Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days

[Charles Perry Locke]

  If I may add a comment, there is a difference between reformation and 
restoration. The protestant movement was a reformation...JS' movement was a 
restoration. I see them as quite different. Luther thought the church had 
gone astray, and reformed it to correct doctrinal error. JS thought the 
church had totally apostatized, so totally resored it. I dfon;t think the 
two can be compared.

  I agree with Luther (in that the church had gone astray, and that 
reformation was due), but not JS.

Perry


From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 22:26:31 -0800


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 07:13:47 -0800 Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Dave:



That would then open the door to the Reformers claiming they were the


answer to Biblical prophecy.  Yet I don't recall any Protestants making
such a claim.  I'm curious as to why they don't adopt this scenario.  By
not seeing it from this perspective, it seems to me they leave the field
exclusively open to folks (like the LDS) who do claim to fulfill Biblical
prophecy.
Vince:

    False prophets and false teachers make false claims. The fact that
lds-ites makes false claims is no reason to compete with lds for primacy
in those false claims. That's like having a contest to see who could most
disasterously beat their own thumbs with a hammer.
    Is asking a non-lds to defend a position which he never advocated
the best arrow that you have in your quiver?

DAVEH:  I'm not trying to shoot arrows into you or Protestants in general, 
Vince.  I'm trying to find out what they believe and why they believe such. 
 To me, the apostasy and subsequent restoration is a given from my LDS 
bias.  It seems so obvious (again.....from my LDS perspective) that the 
gospel went through /dark ages/ just as the world did in other aspects.  It 
just surprises me the Reformers did not jump onto that bandwagon (apostasy 
as evidenced by RCC theology) while claiming to be the Biblical answer (in 
the effect of a restoration of what the RCC folks lost).  Now again, 
Vince....this is my LDS biased thinking.  I'm curious to know if any 
Protestants have given any thought to this.  And if not, why not?  To me it 
seems relatively a logical path to take.  Are there any Biblical reasons 
why the Reformers did not consider traveling that route?

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
_________________________________________________________________
Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win $1000! 
http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1K&sc_extcmp=JS_JASweep_MSNHotm2

----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought 
to answer every man."  (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed.  If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.