Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The link below is a 90 minute sermon that I heard today. I apologize for the length but feel free to fast forward if you need to. Let me know if you can download it and it plays on Windows Media player. https://www.transferbigfiles.com/492...5JtMYOag%3d%3d
Best wishes always in the continued search for truth,
Bob
Katzpur,
Today's Charlotte Observer had the following article on its front page (click on the link.)
Church: Mormons can't lead Scouts - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771940/church-mormons-cant-lead-scouts.html - broken link)
(By the way, I am thrilled at learning 2 days ago how to establish a link. There is great power in knowing how to use the internet.)
As you are aware, I personally feel more closely aligned with Mormons than with the Presbyterian Denomination. The only thread I established so far, "Are denominations in keeping with god’s will? clearly shows that my own answer to that question is "NO'" My own church is one that I believe is truly non-denominational in that we only believe in the New Testament for our doctrinal beliefs. We do not believe in proselytizing others to believe as we do, since every person answers to God for his own belief and behavior. I believe that Mormons are much more faithful to the teachings of Jesus than most of the thousands of denominations that claim to be branches of Christ's church.
Best wishes in the search for higher truth,
Bob
Katzpur,
Today's Charlotte Observer had the following article on its front page (click on the link.) Church: Mormons can't lead Scouts - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771940/church-mormons-cant-lead-scouts.html - broken link)
(By the way, I am thrilled at learning 2 days ago how to establish a link. There is great power in knowing how to use the internet.)
As you are aware, I personally feel more closely aligned with Mormons than with the Presbyterian Denomination. On this website, the only thread I established so far, "Are denominations in keeping with god’s will? clearly shows that my own answer to that question is "NO." My own church is one that I believe is truly non-denominational in that we only believe in the New Testament for our doctrinal beliefs. We do not believe in proselytizing others to believe as we do, since every person answers to God for his own beliefs and behaviors. I believe that Mormons are much more faithful to the teachings of Jesus than most of the thousands of denominations that claim to be branches of Christ's church.
Best wishes in the search for higher truth,
Bob
Katzpur,
Today's Charlotte Observer had the following article on its front page (click on the link.) Church: Mormons can't lead Scouts - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771940/church-mormons-cant-lead-scouts.html - broken link)
(By the way, I am thrilled at learning 2 days ago how to establish a link. There is great power in knowing how to use the internet.)
As you are aware, I personally feel more closely aligned with Mormons than with the Presbyterian Denomination. On this website, the only thread I established so far, "Are denominations in keeping with god’s will? clearly shows that my own answer to that question is "NO." My own church is one that I believe is truly non-denominational in that we only believe in the New Testament for our doctrinal beliefs. We do not believe in proselytizing others to believe as we do, since every person answers to God for his own beliefs and behaviors. I believe that Mormons are much more faithful to the teachings of Jesus than most of the thousands of denominations that claim to be branches of Christ's church.
Best wishes in the search for higher truth,
Bob
Is that the huge church on 51 that looks like Supermans house?
Katzpur,
Today's Charlotte Observer had the following article on its front page (click on the link.) Church: Mormons can't lead Scouts - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771940/church-mormons-cant-lead-scouts.html - broken link)
(By the way, I am thrilled at learning 2 days ago how to establish a link. There is great power in knowing how to use the internet.)
As you are aware, I personally feel more closely aligned with Mormons than with the Presbyterian Denomination. On this website, the only thread I established so far, "Are denominations in keeping with god’s will? clearly shows that my own answer to that question is "NO." My own church is one that I believe is truly non-denominational in that we only believe in the New Testament for our doctrinal beliefs. We do not believe in proselytizing others to believe as we do, since every person answers to God for his own beliefs and behaviors. I believe that Mormons are much more faithful to the teachings of Jesus than most of the thousands of denominations that claim to be branches of Christ's church.
