Comments on: New Pope

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 00:06:09 +0000

Actually, I tend to agree with the Articles of Faith, and believe that organizationally, our Church is quite similar to the Church of Christ in the Meridian of Time.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:42:37 +0000

True, but all those versions of the Catholic church are linked to each other directly.

None of the other churches set up by Jesus are linked in the same way. Organisationally, they are all different churches.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:39:28 +0000

Not exactly the same, no. But of course, the Roman Catholic Church is quite different now from the Catholic Church in, say the year 1300, or the year 1000. In fact, it’s rather different from the Catholic Church of 175 years ago. So how much continuity are you looking for? What I was pointing out were continuities from ancient times, that can be found in the scriptures.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:35:08 +0000

At the same time, ltbugaf, Rick has a point. The church as it exists today has never existed before at any other time in history. It may be Jesus’ church, but that does not mean his church at other times was the same as it is now.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 22:37:31 +0000

Rick, my remarks are addressed to those who believe in the veracity of the scriptures I’m referring to—not to those who don’t believe in God. Obviously, I don’t expect such a person to accept the scriptural evidence I give as to how old the faith is. What I’m saying is that if you do believe in the content of the scriptures, then you probably ought to view our faith as being very old.

As for those who believe all scripture is just a pack of lies, I’m not sure why they even take interest in the topic.

By: rick

rick — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:11:27 +0000

Prove it.
What you just said is the party line of the church – the best sounding answer.

Incredible claims (such as your post) require incredible evidence.

Until further proof arrives, I’m going with the 175 year-old church theory.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 02:14:33 +0000

Men since the time of Adam have been exercising faith in Jesus Christ, repenting, being baptized by immersion for the remission of sins, and receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Thousands of years ago men were ordained to the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods. It looks to me like an old faith, not a young one.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Considering the Catholic church is nearly two thousand years old and other religions are thousands of years old, I don’t think our 175-year-old church can be considered an adult yet.

By: Mary Siever

Mary Siever — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

We grow up fast. Besides that we are the RESTORED Church, so we jsut look young, but we are really much older than that.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Our church isn't older than 175 years. It is much different than what existed at the meridian of time or in more simpler forms previous to that.

Alison, that's not a good analogy since all persons (adults and children) are young bodies with very old spirits. ;)