Marikina, my beloved hometown, was regarded by many Filipinos as the “shoe capital of the Philippines”. Here, shoes are being compared with the finest footwear of Italy and regarded as an ingredient of total elegance and self make-over. The largest leather made shoes in the world was displayed at the city’s Sports Arena, and many people are trying to visit and take some pictures with it.
Aside of the finest footwear of the country, Marikina also won the title “the cleanest city” in the republic. As a matter of fact, plenty of market places scattered all over the Philippines cannot be compared with the city’s Public Market when it comes to cleanliness. Marikina Public Market was well-organized by the government and vendors themselves are regulated by the discipline they earned from succeeding administrations. Thus, Marikina was regarded by its neighboring cities as the home of the disciplined people. However, the green city was suddenly spotted with a kind of dirt came from its religious sphere. Because at the heart of my hometown, a building was erected to be a worship center for a congregation established by a man named Arsenio Ferriol – a man who calls himself as the endtime apostle of the Church of Christ. His group was famous by their street preachings with matching some offering bags surrounding everywhere in the vicinity of the project area. Sometimes, they can be seen in public vehicles
Arsenio Ferriol, the Founder of the Pentecostal Missionary Church of Christ.
like buses and jeeps and sometimes knocking at your own door bringing with them some envelops where you can put your donations to the ministry. So, if you are a lawyer or a doctor, or an accountant, and you are assigned to be a part of a missionary activity in a public market, you have no choice but to carry an offering bag and ask donations from those non-believers walking in front of you – a practice never taught anywhere in the Holy Scriptures.
Arsenio Ferriol, the leader and founder of the so-called “Pentecostal Missionary Church of Christ” or “the 4th Watch”, is just one of those false and self-proclaimed apostles of the modern Christianity. Other examples are Renato Carillo of “Jesus Is Our Shield”, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the Mormon Church, the Charismatic apostles, and finally the Pope, who calls himself “Prince of the apostles”. Why did I believe that these so-called “apostles” are frauds and self-proclaimed apostles? Because if we will try to look deeper in the Bible, we will learn that apostleship is not just a kind of religious office which anyone can attach to their own names anytime they want, or just because they have preaching talent. The line of the apostleship passed through according to some strict procedures and standards mentioned in the Bible, except, of course, those twelve individuals personally chosen by our Lord Jesus Christ. Standards which I think cannot be applied with those pretending apostles in our age. What are these procedures and standards for choosing an apostle? The Book of Acts explains;
And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.
Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. (Acts 1:15-26)
When Judas Iscariote was removed from his office because of his foolishness, and that the rest of the apostles decided to choose someone who will fill the vacancy, a procedure of election was set and the candidates were chosen based upon a standard written in verse 21 and 22, where it says;
Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
To choose an apostle, it is necessary that the candidate should be a witnessed unto the life of Christ during His entire ministry. Question: is there anyone in our age that fits with this standard? Obviously, there’s none. Someone might ask me, “what about Barnabas and Paul”? Of course these two men were also regarded by the Scriptures as apostles. Paul, as we all know, was chosen personally by the Lord during his journey to Damascus. Barnabas, Paul’s partner was also a chosen one, but unlike Paul, he received his election in front of the members of the Church. Accordingly, he was elected by the Holy Spirit through an audible voice. In the book of Acts it says;
Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. (Acts 13:1-3).
Paul and Barnabas are personally chosen by God and confirmed through the laying of hands by the very apostles chosen during the ministry of Christ. (Galatians 2:9). Therefore, based upon these standards and procedures, no one can be declared as apostles unless he literally witnessed the life and ministry of Christ or was called by God in the same manner as of Paul and Barnabas. Its also important that the candidates should be confirmed by the very apostles of Christ.
Question: Is it rightful to say that those pretending apostles of our time
Renato Carillo of "Jesus Is Our Shield".
are true apostles? Of course, they can’t be! That’s why I’m saying that these apostles are fraud. They are fake and liars. Mr. Arsenio Ferriol of the so-called “4th Watch” is a false apostle – he who teaches his members to become beggars in front of the unbelievers; a kind of teaching very much contrary with the works of the true apostles of Christ;
Because that for his name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles. (III John 1:7)
The Bishop of Rome who regards himself as “Prince of the apostles” and that man Renato Carillo who asked his members to purchase the unbiblical “prayer cloth”. And finally, Joseph Smith, a man considered as an apostle by the Mormon Church, and since he was an apostle and that apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28), so Mormons say that people will appear before Christ and Joseph Smith on the Judgement Day.
