Comments on: Why Temple Marriage?

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:59:24 +0000

Ok, I just want to add a comment. I like a lot of the points Tim brought up but also some lines he didn’t.

First off, I believe both the catholic church and mormon church are off the path of righteousness.

The catholic church makes Peter out to be their first saint, when they were the ones who persecuted him. ??? Where is the logic in that…

Mormons, if you believe that temple marriage is required, why then was temple marriage never practiced before? The temples existed when Jesus was alive, Jesus gave the “keys of eternal bondage” to Peter, yet peter walked the country-side revealing the Word of God to anyone who would listen, he was hundreds of miles from the Temple in Jerusalem. There were no temple marriages performed. The keys of eternal bondage are the Word of God, not some human twist on what marriage could be. Tim made a great point with Mark 12:24-25. Why then if you say take the phrases in 1 Corinthians regarding baptising for the dead so literal, even though when speaking to the corinthians he says “we” and referring to baptising for the dead says “they”, why then is that taken literal to just mean baptising for the dead was ok, but eternal marriage should be twisted in Mark 12? It makes no sense.. Why do you need to twist any sentences? 1 Corinthians is just as literal as that. They is a different audience.. not the ones he is talking to the entire time…

But please, feel free to address peter and the keys of eternal bondage first. I would be happy to hear a response.

By: Destiny

Destiny — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 04:29:38 +0000

Ok let me just ask one question. Does it really matter what was causing the shadows? Both knew that the shadows were being made. And the CEO and mailman, they would both benefit if the company prospered. So it doesn’t really matter how they viewed it. What I’m trying to get at is, everyone is equal. It says in the bible that god loves all of his children and as long as we believe in him and fOllow his commandments, we will rejoin him in everlasting life. One of the most simple verses of all time, John 3:16 says for god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosOever believeth in him shall have eternal life. Now tell me, does it say anything about a long list of stringent requirements? No. Does it say anything about following any one except for Him and Christ? No. I believe that you guys are overthinking this way too much. As long as you believe, love, and obey him, you will go to heaven. Case closed.

By: Kendra

Kendra — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 00:44:10 +0000

I know that this is way after the fact, but I would like to share something…especially since I started this conversation long ago with the original post. Hopefully, Tim, you will read this someday.

I really like your question of how do we know who has the authority and all truth. I think this is a vital question because I do not believe that God lies. He will tell us where His truth is if we seek it with real intent.

I was a Lutheran before joining the LDS faith and I whole-heartedly believed in that faith until I had an opportunity to hear the missionaries and find out for myself if there was something more.

You mentioned that we can know truth only through reason and intellect, and that feelings are deceiving. Both can be deceiving. That is why the Spirit tells us using in both places. Joseph Smith received a revelation where the Lord said, “Yea, behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart. Now, behold, this is the spirit of revelation; behold, this is the spirit by which Moses brought the children of Israel through the Red Sea on dry ground.”

In the Bible it also says, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.” (James 1:5-6)

I have asked and I have been told in my mind and in my heart, by both reason and feeling. I know that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God. I know that what he revealed came from God and that the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ was restored to earth. I know that if you ask of God, He too will tell you, if you ask with the faith that He will answer and with true intent to do whatever He says (nothing wavering).

You are right. This is the key to whether there is additional truth given from God in the LDS church, more than what other churches may offer, and I know that God does answer that question.

By: Tim Swanson

Tim Swanson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:50:03 +0000

To answer your Bible comment. Many letters were being written to correct teaching. See Clements letter to the Corinthians( early 90-100)http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm. This was written while the apostle John was still alive. The Shepherd of Hermes is another one that comes to mind. There were many works that taught the faith but didn’t make the final NT cut. This was all decided by the church through their power of the keys.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:21:13 +0000

I think the cave parable was misunderstood. The one guy leaves the cave and learns how the shadows are being made but it is said if he were to come back to tell the others still in the cave, they wouldn’t believe him and would try to kill him……all because they were used to seeing things a certain way and their eyes were not open.
The other example of the workers I gave – one was the CEO and the other was just a mailroom worker, work for the same company and on the same floor. The CEO is going to have a completely different vision for the company than the other worker does.

The Bible question was just meant to ask that if the leaders were still in tact, how come they didn’t continue to write more in the new testament?

By: Tim Swanson

Tim Swanson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:53:52 +0000

Thank you Jan for the websites

By: Jan

Jan — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:31:27 +0000

Tim,

ahh, there is so much that we could go back and forth debating. But the purpose of this website is definitely not to convince people that Catholicism isn’t true. It is to share our beliefs about the restored church.