Best wishes in the search for higher truth,
Bob
Sorry to jump in here Bob. I am Mormon as well and a Boy Scout Scoutmaster in an LDS troop. The ironic thing about the story is that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is by far the largest sponsor of the Boy Scouts of America. The Mormon church long ago adopted Scouting as the major activity arm of their young mens program because the values and morals taught to young men in Boy Scouts are in harmony with Christian teachings. What I would say is that I dont think there is necessarily anything wrong with them limiting leadership positions to church members, because they sponsor the troop. In fact there are tens of thousands of Mormon Boy Scout troops that essentially do the same thing, as a matter of course. We do occasionally have non-LDS parents for assistant Scoutmasters, but generally not, by circumstance. It is more common in our Cub Scout programs, which this story was really about. What is wrong is their choice of words, and the fact they would allow other denominations, just not Mormons, among others Im sure. The other thing is that Scouting is a global program that encompasses other religions, besides as they said; "historical Christianity".
Katzpur,
Today's Charlotte Observer had the following article on its front page (click on the link.) Church: Mormons can't lead Scouts - CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771940/church-mormons-cant-lead-scouts.html - broken link)
Gotta love those "real Christians."
Quote:
As you are aware, I personally feel more closely aligned with Mormons than with the Presbyterian Denomination. On this website, the only thread I established so far, "Are denominations in keeping with god’s will? clearly shows that my own answer to that question is "NO." My own church is one that I believe is truly non-denominational in that we only believe in the New Testament for our doctrinal beliefs. We do not believe in proselytizing others to believe as we do, since every person answers to God for his own beliefs and behaviors. I believe that Mormons are much more faithful to the teachings of Jesus than most of the thousands of denominations that claim to be branches of Christ's church.
You know, Bob, when you started that thread, I really wasn't sure what you were getting at. As a matter of fact, it was probably not until it was a two or three weeks old that it suddenly dawned on me. (I know, I can be slow sometimes. ) Now that I do understand and since you brought it up again on this particular thread, I would like to respond to your comment that you believe your church to be "truly non-denominational." I hope you will not interpret my remarks as being disrespectful, because they aren't intended to be.
It's just that, from my perspective as a Latter-day Saint, there is really no such thing as a non-denominational church. When I think of the Methodist Church, for example, I think of a group of congregations that have certain doctrinal beliefs in common. I'm not really sure how the Methodist Church, or any other Protestant denomination for that matter, is governed, but I would imagine that there has to be some way in which a new Methodist congregation, for instance, is established and tied to the larger group of Methodist Churches, and that when a person attends a Methodist Church, he or she can pretty much count on hearing doctrine that would be recognizable as "Methodist" as opposed to "Presbyterian" or "Baptist." Obviously, I am aware that all Protestant Churches have certain beliefs in common, but there must be certain passages of scripture that each different denomination interprets differently. Am I wrong in assuming that any church that calls itself a Methodist Church, for instance, would interpret the scriptures in pretty much the same way and that it would interpret them in a slightly different way from a Presbyterian or Baptist Church?
Then there are what you refer to as "non-denominational" churches. Unless I'm mistaken, these are the churches that simply call themselves "Christian Churches." I'm assuming that the pastors who preach at these churches have graduated from a theological seminary or divinity college. I'm thinking that most of these colleges were founded by one denomination or another and hire a faculty comprised of men who have a background in one of the various Protestant denominations. Once the pastor completes his course of study, he is ordained a minister and may either be hired to preach at a congregation who recognizes his degree as being consistent with the doctrines it espouses. He may, on the other hand, wish to distance himself from any of the known denominations and simply find a congregation who is looking for a "non-denominational" pastor. Then, presenting himself as simply a Christian pastor, he may preach directly from the scriptures without having to be bound to any strictly denominational interpretations of any doctrines that he cannot agree with. So whereas you may have tens of thousands of Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist congregations falling under the umbrella of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist denominations respectively, each "non-denominational church," in my opinion, is essentially just a denomination comprised of a single congregation. You still have one man teaching his own personal interpretation of the scriptures, focusing on some passages and glossing over others. I fail to see how that is any better than several thousand pastors all teaching the Methodist interpretation of the scriptures.