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (II Corinthians 11:14-15)
So, is it mean that the last day congregation of God doesn’t have an
The 12 Apostles of the Mormon Church
apostle? God forbid. In order for us to be consider as a true Church of God, we must be completed in spiritual gifts. All the apostles, from Peter to Barnabas, were already dead, and there’s no one in our time that can comply with the biblical standards of being an apostle, as what we have already proven. So, who is our living apostle? Our holy and genuine apostle? In the book of Hebrews it says;
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; (Hebrew 3:1)
.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Hi. You write: Question: is there anyone in our age that fits with this standard? Obviously, there’s none. Someone might ask me, “what about Barnabas and Paul”? Of course these two men were also regarded by the Scriptures as apostles. Paul, as we all know, was chosen personally by the Lord during his journey to Damascus. Barnabas, Paul’s partner was also a chosen one,
Therefore, based upon these standards and procedures, no one can be declared as apostles unless he literally witnessed the life and ministry of Christ or was called by God in the same manner as of Paul and Barnabas. Its also important that the candidates should be confirmed by the very apostles of Christ.
Sounds like you’re contradicting yourself – you first say that any true Apostle, MUST have seen Christ’s resurrection and been there during His ministry; THEN you say BUT a true Apostle can also be ‘selected’ or ‘called’ by God, as were Paul and Barnabas. That’s what your write. How, may I ask, can you have it both ways? DS
Of course, there’s no contradiction. The election of the twelve and the election of Paul and Barnabas are both biblical and correct procedures of being apostles. The successor of Judas Iscariote was chosen according to the standard set by the remaining eleven. Their standard was correct and reasonable. But this procedure is not better than the apostolic election made BY God Himself.
Now, anybody can say, “God Himself anointed me!”. But the question is, are they confirmed by the very apostles of Christ like what happened to Matthias and Paul and Barnabas?
Though i understood your points, I may say that they are not as effective to convince a typical reader like me.
1. You said, that to be an apostle, one must be a witness of Christ’s ministry – but you made an exemption for Paul.
Of which, you invalidated your first rule to be an apostle.
2. In your comment reply, you said that Paul was confirmed by other apostles of Christ. How about the successor of Paul, and the successor of that successor, and the people after that. They were not confirmed by the first batch of apostles of Jesus. Would you say that they are no longer credible to claim apostleship?
Remember! The church is of God. And Christ uses His blood to pay for it. So, do you think the TRUE Church disappears after the first batch of apostles died? Luke 11:49, God continues to send. He said SOME will be persecuted, but not ALL. If one claims to be an apostle, let him prove it by his fruits. What is the true prrof? 1 Corinthians 9:2 . The members. If the members does not leave his earthly desire, he is a false one. If they live in holiness, then he is.
Good day.
First of all, it is not my power to convince those people who put a little time to read some articles in this site, but I’m grateful.
Like what I said in this post, “The line of the apostleship passed through according to some strict procedures and standards mentioned in the Bible…” and the incidence happened to Paul is included here, not only because the election of Paul was written in the Bible (which is the basis of every practice of faith and its teachings) but because the One who made Paul and Barnabas to be apostles is above all rules and standards. But though Paul was chosen by means of special election, God directed him to the rest of the disciples (and to the Church) for confirmation. And actually, no apostle was installed without being presented to those original apostles.
According to I Corinthians 4:9 “For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.” The time of Paul is the last batch of the time of the apostleship in the Church because the penning of the gospel was almost done during their time, and also the building of the foundation of the Church (the reason of electing apostles (I Corinthians 12:28). The Church is already formed and we have nothing to do but to be part of it. Past apostles, although they were dead physically, their voices can still be heard in our congregational meetings by reading their writings. And don’t worry if we doesn’t have a visible apostle right now because the Bible declared that the Church still have a Living Apostle in their midst and that is Jesus Christ. (Hebrews 3:1) I will tell you… Its better to have Him as the Apostle of the Church than receiving a pretending apostle in our period.
