LDS, JW, SDA, other?

[JayHawes]

Peter means "a stone or rock." Peter's actual name, Cephas means " a stone." Jesus testified that upon Peter he would build his Church.

quote]
What readily becomes apparent is this: the rock on which Christ built his church is not the same original Greek word that Jesus used when he referred to Peter. Petros, the name Jesus gave Peter, is in the masculine gender and means a movable stone, a piece of rock; but petra, the rock on which the church is built, is in the feminine gender and means a "rock-mass." If Jesus had meant for Peter to be the head of his church he would have said the obvious: "You are Petros and on this Petros I will build my church.’ But Jesus never said that! Nor did he say: "You, Peter, will build my church." Rather, Jesus said: "I will build my church." Who, then, is this petra, the "rock-mass," upon which Christ builds his church?
To understand what Jesus meant it is well to examine, with the benefit of an accurate, modern translation of the Bible, Jesus’ words and their context. One day, while Jesus and his apostles were in the neighborhood of Caesarea Philippi, he asked them: "Who are men saying the Son of man is?" The various answers people gave were wrong. So Jesus asked his apostles: "You, though, who do you say I am?" Simon Peter was quick with an answer: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." To this Jesus replied: "I say to you, You are Peter [Petros, ‘a stone,’ in the masculine gender], and on this rock-mass [Greek, petra, ‘a rock-mass,’ in the feminine gender] I will build my congregation."—Matt. 16:13-18, NW. so Jesus is the rock-mass

Good View. I said the same years ago, I merely forget, thanks for reminding me.

 

[Polaris]

There are no present Apostles becuase they do not fulfill any of the Apostolic Creiteria.

Sure there are.

Also Notice that the BIble says that the Apostles have BUILT, built is past tense, it does not say they continue to build any foundation.

The passage says "ARE built" and is present tense. Just like if I were to say to you "you are seated in a chair", that means you are presently sitting in a chair even though "seated" on it's own is past tense. As soon as you stand up you are no longer seated in the chair. As soon as the prophets and apostles were taken, the church was no longer built upon apostles and prophets.

These men were given the task of setting up of the foundation of the church.

Actually they were given the task of ministering to the church "till we all come in the unity of the faith".

The foundation of the church (universal church) was laid in the first century. This is why the office of apostle is no longer functioning.

Who says? Did one of the apostles actually teach that apostles would no longer be needed after the first-century?

There was also a spiritual gift of apostle (This is not to be confused with the office they are separate). Among those who had the spiritual gift were James (1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19), Barnabas (Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Corinthians 9:6), Andronicus and Junias (Romans 16:7), possibly Silas and Timothy (1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2:7), and Apollos (1 Corinthians 4:6, 9).

How do you know that none of them were ordained to the office of Apostle?

The gift of prophet was a temporary gift given by the Christ for the laying of the foundation of the universal church.

No, actually they were given the task of ministering to the church "till we all come in the unity of the faith".

So the Lord provided gifted men called prophets who proclaimed messages from God to the people until the canon of Scripture was complete.

Who officially and authoratively declared the cannon of scripture to be complete?

It should be noted that the current teaching of the restoration of prophet and the office of apostle is far from what Scripture describes of the men who held the gift of prophet and the office of apostle. Those who teach the restoration of the office teach that the men who claim to be apostles and prophets should never be spoken against, should never be questioned, because the person who speaks against them is speaking against God. Yet, the Apostle Paul commended the people of Berea for checking what he said against the Word of God to make sure he spoke the truth (Acts 17:10-11).

The prophets and apostles were and are the authorities concerning doctrinal truths, period. Sure people can question them and request clarification of them, but they are the ones chosen by God to teach the truth in its purity and clarify points of doctrine. It was that way in the NT and its that way today.

The Apostle Paul also stated to those in Galatia that if anyone, including himself, should teach another Gospel, that person should be "accursed" (Galatians 1:8-9). In everything, Paul kept pointing people to the Bible as the final authority.

At times Paul referred them to the OT teachings and to Christ's teachings (clearly the "Bible" wasn't around then). However, Paul also recognized and utilized his authority to clarify doctrinal truths and participate in the establisment of church policy and teachings.

The Bible is authorative because it contains teachings of prophets and apostles. Living prophets and apostles are just as authorative as deceased ones. The gospel we (LDS) preach is not "another" gospel, but is the same gospel that Jesus taught.