So, if you are wondering about how your beliefs fit in with ours, you could check out the lds fair site (LDS apologists whose research covers all sorts of questions–just like yours). Here is a link to an article called “Comparing LDS beliefs with First Century Christianity.” You could also check out any of Jeffrey R. Holland’s recent talks in General Conference. (http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-851-30,00.html)

By: Tim Swanson

Tim Swanson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:09:29 +0000

Bret

I’m not sure I follow your reasoning about the prophets. Are you saying that since the Jews didn’t recognize and embrace the prophets teachings until later ages. Then that same reasoning can be applied to Joseph Smith and his teaching? So Mormons believe that his teaching, while not accepted everywhere now, will be accepted by all the faithful eventually.
You also mentioned you disagree with my reasoning of papal succession from Peter, but you don’t explain why. Please elaborate on your statement.

By: Bret

Bret — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:00:22 +0000

Reading this exchange, I think that it is important to understand that the Holy Ghost testifies of truth. Did the Spirit testify to C.S. Lewis when he converted to the Anglican church? I believe so. Can it testify to the Catholic as well as the Mormon? Indeed! When people move from one level of spirituality to a higher one, the spirit will testify of the truth. When a person with an open heart and humble spirit learns of Jesus Christ, the spirit will testify because there is truth. I believe there is truth in the Bible for this reason. I also believe there is much truth in the Book of Mormon. There is truth even in non scriptural writing and the spirit will testify of it at times.

The difference, then, is this authority of the Priesthood and the fullness of truth. You raised the question, “Why did Jesus build His church if He knew it would fall?” If the knowledge that His gospel would be lost over time would have prevented Him, then there never would have been prophets at all because they would have been rejected anyway. God called prophets throughout the Old Testament who called the people to repentance and taught them the true gospel of Christ. After time, sometimes immediately, they were rejected. The Jews lived for a few hundred years after Malachi died without a prophet because they refused to listen. Christ restored to the Jews the gospel that had been lost and built His church to strengthen the faithful and build a base of truth for millions. Many truths endured, however, through time, many things were lost and changed. The calling of the 12 apostles was different from that of the bishop of Rome, where the Papal line begins and that, I think, is where we disagree.

In any case, I don’t doubt the truths and spiritual feelings you hold dear. Our invitation is to hold fast to the truth and seek out further light and knowledge. Through the Book of Mormon, for example, because as the website says, that is what we believe because is so strongly testifies of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

By: Tim Swanson

Tim Swanson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:16:27 +0000

Discerning who has authority is fundamental. I see the problem restated this way using your examples There would be two people who leave the cave and return with conflicting stories on what makes the shadows. In The other example, both people would claim they are CEOs. How would you determine who is telling the truth?
Based on what we’ve realted so far, it’s apparent we both have come to recognize that God (Holy Spirit) has touched our hearts and has made his present know to us. I’ve been lead to the Catholic Church as containing the whole deposit of faith and you look to the Mormon Church. So now we have the issue of determining what is true. Sine we both feel we are following the one pure source of the Holy Spirit we both can’t be right. Since there aren’t two truths there is just one. I think we can agree on this based on reason. So following this line of reasoning, much of what you say doesn’t track based on my study of history. I felt that examining how the books in the NT came to be would shed light on why I believe the Catholic church is the one true church established by Christ. To have Mormonism make sense to me they would need to reject the NT books because they were based on guys who lost the keys or some fo the keys. Or is it your faith that Jospeh Smith infalliably told you the NT was a good start. If this is true then the early Mormon church lasted until the 4th century because that’s the time they settled on the NT. Please help me understand your line of reasoning. I understand Jesus knew people would fall away from him but to be Mormon I see that EVERYONE had to lose the faith. If not, why would Joseph Smith’s teaching be so out of line from the Christianity he knew. Is this a true statement? If so, when did this falling away happen?
I’m not sure what point you are trying to make with why the bible didn’t continue. Are you trying to help me understand why Jesus would establish something on the apostles and then let it disappear for 1800 years? I would like to understand your thinking on this.
The Catholic Church teaches Jesus atoned for the sins of Isreal, his old convenant people. He established the new convenant with his death and resurrection. Since he is God, he alone can do this. He established his new convenant through his church following the teaching of the apostles. When I examine history I see this unbroken line of successors from the first Pope Peter to the present one Benedict XVI in the Catholic Church. You see a different structure. I understand you believe that it was lost but where is your proof? Am I suppose to believe it just because you say it. I see the early church councils developing doctrine based on the teaching of the apostles which can be seen or implied by the books they established as inspired by God, we now call the NT. This makes sense to me. Please help me understand how you find this unreasonable.