Latter-day Saints believe that the priesthood was restored to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery by John the Baptist followed then by Peter, James, and John who appeared unto them. Let us not forget too that Joseph saw Christ personally. Joseph became the prophet, and had the priesthood authority–given by the apostles under Christ’s ministry– to select apostles under the guidance of God. That line of priesthood authority still continues today. Whether or not you believe it doesn’t matter, it still meets your criteria: he was personally called by God and Christ and was given the authority by the laying on of hands by Christ’s apostles.The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is a legitimate body of apostles according to your reasoning.
By the way, I still haven’t received a response to a comment I wrote on an earlier post of yours about Latter-day Saints when I pointed out a poor argument of yours concerning early 19th century New York publishing law. I’m eager for that response as well a challenge from you to me to answer any of the other points you brought up. I’m just a college sophomore, it shouldn’t be too intimidating.
“The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion.” Proverbs 28:1
What priesthood? The Holy Scriptures stated that human priesthood which was given only to the House of Levi had already ceased from continuing. (Heb.7:23). Sorry to say this, but Joseph Smith lied all of his followers. The Bible, that legitimate book of God, tells us that we have only one priest who made to be the everlasting priest in the heavenly sanctuary. Human priesthood was discontinued BECAUSE the Church need such a priest who will live forever and that death is powerless to stop him from continuing. Joseph Smith also told his members that the Father appeared to him, and that’s a lie because the Father never shows Himself to anyone according to Christ, not even to Moses. So how could his statements be true and believable? Smith is a liar. He speaks contrary to what the Bible said. His authority is only pretension. David Whitmer testified that all these priesthood stuff was formulated only in the mind of Sydney Rigdon and Smith entertained it in order to prove his allegations. Wanna see the documentation? Read this –> An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer, 1887.
Well you definitely raised several points that I will try to address, not speaking on behalf of the Church but by my own understanding. Please, from now on can we both keep it to a respectable writing tone so we can “come now, and…reason together?” David Whitmer is a particularly interesting character in the history of the Church. One of the main reasons he left the Church was because he believed Joseph Smith had gone astray and did not believe in the revelations he received after 1836, several years after the founding of the church. It’s true, he had his issues with the church, but for some reason he never denied having seen the gold plates. One of the strongest of these testimonies was given just shortly before his death in a letter he penned to his local newspaper, the Richmond Conservator:
“It having been represented by one John Murphy, of Polo, Caldwell County, Mo., that I, in a conversation with him last summer, denied my testimony as one of the three witnesses to the ‘Book of Mormon.’
“To the end, therefore, that he may understand me now, if he did not then; and that the world may know the truth, I wish now, standing as it were, in the very sunset of life, and in the fear of God, once for all to make this public statement:
“That I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof, which has so long since been published with that Book, as one of the three witnesses. Those who know me best, well know that I have always adhered to that testimony. And that no man may be misled or doubt my present views in regard to the same, I do again affirm the truth of all my statements, as then made and published.
“‘He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear’; it was no delusion! What is written is written, and he that readeth let him understand.”
His problem was he became, like most who leave the church, offended or fell to a spell of temptation. The fact that he still believes in the Book of Mormon though opens up an obvious line of logic. If an angel presented it to him then it had to be of God. If that same angel said that Joseph would be an instrument in restoring Christ’s church then he would need God’s authority–the priesthood–to do so as has been mentioned in a prior a comment of mine and thus a priesthood line would exist again on the earth.
That being said, it wouldn’t be fair for either of us to use an excommunicated member for an argument. It wouldn’t be fair to judge a man’s character solely by what his ex-wife tells you.
Hebrews 7 is meant to be read that the Levitical priesthood, or the priesthood of Aaron, is not done away with, but rather that a higher priesthood, the priesthood of Melchizedek, exists and functions to administer the Gospel. The priesthood of Aaron was revealed to Moses because the Israelites were rebellious against God. It was the priesthood for outward and temporal ordinances. All of the prophets of old have held the higher priesthood and it has been necessary to administer the Gospel, both before and after Jesus. Many prophets died in the Old Testament followed by a period of apostasy leaving a need for the priesthood to be restored as God called a new prophet. This too happened after the apostles died. It has been restored again, but this shouldn’t be a surprise. In Acts 3: 20-21 we read “And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” Surely God had to have spoken of the priesthood to the prophets of old since it was by the priesthood they were able to act in God’s name. Also we know the priesthood must be restored for in Malachi 3 in reference to the Second Coming of the Lord we read in verse 3: “And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness” The priesthood will need to already be on the Earth before that day, and indeed it is.