Since we're talking about all of this in a thread about Mormonism, I'll explain the LDS position on the subject. To us, teaching correct doctrines, interpreting the scriptures as they were meant to be interpreted, reconciling those verses which may appear to be at odds with each other, etc. is only part of what gives a church its validity. The other ingredient, which is every bit as important, is that the Church be approved by God as being His. We as Latter-day Saints, believe that Jesus Christ initially gave Peter "the keys" of the Kingdom of Heaven. We believe that these "keys" represent the authority to preside over the Church, to perform ordinances (aka sacraments) that were established by the original Head of the Church Himself. We don't believe that a person can simply take it upon himself to administer these ordinances. Rather he must be called and ordained to the priesthood by the laying on of hands by one who already has that authority. That's not the same thing as being ordained by the dean of the seminary, who may be a learned man but who doesn't have any more God-given authority than the person he's ordaining. Consider the following scriptures, all from the New Testament:
Mark 3:14-15 "And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils."
Luke 9:1-2 "Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick."
Luke 10:1 "After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whether he himself would come."
John 15:16 "Jesus said to the disciples, 'Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."
Acts 6:5-6 "And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch: whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them."
1 Timothy 4:14 "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."
Titus 1:5 "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee."
Hebrews 5:1-4 "For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."
Let's look at the last of these passages. How did Aaron get his priesthood? He was called of God through Moses, who was a prophet. Moses -- who himself held the authority, which he could pass on to another individual -- formally ordained him. All of the offices in the Savior's original Church were passed on from one person to another in the same way. A man was chosen by those who had the authority to do so and then ordained to his calling. That was the divine pattern in Christ's day and should be the pattern today.
So, even if the pastor of a "non-denominational church" happened to interpret every scripture in the New Testament correctly, unless he had received his priesthood from someone who could ultimately trace his priesthood all the way back to Jesus Christ, he would not have the authority to baptize, confirm, heal the sick, perform a marriage, or ordain anyone else. And when it gets right down to it, we don't believe that any non-denominational pastor today is interpreting every passage of scripture accurately; if he was, he'd recognize himself that he is lacking the authority to do these things.
You know, Bob, when you started that thread, I really wasn't sure what you were getting at. As a matter of fact, it was probably not until it was a two or three weeks old that it suddenly dawned on me. (I know, I can be slow sometimes. ) Now that I do understand and since you brought it up again on this particular thread, I would like to respond to your comment that you believe your church to be "truly non-denominational." I hope you will not interpret my remarks as being disrespectful, because they aren't intended to be.
It's just that, from my perspective as a Latter-day Saint, there is really no such thing as a non-denominational church. When I think of the Methodist Church, for example, I think of a group of congregations that have certain doctrinal beliefs in common. I'm not really sure how the Methodist Church, or any other Protestant denomination for that matter, is governed, but I would imagine that there has to be some way in which a new Methodist congregation, for instance, is established and tied to the larger group of Methodist Churches, and that when a person attends a Methodist Church, he or she can pretty much count on hearing doctrine that would be recognizable as "Methodist" as opposed to "Presbyterian" or "Baptist." Obviously, I am aware that all Protestant Churches have certain beliefs in common, but there must be certain passages of scripture that each different denomination interprets differently. Am I wrong in assuming that any church that calls itself a Methodist Church, for instance, would interpret the scriptures in pretty much the same way and that it would interpret them in a slightly different way from a Presbyterian or Baptist Church?
