Replies

I've noticed in your threads that when a Mormon comes to defend their position they completely and summarily dismiss any scholarly refute of Mormonism. They are usually arrogant, consider themselves the only true patriots and mock rather than have a real debate.

I've never seen that happen. But then again, in 30+ years I've never seen a scholarly defense of Mormonism that can withstand a scholarly cross-examination. And that's when the door swings wide to allow the mocking....

"You can know the Mormon church is the One True Church, because we always have twelve living Apostles!"
"Let me get this straight...according to the Mormon church, the Apostle John never died and is fact still roaming this Earth?"
"According to Section 7 of Doctrines and Covenants, that is correct."
"Patrick - is St. John the Evangelist currently an Apostle in the Mormon church?
[silence]
"You're telling me that, after eighteen hundred years with no church to worship in, no fellow believers to gather with, no one to preach to, baptize, commune or consecrate, that the disciple who Jesus loved was too busy tap-dancing atop a pile of yak manure to claim the spot that Jesus gave him on the freshly rebooted apostolic roster?"
"Uh, I don't know about the yak manure..."
..."You're also telling me that in the subsequent time since the One True Church woke up from its near-two-thousand-year coma, that the guy who wrote five books of the Bible couldn't even be bothered to show up at your Salt Lake City headquarters for an official meet-and-greet?"
-- from the thread Donall and Conall Meet the Mormon Missionaries

"I've never seen that happen."

Neither have I.

Alex, are you asserting that the truth of God can be proved through scholarly examination?

Here's an examination you might want to consider. In the original Church a Bishop was the head of a congregation of the Church.

Linus was a Bishop in Rome. When most of the Apostles were killed, Linus claimed to be head of the whole Church, even though there was still a living Apostle on the earth at that time. Linus was never ordained an Apostle. He was only a Bishop.

Regardless of what Linus claimed, the Lord Jesus Christ followed His original organization. In 70 AD, Jesus appeared to the Apostle John and spoke to John face to face. Jesus gave John a vision of the world to come, which is now the Book Revelation in the Bible.

Jesus never appeared to Linus, Clement or any Pope ever.

When Linus claimed to be the head of the Church without being called directly by God Himself, this action constituted apostasy. Linus by his actions had in fact, created a new church. One that was not claimed by Jesus.

Jesus followed His own rule. When men teach another gospel other than His, He leaves them alone. Again, God has never spoken face to face with any Pope or protestant minister, ever.

If Linus had been the real leader of Jesus' true Church, Jesus would have appeared to Linus instead of John. But John was the real head of the Church, not Linus.

I think this is a much more interesting topic of discussion...