And yes, often misunderstood in the Old Testament is that God is the premortal Christ, Jehovah, not actually God the Father. We can confidently say that Jehovah had shown himself to several, but the Father is not seen. But in the New Testament, Stephen does see Him. In Acts 7: 55-56 “But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” This one written account alone has to toss out John 1:18 an 1 John 4:12, especially since they aren’t spoken by the mouth of Jesus. Maybe since the Catholic church decided to believe in the Trinity many years later it would make sense to clean some of these scriptures up, maybe the translation is poor or maybe they were just speaking presumptuously as men are allowed to do. What if instead the verses were read as, And no man hath seen God at any time except them that believe. Would that really be stretch considering Stephen?
God is all powerful and can do as He pleases. I don’t think He has lost the ability to go where He wants. Since Joseph saw God the Father and Jesus Christ it allowed for the understanding of the Godhead, that they are three separate beings. The last thing God would want to do before the restoration of all things is be ambiguous about His being.
You may speak by your own understanding but I can’t promise that I will not use any references from your Church as pointing factors against what you are saying. As what I have said to one of critics, Whitmer declared only those what he had learned while in your Church, and I hope that you will not criticize him since perhaps no one has the knowledge better than what he knows about your Church. And I think, its reasonable to use those who had been in your Church as references, especially those who personally accompanied your prophet, isn’t?. Whitmer said that for two years after the establishment of the Church, there was no such thing as priesthood authority until the time of Rigdon, and he learned that Smith adopted Rigdon’s view and that made him a priest. Is Whitmer lying? I don’t think so.
Concerning to the priesthood, anyone can be used by God to raise His church even without assuming any priesthood order. Paul is not a priest. Peter is not a priest neither James. They never assume any priesthood order, but they administered the Church. There is only one who held priesthood in the New Covenant, that is Christ – the Priest according to the order of Melchizedek. The order of Melchizedek is an everlasting priesthood, so the one who should hold the post is He who lives forever. How about the Aaronic priesthood? This was the shadow of Christ’s priesthood. So when Christ (the body) came, the shadow became of no effect. In fact, one of the major changes that were made in the New Covenant is the abolition of the Aaornic priesthood. (Hebrews 7:12) And what was the replacement? The another priest after the order of Melchizedek as Hebrews 7:11 said. Now, is there any place for Joseph Smith? Not even a little space. Why? Because Joseph Smith is mortal and like the priests of old, he will die and will not suffer to continue bacause of his death. (verse 23). Of course, he can’t have priesthood after the order of Aaron because Christ replaced the Levites and Joseph Smith cannot replace Christ. If he will insist, then he is a blasphemer. So the idea of restoration is a blatant lie. How will you restore something that never lost? (I’m speaking about Melchizedek priesthood). How will you restore something that God intentionally abolished? (the Aaronic priesthood). And how Aaronic priesthood replace the priest after the order of Melchizdek if he is unchangeable? (Hebrews 7:24).
Malachi 3 is a figurative statement. The “sons of Levi” symbolize the Church, but it doesn’t mean that they will assume Levitical priesthood. The prophecy is symbolical so we must not understand it literally. Saying that they will assume Levitical priesthood simply because of the keywords “sons of Levi” is a wrong interpretation of the prophecy.
Concerning to Stephen, read again the verse that you’ve given, and understand what Stephen really saw. It was the “glory of God”…not the very image of God.
“…saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.” So what is glory if it isn’t God Himself–a bright orb, a sparkling aura surrounding empty space? It says at the right hand of God. This means Christ is to the right of something, which means Stephen has to see something in order to have a reference point. Understanding that Stephen had never seen God before, there must have been something unique that made him distinguish the glory to be God and not the Holy Spirit or anything else since he had no understanding of what They looked like. At any rate, it’s only the author who writes in “glory”. It’s 56 that is the important verse when Stephen looked up ” And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” What may be slightly confusing in the verse before it is soundly reworded in the first person. This is incredibly clear and since you believe that God the Father and Jesus are two separate beings, finding out that God can show Himself to man has no effect on your faith except for it slightly gives strength to a religion started by a young farm boy that for whatever reason you have dedicated a sizable portion of your time to disprove.
