scholars.
as far as the Priesthood, as I said, no other Christian faith I know of even claims to have the Priesthood, much less understand what it is and what they do with it. Christ gave the priesthood to his 12 apostles. As he always wanted it to be.
Really? Thats as He always wanted it to be? Only 12 to hold the priesthood at any given time?
Then that would tend to put the lie to the LDS practice of ordaining LDS males to the priesthood when they reach 12 years of age.
If this was as Jesus always wanted it to be...then every last worthy member of the LDS Church might as well kiss their priesthood authority nighty-night...except of course for the Quorum of the Twelve.
Don't play the idiot Jaye, although you do it well. Christ instituted the 12 apostles, and gave them the Preisthood. You know this, (at least I think you do ) He never said it would change, it hasn't.
I beg to differ Kent. The fact that you stated that Christ gave the priesthood to 12 men...12 Apostles, as He always wanted it to be...and the fact that the LDS Church ordains EVERY worthy LDS boy to the priesthood when he reaches 12 years of age...puts the lie to your comment.
And since you claim that Jesus never said that this would never change...and it hasn't...you are either a downright liar, and prevaricator...or you are simply uninformed.
Play the idiot all you want, I think it was clear by my designation of "12" apostles, I was speaking of them having the priesthood. For the non senile, I think it was clear.
What has been crystal clear, for nigh on every participant of this forum...is that your opinion bears less weight than a toad's fart.
Within the 4 gospels...Jesus gave priesthood authority to His chosen 12 Apostles.
Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up.
He only gave this gift to 12 individuals. When did this change?
Jaye, answer this, do you believe we have every thing or word Jesus ever said and did in the Bible?
No Kent...I don't. I believe that what we have is every word and deed that a number of His followers heard him say, or saw him do, or heard about him saying or doing... and remembered to relate.
The gospel of Luke and Mark are based upon hearsay evidence which these two men heard about Jesus from other men.
And in the case of Luke...his account contains rather important stories that were not included in the accounts of the two who actually walked and talked with Jesus during His life and ministry.
But there were other disciples who's words regarding the life and ministry of Jesus Christ were disregarded and left out of the Holy Bible.
There in lies the rub you don't get cliffy, We dont' have the whole organization nor list of all who recieved the priesthood, how, where, or why. So for you to question where this happened, then admit we don't have all that happened, shows your logically not thinking.
Your grammar sucks...figuratively speaking. Until you address your errors, and work on the manner in which you think, and communicate...you have no room to accuse anyone else of 'logically not thinking'...or did you mean to say...'lack of logical thinking'?
Let me re-phrase. You admit we don't have all of Christ's nor the apostles deeds and words in scripture.
But then ask the question
"Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up."
See the contradiction cliffy? You admit on one hand we don't know all Christ did, on the other you question that "nothing is mentioned"
Is it possible it was and was taken out as part of the "plain and precious parts" that were removed from the Bible? Or do you not believe this scripture either?
That is an unacceptable argument, period. It allows anyone anytime to decide what is acceptable or not with the remark, "well, it must have been one of the 'plain and precious parts' removed long ago from the Bible." Simply unacceptable.
Yet, that is what has caused the confusion to begin with, the Bible.
You can't even be logical enough to agree that we don't have all that Jesus and the apostles said and did in their life in the Bible?
Hey gumball, if we don't have it, how do you know it was necessary?
If we don't have it? Huh, WE do have it, that's the point dar dar.
If you have it...it should be relatively easy to PROVE it.
Huh? Do you claim to have it? Can you prove it?
No...and that's why I do not profess that the LDS Church is the one true Church, nor the only path to salvation.
So now you don't profess to have the priesthood anymore?
Never said that Kent.
As far as I'm concerned...the LDS Church is true enough for me. I don't concern myself with whether or not it is the only truth for everyone.
That is between everyone...and everyone's Creator.
I asked if you claim to have it, you said "NO"
So do you or don't you claim to have the priesthood? If so, what is it for you to you?
I have never stated that I didn't have the priesthood. I've never NOT had the priesthood since the year I turned 12.
You said this cliffy in answer to my question...
dubs said...Huh? Do you claim to have it?...
Jaye said...."No"...and went on to explain that this is why he believes the LDS church is not the one true church.
What am I missing Jaye?
So if you now claim to have it, but don't believe it is what the church claims it is, that is the "authority to act in Gods name" What is it to you?
What you are missing is the fact that my resounding 'NO' was in answer to your question as to whether I could prove the Church's claim to having priesthood authority.
Not entirely surprising...as you miss just about everything else.
There was two questions was there not? So if you meant one and didn't specify which one you were answering, that's your poor communication via written word.
