You keep saying this but I haven’t seen you present evidence to prove it. Either prove it or stop saying it.
Because making the claim is on topic, but having to prove it is off topic.
Making the claim is responding to you which would seem would be on topic unless you are penalized for being off topic.
I have started a PM with Alphasquirrel.
If you or CaptainPrudman or Alphasquirrel want to start a thread for me to support what I think is there, I will. Just start the thread. It will IMO be a very strong LDS apologetic (which is not against the rules here, but I do not intend to start such a thread).
It is quite an undertaking and I might as well do it on the public board rather than in PM, but it will need to be your choice… if you are not scared … taunt, taunt …
Can not disagree with two opposite claims.
I have not idea what you are saying “Can not did disagree with two opposite claims.”
I do not know what that says.
Perhaps you mean there is a contradiction.
That many beliefs are found in the ECF and SOME beliefs are newly revealed is not a contradiction.
Putting words on my mouth is sophistry.
How about you support your unsubstantiated claims here, in public? It’s not off-topic to provide evidence for a claim you make.
In the thread, “The Next Prophet or Spokeman of God,” Tom claimed that the Mormon Melchizedek Priesthood was biblical. He was asked to prove it, but he never did.
He did say that is was obviously in the bible, but with no proof.
He did say that asking a Mormon for evidence is an attack on Mormonism.
He did say he couldn’t prove it.
Then he said the evidence he provided provide it. Of course there was no evidence.
He did say the the Mormon Melchizedek Priest was revealed to Joseph Smith and consistent with the bible; of course he had yet to show it from the bible.
Then he said he could show it from the bible, but……never did.
This thread will end with Tom never able to prove his claim that any of the following were believed by the ECFs:
The early Church was Catholic and never Mormon.
Here’s all you need. Enjoy!!
I did not put words in your mouth.
“SOME” was not something I claimed you said.
I claimed you said, “Can not did disagree with two opposite claims.”
I claimed and still claimed that anyone who actually READ what Gazelem and I have been saying would know that what we have been saying was,
“That many beliefs are found in the ECF and SOME beliefs are newly revealed.” Thus your desire to find some contradiction to beat us with has failed.
If you have honestly misread, then fine admit it, but there is no contradiction.
I got my answer from the Mormon website in January. The Mormon Melchizedek Priesthood was revealed to Joseph Smith. It is not biblical or a belief of the early church fathers according to the Mormon Church.
Where does The Church of Jesus Christ state:
A) that the Latter-day Saint Melchizedek Priesthood is not Biblical?
B) that the Latter-day Saint Melchizedek Priesthood is not a belief of the early church fathers?
Thanks in advance.
You also received a Catholic priest and a popular Catholic apologist who claimed that the the Catholic priesthood was the “Melchizedek Priesthood.”
There were no quotes from the early church fathers that said they held the Melchizedek Priesthood.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.