I gave you the upper hand in the discussion by proposing we not use quotes from David Whitmer since the one I used is dated later and refutes others he had made, including yours, previously. On a side note, let’s not assume the falling away or apostasy of individuals has anything to do with the truthfulness of the Gospel itself. Remember, Peter denied Christ thrice even though he boldly proclaimed he wouldn’t when Christ prophesied he would. Judas accompanied Christ (as you mentioned about Mr. Whitmer to Joseph Smith) and yet betrayed Him for thirty pieces of silver. Men are not perfect. They have faults. The Gospel is perfect.
As far as the priesthood is concerned, we have different opinions that will never change. We read and understand scriptures differently and unfortunately there isn’t a for sure and easy way to know about it by simply reading the Bible, and this is obvious since it is a huge point of contention between many religions. Just as your reading helps you my understanding increases when I study the Bible alongside the Book of Mormon because they are companions to each other and testify of Christ. I know that the power of the priesthood is limited to those who God calls, not who men choose or what degrees say. I know it is alive and especially crucial in the days leading up to the Second Coming to have on the Earth.
It’s very disrespectful to call anyone who means well a liar or blasphemer even if they preach a different doctrine than you as you have done many times in this post and in others. I understand your concern about prophets in the last days, that we should “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” (Matt. 7:15) And this is true, and many have come and gone. But read on to verse 20: “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” The prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints along with many leaders from other religions have done an exceptional amount of good for this world and the world is in fact a better place because of them and those that follow them. God gives His light to all, and I know that a person would be better off being devout in any religion that encourages its people to be good than to sit listening to you up at your pulpit trying to bring them all down. Your fruit are festering with thorns.
I didn’t told you that the glory is not of the Father. Of course, I do believe that the glory belongs to the Father, but it’s not the issue. The issue here is that you have used a wrong verse to justify the appearance of the Father to Joseph Smith because Stephen never seen what had Smith seen. Do you get my point? The verse in Acts cannot be a supporting verse to justify the appearance of the Father to Smith because they saw God in two different image. One is the glory while the other is the very image. And I don;t believe that Smith seen the Father in His very image, because He never shows Himself to any man (according to Christ) except by the image of His glory.
I think that’s unfair. Don’t you know that the best witness and resource person is the person who
actually present in a particular occurrence? Rigdon’s priesthood is not just a statement of Whitmer, but even Cowdery validated it. Of course, Smith will not speak against himself neither any Mormon unless he is willing to be excommunicated for the sake of truth. The only thing you have to do to confront this, let me say, “allegations”, is to prove that they were wrong. That Rigdon was not the
originator of Mormon’s priesthood doctrine.
Since I don’t believe that Joseph Smith taught the truth, I don’t also believe that his BOM and the bible are companions and both leading the way to Christ. There was an another gospel according to Paul, and if there was another gospel, it follows that there was also another Christ. I think this is the difference between the Bible and the BOM. The Bible speaks about two priesthood. The first one is that which was changed because of its unprofitableness, and the second one that which is everlasting. Mormons declared that both were restored, but this is wrong. Why? Aaronic priesthood is proven to be unprofitable that made it to be changed, and Melchizedek’s priesthood is eternal so there’s no reason to say it’s lost to be “restored”. That’s how Joseph Smith contradicts the Bible and the true gospel.
I don;t believe that the world today is a better place. In fact, God will destroy this earth because of its wickedness, and one of its wickedness is the love of the people to hear lies. God wanted us to be saved, and one thing that he did is He sacrificed his own Son. He sent His words, His apostles, his messengers in order for us to be saved. But in spite of their message of truth, people still love to listen with lies and flattery. Yes, religious leaders teach their members to be good, but not every good thing in the sight of man is acceptable to the Lord. God want us to be good, but being good in God is to follow the truth, not the standard of the world.
“for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.” (Luke 16:15)
All we need to do is to understand what is the will of the Lord. (Ephesians 5:6) Do you not afraid that if a blind leader lead the blind , both shall fall into the ditch? But I’m not forcing you to believe my posts. I know what I’m doing, and I’m not a menpleaser.
The bible was written by GOD’S prophets and apostles. Nowadays there’s a lot of people claiming they are apostle send by GOD.My question, are they brought new teaching coming from GOD or they they ‘re still based on the bible which is completed thousand of years ago. So, if there’s no new teaching it means they are all false APOSTLES. For me my apostle.prophet,teacher,evangelist and SAVIOR is no other than JESUS CHRIST.He is much very ALIVE. Good day and GOD bless you all.