So what about the other question, going to answer or pull a Wren/Blogan/Uncle/etc?I have answered both questions. But I'll repeat my answers...just for your edification. 1. I have held the priesthood since I was 12 years old. 2. I cannot prove the Church's claim of being the sole holder of the restored Priesthood Authority. Do you understand my answers NOW?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resident husband of a white witch and lover of witches in general.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Jaye (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 11590
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 6
|
Betz wrote:Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Don't beleive me then on Baptism for the dead, believe the references to non LDS scholars.
as far as the Priesthood, as I said, no other Christian faith I know of even claims to have the Priesthood, much less understand what it is and what they do with it. Christ gave the priesthood to his 12 apostles. As he always wanted it to be.
Really? Thats as He always wanted it to be? Only 12 to hold the priesthood at any given time?
Then that would tend to put the lie to the LDS practice of ordaining LDS males to the priesthood when they reach 12 years of age.
If this was as Jesus always wanted it to be...then every last worthy member of the LDS Church might as well kiss their priesthood authority nighty-night...except of course for the Quorum of the Twelve.
Don't play the idiot Jaye, although you do it well. Christ instituted the 12 apostles, and gave them the Preisthood. You know this, (at least I think you do ) He never said it would change, it hasn't.
I beg to differ Kent. The fact that you stated that Christ gave the priesthood to 12 men...12 Apostles, as He always wanted it to be...and the fact that the LDS Church ordains EVERY worthy LDS boy to the priesthood when he reaches 12 years of age...puts the lie to your comment.
And since you claim that Jesus never said that this would never change...and it hasn't...you are either a downright liar, and prevaricator...or you are simply uninformed.
Play the idiot all you want, I think it was clear by my designation of "12" apostles, I was speaking of them having the priesthood. For the non senile, I think it was clear.
What has been crystal clear, for nigh on every participant of this forum...is that your opinion bears less weight than a toad's fart.
Within the 4 gospels...Jesus gave priesthood authority to His chosen 12 Apostles.
Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up.
He only gave this gift to 12 individuals. When did this change?
Jaye, answer this, do you believe we have every thing or word Jesus ever said and did in the Bible?
No Kent...I don't. I believe that what we have is every word and deed that a number of His followers heard him say, or saw him do, or heard about him saying or doing... and remembered to relate.
The gospel of Luke and Mark are based upon hearsay evidence which these two men heard about Jesus from other men.
And in the case of Luke...his account contains rather important stories that were not included in the accounts of the two who actually walked and talked with Jesus during His life and ministry.
But there were other disciples who's words regarding the life and ministry of Jesus Christ were disregarded and left out of the Holy Bible.
There in lies the rub you don't get cliffy, We dont' have the whole organization nor list of all who recieved the priesthood, how, where, or why. So for you to question where this happened, then admit we don't have all that happened, shows your logically not thinking.
Your grammar sucks...figuratively speaking. Until you address your errors, and work on the manner in which you think, and communicate...you have no room to accuse anyone else of 'logically not thinking'...or did you mean to say...'lack of logical thinking'?
Let me re-phrase. You admit we don't have all of Christ's nor the apostles deeds and words in scripture.
But then ask the question
"Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up."
See the contradiction cliffy? You admit on one hand we don't know all Christ did, on the other you question that "nothing is mentioned"
Is it possible it was and was taken out as part of the "plain and precious parts" that were removed from the Bible? Or do you not believe this scripture either?
That is an unacceptable argument, period. It allows anyone anytime to decide what is acceptable or not with the remark, "well, it must have been one of the 'plain and precious parts' removed long ago from the Bible." Simply unacceptable.
Yet, that is what has caused the confusion to begin with, the Bible.
You can't even be logical enough to agree that we don't have all that Jesus and the apostles said and did in their life in the Bible?
Hey gumball, if we don't have it, how do you know it was necessary?
If we don't have it? Huh, WE do have it, that's the point dar dar.
If you have it...it should be relatively easy to PROVE it.
Huh? Do you claim to have it? Can you prove it?
No...and that's why I do not profess that the LDS Church is the one true Church, nor the only path to salvation.
So now you don't profess to have the priesthood anymore?
Never said that Kent.
As far as I'm concerned...the LDS Church is true enough for me. I don't concern myself with whether or not it is the only truth for everyone.
That is between everyone...and everyone's Creator.
I asked if you claim to have it, you said "NO"
So do you or don't you claim to have the priesthood? If so, what is it for you to you?
I have never stated that I didn't have the priesthood. I've never NOT had the priesthood since the year I turned 12.
You said this cliffy in answer to my question...
dubs said...Huh? Do you claim to have it?...
Jaye said...."No"...and went on to explain that this is why he believes the LDS church is not the one true church.
What am I missing Jaye?
So if you now claim to have it, but don't believe it is what the church claims it is, that is the "authority to act in Gods name" What is it to you?
