The Next Prophet or Spokeman of God


#250

If you want to get an impression of what the LDS leaders are like watch their most recent press conference last week held right after Nelson was made the new president of the Mormon church. If you listen to the answers they gave to the press you will see just why so many LDS are leaving. They get asked a couple of questions about ongoing problems in the LDS church, and they either dodge the question altogether and go off on nonsensical tangents. They sound totally out of touch with what’s going on in the church. Seriously, watch this thing and get an idea of just how frustrating it is for LDS to get good answers to tough questions, and even not-so-tough questions as well.


#251

God was a man but was eternal, and Christ was a man but eternal, and all mankind are eternal. The Melchizedek Priesthood is eternal and given by God as he delegated authority. Adam as the first eternal spirit to live on earth, as oppose to Kolob, received the Melchizedek Priesthood. The Book of Mormon refers to the Melchizedek Priesthood as ordained from God. All the Prophets of biblical history had the Melchizedek Priesthood as it was passed from one to the next. Christ had it and gave it to his Apostles until…………wait for it…………the Great Apostasy!!!
It is clear the Mormon Melchizedek Priesthood predates Christ and is therefore not Christian.

The Mormon belief in a Melchizedek Priesthood, as Mormon scripture calls it, is clearly not biblical. Whether the Bible references are read as literary (Catholic) or literal (Mormon), it is not there.


#252

These guys are used to reading a teleprompter at General Conference under controlled conditions, but off-the-cuff can be quite revealing.


#253

Thank you for sharing this. It is indeed revealing.


#254

Yes I was actually embarrassed for them their answers were so bad, like they didn’t even hear or comprehend the questions. And these are the top three guys in the whole church. Not good.


#255

I watched too!
What I thought was most important for the anti-Mormons here at Catholic Answers is that the position that LDS scholars have been trying to explain to you for a long time was mentioned by the LDS leaders.
LDS do not believe in infallibility of our leaders. Concerning those who God can work with on the earth, Nelson - “Everyone has been imperfect except His beloved son Jesus Christ.” Oaks - “We don’t believe in infallibility.”

So, since you all so enjoyed that video, we can now dispense with the quoting of a past LDS leader and the requirement that I believe what you think they believed. I stand upon the shoulders of great men and I believe what they have taught me to believe, not what some singular quote you might hope represents my beliefs says.

Thanks for the link!!!
Charity, TOm


#256

TOm, Catholics don’t consider the Pope infallible except in the teaching of faith and morals. He is not infallible at any other time.

Here is an article that will help you understand.

https://www.catholic.com/tract/papal-infallibility


#257

Oh Tom, we can always count on you for some good spin. You should really consider working for the LDS church PR department.

Hey everybody, Tom says pay no attention to anything the leadership of the LDS says in public because after all, they are not infallible. None of it matters, no matter how idiotic, rambling, or out of touch they sound.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.


#258

Oh! You misunderstand. Read LDS works. watch LDS conferences (press or general).
Just don’t act like every word is straight from God. God communicates with His prophets, but they imperfectly communicate with us.
Charity, TOm


#259

If they imperfectly communicate with their people, then how can they be prophets?


#260

I don’t much about the Mormons, but I do know that one of my cousins was married to one, and she said it was like a cult, and she had to run away from him with her kids because of the Mormon Church.

I know it is considered a pseudo-Christian religion, but what do Mormons consider themselves? Christians?

Obviously they would never think they are part of a cult or non-Christians, or would they?


#261

It depends. Some say they are Christian and others say they are not. They have a new prophet now so I guess it will depend on what he tells them to think.


#262

No Tom, it is you who misunderstands, and it is you who is deflecting with tangents that have nothing to do with the point of my original post. I never said, nor implied, that everything that comes out of an LDS prophet’s mouth is to be taken as gospel truth. But when they conduct a press conference like that which so clearly demonstrates just how clueless they are about the problems in the church, and just how badly equipped they are to handle them, it’s quite obvious that in no way do these men reflect anything remotely near what one would expect of a true prophet and leader of a religion. This is not an isolated example either. You can choose to ignore the obvious in order to protect your belief in these men as prophets, but prophets they are not. They are false prophets. They are just men who rose through the ranks and were next in line to fill the void.