Indeed, Jesus Christ is the only living apostle in our time. He is the only prophet in our time. As David said, “The Lord is my shepherd I shall not want.”. But teaching new doctrines is not the criteria of being a true one (apostle or prophet). We must always speak according to what the first messengers of God had preached. They have the complete teachings of salvation and I believe that we don’t need anything more than this. John said, “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.” (I John 1:3)
Let’s talk about prophets.
The opinion seems to be that there have been no, nor will there ever be, prophets after Christ and His apostles died. Christ fulfilled all righteousness and because all other prophets have prophesied of Him, after His death and subsequent resurrection there is no need for a prophet. I would like to counter this by declaring: Because God loves us, because we as humans are in need of spiritual guidance in a fallen world, and because God is unchangeable, He continues to call prophets this day.
“Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7
“Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he” Proverbs 29:18
“But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit…even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” 1 Corinthians 2: 10-11
“And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” Ephesians 4: 11-12
“Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings” 1 Thessalonians 5: 19-20
We are children of God, and as His children He loves us. He wants us to make it back to live with Him again. Because of this, He has called prophets in the past to declare His word and turn others to the Christ. He sent His Son to “fulfill all righteousness” and to establish His church on the earth. Christ and His apostles were killed and the Church drifted into apostasy because there was no authority on the Earth to make sure it did not become corrupted by honest mistakes and false teachings. We were blessed to have the Bible put together, but it was put together by Man, centuries after Christ had been resurrected. It contains inspired words of God, but not all of His words. We know of many books that were excluded from the Bible. And there was still no authority on the Earth approved of by God to lead His church. In His love, God restored His church on the Earth once more. That church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He has called prophets and apostles to lead the world at a time when there is an abundance of sin and a need for His guidance. God is the same yesterday, today and forever. He will continue to call messengers to speak to the world.
“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits.” Matthew 7:15-16
If there be false prophets, there too must be true prophets. You will be able to tell the false ones from the true ones by their fruits, or their works. Anything that is good comes from God. Anything that would lead man closer to God and help him become more like God is good. A false prophet would declare that God no longer declares His word to His children, that the heavens are sealed up, that we do not need anymore of God’s guidance in a world that is constantly changing and presenting us with more challenges than were written about in the first century. God lives and continues to reveal His secrets to His servants, the prophets.
I also believe that God did not ceased from sending prophets. If there will be false prophets as Christ said, of course there must be true prophets. But in case of Mr. Smith, the LDS prophet, as far as prophecies are concerned, (as well as teachings), we cannot include him among the true prophets. In fact, he cannot even distinguish a revelation if it is from God or from devils so how do you know if the revelations that he gave came from God? READ: An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer, 1887.
Surely your evidence for if someone is a true prophet or not can’t be from an individual who is an apostate of the faith and prophet in dispute. Remember that even Judas Iscariot, a disciple chosen by Christ, betrayed him. This man was faithful but eventually left the church. Besides, if you look at the entire source you have submitted, found here http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/address1.htm you’ll find that David did believe Joseph was a prophet but stumbled into error as David did in the Bible (though he states David was actually worse than Joseph). He also claims that the Book of Mormon is in fact true, and was translated by Joseph, and Joseph was called to be a prophet by God. David Whitmer let small, personal things get in the way of his faith and so he left the church, only to follow one that still believed in the Book of Mormon and Joseph’s translating it by divine authority. Here is another source at his death bed that verifies his faith in the Book of Mormon: http://www.whitmercollege.com/interviews/85-richmond-democrat-1888 Here’s a whole page dedicated to his quotes on the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith:http://chapmanresearch.org/PDF/David%20Whitmer%20Statements%20on%20The%20Book%20of%20Mormon.pdf It’s important that he believes in the Book of Mormon because we have both agreed that you can know a true prophet by their fruits. The Book of Mormon was the fruit of Joseph Smith’s earthly labor. By logic, one cannot believe one without believing in the other. David had a personal conflict with Joseph that drove him away. The fact that Joseph, and the other prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are true prophets called of God cannot be dismissed with this evidence.
If you too believe that there are prophets called of God today, which ones claim that God has personally called them and have fruits such as another record testifying of Christ and containing more of God’s word or God’s restored church, with priesthood authority claimed from God, upon the earth as their fruits to verify their claim as a prophet?