It should also be noted that Scripture refers to these men in the past tense. In 2 Peter 3:2 and also in Jude 3-4, it states that the people should not stray from the message the apostles gave (past tense). In Hebrews 2:3-4, it also speaks in the past tense of the those who performed (in the past) signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit."

Peter specifically referred to the words of the "holy prophets", likely referring to the prophets of the OT. He was in the very act of giving them counsel, clearly they were supposed to heed his present apostolic message too.

Jude is speaking in reference to corruption that "crept in unawares" in the church, so it makes perfect sense for him to say "contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints".

You've made some significant claims: apostles as a first-century-only office, bible as the culimnation of the church's foundation implying no more need for prophets and revelation; yet you haven't provided any authorative support for these claims. How can you rightfully claim that apostles were no longer a necessary part of the church after the 1st century? Paul states otherwise. How can you rightfully claim that the bible canon eliminates the need of prophets and apostles? What authorative figure made that declaration?

 

[may]

The true church or congregation is likened to a human body, because it has many members but only one head, just as a human body has. The inspired Scriptures, at Ephesians 1:22, 23 (Dy), tell us that God made Christ "head over all the church, which is his body." This church is also compared to a virgin girl engaged to Christ, because as a group the members of the true church are to be closely united to Christ, as a wife is to her husband. Writing to certain members of the church, the apostle Paul said: "I personally promised you in marriage to one husband that I might present you as a chaste virgin to the Christ." (2 Corinthians 11:2; see also Revelation 21:2, 9, 10.) So it is a clean congregation, free from worldly corruption and devoted to its Head, Jesus Christ.

 

[rad_ic_ul]

thank you may!

 

[rad_ic_ul]

Sure there are.



The passage says "ARE built" and is present tense. Just like if I were to say to you "you are seated in a chair", that means you are presently sitting in a chair even though "seated" on it's own is past tense. As soon as you stand up you are no longer seated in the chair. As soon as the prophets and apostles were taken, the church was no longer built upon apostles and prophets.

all that is beside the point! the real reason for the tread is for members to debeate why thy think that it's their religion that has the restoration of truth. not to bedeate successionship, or who built the church. the real question is by what critiria do we decide which religion is adhering as close to the theaching of jesus and the apostles?

Actually they were given the task of ministering to the church "till we all come in the unity of the faith".

the question is then: who today is united in the faith more than the JWs

Who says? Did one of the apostles actually teach that apostles would no longer be needed after the first-century?

8 Love never fails. But whether there are [gifts of] prophesying, they will be done away with; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will be done away with. 9 For we have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially; 10 but when that which is complete arrives, that which is partial will be done away with. 11 When I was a babe, I used to speak as a babe, to think as a babe, to reason as a babe; but now that I have become a man, I have done away with the [traits] of a babe. 12 For at present we see in hazy outline by means of a metal mirror, but then it will be face to face. At present I know partially, but then I shall know accurately even as I am accurately known. 13 Now, however, there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
paul makes it clear that these things will be done away with. who today is adhering to faith, hope, and love, which remain.

The prophets and apostles were and are the authorities concerning doctrinal truths, period. Sure people can question them and request clarification of them, but they are the ones chosen by God to teach the truth in its purity and clarify points of doctrine. It was that way in the NT and its that way today.

as fir apostleship. the critiria for an apostle was to have been among those assembled with the apostles when the misitry of the christ was beening carried out. from his baptism to his ressuraction.

in the presences of the apostles did the gifts come. and only the apostles! i.e. acts 9:34-48;

34​

At this Peter opened his mouth and said: "For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial, 35 but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him. 36 He sent out the word to the sons of Israel to declare to them the good news of peace through Jesus Christ: this One is Lord of all [others]. 37 YOU know the subject that was talked about throughout the whole of Ju·de´a, starting from Gal´i·lee after the baptism that John preached, 38 namely, Jesus who was from Naz´a·reth, how God anointed him with holy spirit and power, and he went through the land doing good and healing all those oppressed by the Devil; because God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all the things he did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem; but they also did away with him by hanging him on a stake. 40 God raised this One up on the third day and granted him to become manifest, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses appointed beforehand by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after his rising from the dead. 42 Also, he ordered us to preach to the people and to give a thorough witness that this is the One decreed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. 43 To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone putting faith in him gets forgiveness of sins through his name."​