#263

I don’t think perfection (in communication or otherwise) is a requirement for prophethood. Where do you see that? Perhaps that is why we have so many exMormons? I also learn a great deal from less than perfect communication. I value such things greatly.
Charity, TOm


#264

I did misunderstand you, but I was not deflecting.
I thought you were ridiculing a less than perfect press conference.
I had no idea that you thought you saw proof (or even evidence) that Pres. Nelson was not a prophet of God. I didn’t realize that was your point. That may be my fault, but I did misunderstand.
I think with a hostile press, female priest, gay marriage, and loss of faith are tough questions.
Perhaps it is just tough to give God’s words to the secular media.
Moses was not eloquent and was slow of speech, so perhaps you have no idea what a prophet should sound like. Its right there in the Bible.

I saw nothing disconfirming for my faith, but I did see a refutation of a common theme here at CA so I pointed it out.

Can I ask a couple of questions.
1.When will most of the Catholic Church allow folls in same sex marriages to partake of the Eucharist because there is no presumption that they are in mortal sin any longer?
2.When will Bishops ordain female priests without any reprisal and generally with recognition from the Vatican?
I think the first is coming during my lifetime. Don’t know about the second.

Charity, TOm


#265
  1. Never. The church is very clear on this. Sexual activity outside a valid marriage, which is between a man & woman, is condemned for all not just those with SSA.
    Q. When will the LDS allow it?

  2. In the last 1988 years it has not happened and the Magisterium has been clear on why.
    Q. When the LDS allow for women to have the priesthood?


#266

No that’s not why there are so many ex-Mo’s. It’s not a matter of the prophets being ‘less than perfect’ (although there is a huge difference between being ‘less than perfect’ and a conniving, adulterous, pedophile conman like Joseph Smith). By and large the reason there are so many ex-Mo’s is because they were lied to their whole lives about so many things in the church that they just couldn’t believe it anymore. And then when they tried to get answers from their leaders, the answers were so bad they finally realized there were no good answers. When they found out the truth was far different (and worse) than what they were taught, it became clear that pretty much everything uniquely Mormon was a lie. That’s why they leave, and that is a pretty universal story. So what you put so mildly as ‘less than perfect’ is actually much, much worse. You need to make a little effort to understand the agony many ex-Mo’s endured as they found there way out of the church.

One main area where you and I disagree is that you believe you are standing on the shoulders of great men (I assume you’re talking about people like JS and BY), whereas the more I learn about Joseph Smith the more I believe him to be a conman, fraud, and all-around terrible person. And the same goes for BY. The historical evidence is sharply in my favor.


#267

None of the words of your alleged “prophets” come “straight from God.” If they did, they’d know how to answer the questions presented to them by members of your church and by anyone else.


#268

Tom seems to have recently discovered that Catholics believe in venial and mortal sin; and seems very smug about his new knowledge. He will be glad to teach you all he knows about the subject while not taking the time to actually fully understand it.


#269

Knowledgeable and Charitable Catholics have a different opinion of Joseph Smith. Catholic Scholar Stephen H Webb said the following:

By any measurement, Joseph Smith was a remarkable person. His combination of organizational acumen with spiritual originality and personal decorum and modesty is rare in the history of religion. He was so steadfast in his ability to inspire men and women through times of great hardship that none of those who knew him could claim to fully understand him. He knew more about theology and philosophy than it was reasonable for anyone in his position to know, as if he were dipping into the deep, collective unconsciousness of Christianity with a very long pen. He read the Bible in ways so novel that he can be considered a theological innocent—he expanded and revised the biblical narrative without questioning its authority—yet he brusquely overturned ancient and impregnable metaphysical assumptions with the aplomb of an assistant professor. For someone so charismatic, he was exceptionally humble, even ordinary, and he delegated authority with the wisdom of a man looking far into the future for the well-being of his followers. It would be tempting to compare him to Mohammed—who also combined pragmatic political skill and a genius for religious innovation—if he were not so deeply Christian. (Stephen Webb, Jesus Christ, Eternal God: Heavenly Flesh and the Metaphysics of Matter (Oxford University Press, 2012)


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.