I'm sure glad you posted that, Pastor Mike. I got bogged down reading through it all and likewise realized participants were a bit hobbled for discussion.

I didn't see answers to several of the OP statements. One concerns the claim the Church fell into apostasy/heresy upon death of the last original apostle. What do they do with the disciples of the apostles, and the many pastors established in the many churches? The apostles passed revelation of Christ on to them, not hierarchical authority. The authority comes from Christ in us. Also I will point out Paul was not an original apostle, but defined the Church beyond question of the authority put upon him.

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (Petros, piece of a rock), and upon this rock (petra, a mass of rock like an outcrop) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. It appears the Mormons argue against Jesus' prophesy given before Jesus and the apostles died. If it were true the Church fell into apostasy, only in the past century returning to the gospel of Christ, then Hell prevailed. If so the Mormon must claim Jesus' prophesy was false. That is unconscionable.

Nothing destroyed the Church throughout the following centuries. Believers continued to fill the Church, speaking a God gave utterance. Indeed many false teachings came along, like today finding hundreds of books in Christian book stores containing errors. We have sufficient copies of ancient manuscripts from enough sources to know with a high level of certainty exactly what message the original apostles had access to. That those words have been distorted here and there is not evidence the Church collapsed. Although distortions have survived centuries, none of them can possibly change what was originally written.

We also know the meanings of the words of the original languages. There is no more need for translation except for benefit of some remote tribe not yet having a Bible, their language perhaps not known. As for interpretations, when done in a scholarly manner while comparing a verse to the passage, faulty interpretations, determining the meaning of a string of words by combining the best fitting definitions, are easy to detect. When people accept obviously faulty interpretations, the result is a "cult", out of the mainstream of general belief based on the most obvious, logical, reasonable interpretations of verses.

Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Well put, Jim.

Mormon doctrine & teachings seem to be chocked-full of these type of, shall we say, inconsistantcies? And all the LDS church really has to say about them is that Biblical Christians are the one's in the wrong, thereby implyimg the Bible is wrong, which just proves our position all the more.

We must also realize that the average Mormon doesn't have the slightest clue most of the time, as to what their church is really all about. When a loving Christian quotes one of their leaders or something from one of their books, attempting to help them, they are of course hesitant to believe it. And their Bishop or Elders if asked about it, will generally- as with any cult -dismiss it and try to sweep it under the rug, never actually addressing the issue in any substantial way. This is one of the things that makes it so tricky when witnessing to Mormons, in general. It's why it is so important to set guidelines when discussing theology with them.

Their church has re-defined so many terms and word meanings to their own advantage, it's often difficult to hold a substantial, meaningful, conversation with them. The best we can often do is ask for the Holy Spirit to open their blind eyes and deaf ears to the truth, and leave it up to God.

In Christ,
Pastor Mike.