44 While Peter was yet speaking about these matters the holy spirit fell upon all those hearing the word. 45 And the faithful ones that had come with Peter who were of those circumcised were amazed, because the free gift of the holy spirit was being poured out also upon people of the nations. 46 For they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God. Then Peter responded: 47 "Can anyone forbid water so that these might not be baptized who have received the holy spirit even as we have?" 48 With that he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they requested him to remain for some days.

and the laying on of thier hands. 1 timothy 4: 14;
14 Do not be neglecting the gift in you that was given you through a prediction and when the body of older men laid their hands upon you.

sense the scriptures say nothing about any others passing on these gifts. when the apostles died. the is no successors. to pass on anything likee it.

make your comments! read annd enjoy!

 

[Katzpur]

As soon as the prophets and apostles were taken, the church was no longer built upon apostles and prophets.

Bingo! The foundation of the Church Christ built suddenly no longer existed. What happens to any structure when its foundation is removed?

all that is beside the point!

No, it's not beside the point. It is the point. Jesus Christ gave authority to the Apostles. For a brief time, they passed that authority on to others, as He had intended. If apostolic succession had continued, the Church would not have fallen into apostasy. Since it did, the apostleship had to be restored.

the real reason for the tread is for members to debeate why thy think that it's their religion that has the restoration of truth. not to bedeate successionship, or who built the church. the real question is by what critiria do we decide which religion is adhering as close to the theaching of jesus and the apostles?

The true Church must teach true doctrines, but it must also be authorized by its founder and have the authority He gave men to act in His name.

Actually they were given the task of ministering to the church "till we all come in the unity of the faith".

the question is then: who today is united in the faith more than the JWs

That's the question? Why didn't somebody tell me? Are you implying that if I could prove the Later-day Saints are more united in the faith than the Jehovah's Witnesses, that would be proof that our Church is true and yours isn't? We're all supposed to come into the unity of the faith -- not as separate denominations, but as united followers of Christ.

Let me ask you something. What happens when a Jehovah's Witness converts to another Church? How do other Jehovah's Witnesses respond to his decision?

sense the scriptures say nothing about any others passing on these gifts. when the apostles died. the is no successors. to pass on anything likee it.

I think that's where we differ.

 

[may]

Bingo!

The true Church must teach true doctrines, but it must also be authorized by its founder and have the authority He gave men to act in His name.

.

matthew 24;45-47 this is the channel and it is alive and very active . and it is being given food at the right time .

 

[rad_ic_ul]

that is true knowledge indeed , and it is right inline with the bible , and yes there is a people right inline with the bible. and those who are feeding from the channel that Jesus is feeding , know just who they are matthew 24;45-47

yes! feeding at the same table indeed. it's a wonderful thing that others don't experience.

 

[may]

yes! feeding at the same table indeed. it's a wonderful thing that others don't experience.

helping christs brothers leads to everlasting life .
"He will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats."—MATTHEW 25:32.

 

[rad_ic_ul]

Bingo! The foundation of the Church Christ built suddenly no longer existed. What happens to any structure when its foundation is removed?

you mis quote me Katzpur!

No, it's not beside the point. It is the point. Jesus Christ gave authority to the Apostles. For a brief time, they passed that authority on to others, as He had intended. If apostolic succession had continued, the Church would not have fallen into apostasy. Since it did, the apostleship had to be restored.

i'm not perfect. show me where in the bible that the apostleship will be restored. and i mean apostleship. bear in mind that apostle is an office not a doctrine.

The true Church must teach true doctrines, but it must also be authorized by its founder and have the authority He gave men to act in His name.

i will have to consider this in its meaning.

That's the question? Why didn't somebody tell me? Are you implying that if I could prove the Later-day Saints are more united in the faith than the Jehovah's Witnesses, that would be proof that our Church is true and yours isn't? We're all supposed to come into the unity of the faith -- not as separate denominations, but as united followers of Christ.

no not at all! but since you quoted the bible text it would be a find place to start.

Let me ask you something. What happens when a Jehovah's Witness converts to another Church? How do other Jehovah's Witnesses respond to his decision?

he has left off united family of freinds. and is no longer one of Jehovah's witnesses.

I think that's where we differ.

respected.

 

[rad_ic_ul]

katzpur. when you quoted me about the foundation being removed you unknowingly where quoting polaris. i was simply replying to his though and forgott my quote tags. i'm sorry for the misunderstanding and confusion i have created!
OK!