Reno,
I rejected no challenge. And I carefully pointed to
where I believe your train of understanding went off
the track.
As to Apostles, I do not believe this was a continuing
gift to the church. I believe it was a foundational
gift for the establishment of the church... and
especially until the cannon of scripture was complete.
Again, I can hear the words of smith ville in your post -
you’ve absorbed the charges well. They aren’t true, however.
I could take your argument and point out that after young
smith’s “revelation”, he was followed by Jehovah’s witnesses
not too many years after with new “revelation”. While all
cults make some classic doctrinal errors that result in
heresy, why not go with the more recent revelation?? Hmmm?
Their stuff is much more current and cutting edge than
yours. And after their turn with “revelation”, Mary Baker
Eddy slipped on ice (true!) and had her new “revelation in
1866. Wow, wasn’t young Smith’s revelation way back in 1830
or so?? Better to go with the latest an greatest “direct
revelation” right???
Why not cut to the chase, forget about mere prophets, and
go with the “return of Christ himself!”, The Rev. Sun Myong Moon!
He has DAILY “revelation”! And it is 160+ years more
current than that old smithville stuff! And his revelation
shows he is Christ! And he obviously believes as you have
expressed, “go directly to the source for my wisdom
on these matters”. Plus you would have the advantage of
marrying with out all the courting stuff! Forget multiple
brides for one man. You can have multiple couples
marrying at once.
And so goes the slippery slope. The only remaining revelation
is which cult will arise next to restore the church and
bring us new truths.
BTW, You did not answer my questions to you about history
during the life of Joseph Smith...
best,
ampu
Have you shown me where most of the Athanasian creed’s opinions are in the bible?
You stated “As to Apostles, I do not believe this was a continuing gift to the church. I believe it was a foundational gift for the establishment of the church... and
especially until the cannon of scripture was complete”.
Can you site to me a biblical reference to this belief. Remember, everything is in the bible.
As to me not answering your question, I believe I did but perhaps you can refer to what question you’re talking about. If you’re refering to the religous fervor of the time, what does that make a difference? There was certainly a lot of religous fervor at the time of Christ as well. The Pharisees, Saducees, the Scribes, the Herodians, Christians, etc.... So, does that mean that Christ shouldn’t have set up his church at the time, b/c there were to many competing ideas? If that’s the question you don’t feel I answered, I’m scratching my head on that one.