Then there are what you refer to as "non-denominational" churches. Unless I'm mistaken, these are the churches that simply call themselves "Christian Churches." I'm assuming that the pastors who preach at these churches have graduated from a theological seminary or divinity college. I'm thinking that most of these colleges were founded by one denomination or another and hire a faculty comprised of men who have a background in one of the various Protestant denominations. Once the pastor completes his course of study, he is ordained a minister and may either be hired to preach at a congregation who recognizes his degree as being consistent with the doctrines it espouses. He may, on the other hand, wish to distance himself from any of the known denominations and simply find a congregation who is looking for a "non-denominational" pastor. Then, presenting himself as simply a Christian pastor, he may preach directly from the scriptures without having to be bound to any strictly denominational interpretations of any doctrines that he cannot agree with. So whereas you may have tens of thousands of Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist congregations falling under the umbrella of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist denominations respectively, each "non-denominational church," in my opinion, is essentially just a denomination comprised of a single congregation. You still have one man teaching his own personal interpretation of the scriptures, focusing on some passages and glossing over others. I fail to see how that is any better than several thousand pastors all teaching the Methodist interpretation of the scriptures.
Since we're talking about all of this in a thread about Mormonism, I'll explain the LDS position on the subject. To us, teaching correct doctrines, interpreting the scriptures as they were meant to be interpreted, reconciling those verses which may appear to be at odds with each other, etc. is only part of what gives a church its validity. The other ingredient, which is every bit as important, is that the Church be approved by God as being His. We as Latter-day Saints, believe that Jesus Christ initially gave Peter "the keys" of the Kingdom of Heaven. We believe that these "keys" represent the authority to preside over the Church, to perform ordinances (aka sacraments) that were established by the original Head of the Church Himself. We don't believe that a person can simply take it upon himself to administer these ordinances. Rather he must be called and ordained to the priesthood by the laying on of hands by one who already has that authority. That's not the same thing as being ordained by the dean of the seminary, who may be a learned man but who doesn't have any more God-given authority than the person he's ordaining. Consider the following scriptures, all from the New Testament:
Mark 3:14-15 "And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils."
Luke 9:1-2 "Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick."
Luke 10:1 "After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whether he himself would come."
John 15:16 "Jesus said to the disciples, 'Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."
Acts 6:5-6 "And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch: whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them."
1 Timothy 4:14 "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."
Titus 1:5 "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee."
Hebrews 5:1-4 "For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."
Let's look at the last of these passages. How did Aaron get his priesthood? He was called of God through Moses, who was a prophet. Moses -- who himself held the authority, which he could pass on to another individual -- formally ordained him. All of the offices in the Savior's original Church were passed on from one person to another in the same way. A man was chosen by those who had the authority to do so and then ordained to his calling. That was the divine pattern in Christ's day and should be the pattern today.
So, even if the pastor of a "non-denominational church" happened to interpret every scripture in the New Testament correctly, unless he had received his priesthood from someone who could ultimately trace his priesthood all the way back to Jesus Christ, he would not have the authority to baptize, confirm, heal the sick, perform a marriage, or ordain anyone else. And when it gets right down to it, we don't believe that any non-denominational pastor today is interpreting every passage of scripture accurately; if he was, he'd recognize himself that he is lacking the authority to do these things.
Katzpur,
I believe If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
Katzpur,
My computer acted up when it submitted the above post before I had finished it.
I believe you are right when you say that individuals who are trained in denominational seminaries are likely to adhere to the doctrines of that particular denomination; also that the typical
"non-denominal" trainee will present his personal interpretation of scriptures as being correct.
On the other hand Roman Catholics laud tracing their background all the way back to the time of the Apostle Peter. I happen to agree with Martin Luther when he risked his life to proclaim that the Holy Bible should take preference over Popes and Councils and their traditions, which often led to corruptible practices.
As much as I admire some Mormons for their individual character traits, I must admit that I do not trust Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon in doctrinal issues.
When it comes to doctrines, I believe that the Gold Standard would be the admonition of our Saviour when he said in John 7:17, "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself." If we are truly committed to doing the will of our Father in Heaven, I believe that is the way to gain the approval of God.
Best wishes in the continual search for truth,
Bob
Last edited by Robert M Prince; 10-20-2010 at 09:58 AM..
Reason: typos
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) Now that I do understand and since you brought it up again on this particular thread, I would like to respond to your comment that you believe your church to be "truly non-denominational." I hope you will not interpret my remarks as being disrespectful, because they aren't intended to be. 