What you are missing is the fact that my resounding 'NO' was in answer to your question as to whether I could prove the Church's claim to having priesthood authority.
Not entirely surprising...as you miss just about everything else.
There was two questions was there not? So if you meant one and didn't specify which one you were answering, that's your poor communication via written word.
So what about the other question, going to answer or pull a Wren/Blogan/Uncle/etc?
I think you are overly exhausted and really need to get some sleep. He also answered the other question when you started bitching at him about it. Where did the "eye roll" smiley go, dangit! I really need it here! Yeah...poor little feller must be plumb tuckered out from his little league game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resident husband of a white witch and lover of witches in general.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Betzz (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 5558
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: 13
|
Jaye wrote:
Yeah...poor little feller must be plumb tuckered out from his little league game.LOL 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proud to be a wicked witch and uppity wench.
Words for Dubbs from an apostle: "More regrettable than the [LDS] Church being accused of not being Christian is when church members react to such accusations in an un-Christlike way," Apostle Robert D. Hales said on the second day of the two-day conference. "Surely our Heavenly Father is saddened - and the devil laughs - when we contentiously debate doctrinal differences with our Christian neighbors."
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
Dubbs (User)
Platinum Boarder
Posts: 6280
|
|
Re:VATICAN KEEPS PARISH RECORDS FROM MORMONS 4 Months, 4 Weeks ago
|
Karma: -376
|
Jaye wrote:Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Don't beleive me then on Baptism for the dead, believe the references to non LDS scholars.
as far as the Priesthood, as I said, no other Christian faith I know of even claims to have the Priesthood, much less understand what it is and what they do with it. Christ gave the priesthood to his 12 apostles. As he always wanted it to be.
Really? Thats as He always wanted it to be? Only 12 to hold the priesthood at any given time?
Then that would tend to put the lie to the LDS practice of ordaining LDS males to the priesthood when they reach 12 years of age.
If this was as Jesus always wanted it to be...then every last worthy member of the LDS Church might as well kiss their priesthood authority nighty-night...except of course for the Quorum of the Twelve.
Don't play the idiot Jaye, although you do it well. Christ instituted the 12 apostles, and gave them the Preisthood. You know this, (at least I think you do ) He never said it would change, it hasn't.
I beg to differ Kent. The fact that you stated that Christ gave the priesthood to 12 men...12 Apostles, as He always wanted it to be...and the fact that the LDS Church ordains EVERY worthy LDS boy to the priesthood when he reaches 12 years of age...puts the lie to your comment.
And since you claim that Jesus never said that this would never change...and it hasn't...you are either a downright liar, and prevaricator...or you are simply uninformed.
Play the idiot all you want, I think it was clear by my designation of "12" apostles, I was speaking of them having the priesthood. For the non senile, I think it was clear.
What has been crystal clear, for nigh on every participant of this forum...is that your opinion bears less weight than a toad's fart.
Within the 4 gospels...Jesus gave priesthood authority to His chosen 12 Apostles.
Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up.
He only gave this gift to 12 individuals. When did this change?
Jaye, answer this, do you believe we have every thing or word Jesus ever said and did in the Bible?
No Kent...I don't. I believe that what we have is every word and deed that a number of His followers heard him say, or saw him do, or heard about him saying or doing... and remembered to relate.
The gospel of Luke and Mark are based upon hearsay evidence which these two men heard about Jesus from other men.
And in the case of Luke...his account contains rather important stories that were not included in the accounts of the two who actually walked and talked with Jesus during His life and ministry.
But there were other disciples who's words regarding the life and ministry of Jesus Christ were disregarded and left out of the Holy Bible.
There in lies the rub you don't get cliffy, We dont' have the whole organization nor list of all who recieved the priesthood, how, where, or why. So for you to question where this happened, then admit we don't have all that happened, shows your logically not thinking.
Your grammar sucks...figuratively speaking. Until you address your errors, and work on the manner in which you think, and communicate...you have no room to accuse anyone else of 'logically not thinking'...or did you mean to say...'lack of logical thinking'?
Let me re-phrase. You admit we don't have all of Christ's nor the apostles deeds and words in scripture.
But then ask the question
"Nothing is mentioned regarding the Lord teaching that this priesthood should be given to worthy males from the age of 12 and up."
See the contradiction cliffy? You admit on one hand we don't know all Christ did, on the other you question that "nothing is mentioned"
Is it possible it was and was taken out as part of the "plain and precious parts" that were removed from the Bible? Or do you not believe this scripture either?
That is an unacceptable argument, period. It allows anyone anytime to decide what is acceptable or not with the remark, "well, it must have been one of the 'plain and precious parts' removed long ago from the Bible." Simply unacceptable.
Yet, that is what has caused the confusion to begin with, the Bible.
You can't | | |
