Priesthood - Lost & Found: Evidences
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- This video specifies the details surrounding the loss of Priesthood Authority in the early Christian Church, the erroneous claim that priesthood succeeded from Peter through Bishops rather than Apostles, and how this claim is not scripturally based. Also shown is the erroneous Protestant view, based on a misinterpreted scripture, that the Priesthood is held by all believers and that no direct line of Priesthood succession was needed. Very clear scriptures are shared testifying that this isn’t the case. The viewer should come away with a deeper understanding of why authority mattered, how it was given, why and how it was lost, and why a restoration was needed.
HERE IS A DIRECT LINK TO THE TRANSCRIPT OF THIS VIDEO FROM THE WEBSITE
latterdaysaint...
Resources:
Books:
Alexander Morrison, Turning From Truth, A New Look at the Great Apostasy
Alonzo Gaskill & Stephen Webb - Catholic & Mormon
Tad Callister, The Blueprint of Christ’s Church
Barry Bickmore - Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity
Articles/Websites:
Elder Ballard’s article in the January 2020 Ensign, How The Lord Prepared the World for the Restoration
www.churchofje...
Fairmormon article on ‘Is There a Priesthood of all Believers'
www.fairmormon...
James Carver’s article in the November 1986 Ensign, How do Latter-day Saints support the doctrine of Melchizedek Priesthood authority form the Bible?
www.churchofje...
![Lord of Spirits - A Land of Giants [Ep. 7]](/img/1.gif)
Thank you for the research that you put into this video. I’m a Ward Missionary and I get the occasional Bible challenger who wants the Apostolic church to be defended Biblically. So finding your video was an answered prayer!
Thank you! I am grateful you found the channel and are able to use it as a resource in your calling. You should look through the library for other videos which may come in handy as well. I will direct you to 2 others that came to mind immediately for you:
Original Christianity Restored- Evidences:
ruclips.net/video/KwxO0TKP0tw/видео.html
Original Christianity Restored - Part 2 - Evidences:
ruclips.net/video/c_rfmHVrK4Y/видео.html
Wow, I was not expecting that actually authority from the Lord was needed. This video made me ponder upon the actual need for a restoration 😮
Ironically it probably surprised Joseph Smith as well, coming from his protestant background
Near the very end of the video, when you were talking about Martin Luther's quote justifying that all believers had the priesthood, you talked about the basis of that quote really being about the Israelite peoples of the Old Testament where only the Levites and the Kings had any priesthood authority. That triggered a realization that, when the Israelites built the Golden Calf and were subsequently given a lower law, the entire nation not only lost the privilege to receive the authority to officiate in the Melchizidek Priesthood but the common Israelite lost the opportunity to receive any authority to officiate in the lesser priesthood which was given strictly to the Levites. Their rebellion towards God had a terrible consequence.
Your RUclips account is rapidly becoming my favourite account to go to for LDS information, thank you for using your talents!!
Thank you! Glad you found the channel and have found it beneficial!
Always it is best to listen or to read fully a presentment of a speech or session before making an evaluation with our senses, so an affirmation will always accompany the faithful student. Thank you again. A good review of understanding.
Thanks
Brother JEFF, i forever thank HEAVENLY FATHER & BELOVED HOLY HEAVENLY MOTHER, for the amazing work you are doing. Please, keep up the good work.
Thank you so much!
23:04. Poetic how one Simon is used by The Church to confront and call-out the other.
And the old cliche' "Simon says" comes to mind.
Additionally it appears the old profession of Sorcerer has everything to do with persuasion and conniving.
Sorcery? : There are links to "pharmakeia" or pharmacy which suggests that Pharma = Sorcery. Hugely controversial today.
Love your labor and enthusiasm!
Thank you!
Thank you for all the work you do to air these videos. I am learning and wish I had found you before I became this old.76
Thank you!
Why did Christ leave such a flawed succession plan? He knew his apostles were mortal men who would die, so why didn’t he plan for apostles to continue on? Do any of the books you held up address that question? I’m not being argumentative: but genuinely seeking information. Thank you!
It is an excellent question, and one I have asked myself many times. The books I held up are focused more on how and why the “falling away” occurred, but don’t really address why God would allow it to happen when He, being all-powerful, could have prevented it.
For me, it has to do with God’s gift of agency to each of His children so that by making mistakes, we learn and grow until we perfect the art of obeying Him. This is explained in the hymn, “Know This that Every Soul Is Free,” which says:
* 1. Know this, that ev’ry soul is freeTo choose his life and what he’ll be;For this eternal truth is giv’n:That God will force no man to heav’n.
* 2. He’ll call, persuade, direct aright,And bless with wisdom, love, and light,In nameless ways be good and kind,But never force the human mind.
Throughout Biblical history, there’s been a pattern of people using their agency to follow God and then, not long after, to break their covenants with Him and apostatize. When this happens to a people collectively, God’s prophets, priesthood power, and ordinances are taken from them. Then, after a period of darkness and apostasy, God sends prophets like Noah, Moses, and even Christ, the son of God, to preach His gospel and the cycle begins all over again. Christ came to a people who were in a state of apostasy, even though they held true to some beliefs, many parts of God’s pure gospel had been corrupted. He was sent to establish His church anew. But even Christ’s chosen apostles knew the fullness was going to be short-lived. Thessolonians 2:3 says, “ Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;” (See the sampling of quotes I share in my video, “ Biblical Prophecies of the Restoration linked here:
ruclips.net/video/0up1p2Ak8p8/видео.html
...and here is a link to an article that provides many more references than I shared in that video:
www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1984/12/early-signs-of-the-apostasy?lang=eng
Also, 2 other videos on my channel that may be helpful on this in general is Restoring Original Christianity (I did a Part 1 and Part 2 on this topic).
Here is a link to another brief piece attempting to answer the question of why God allowed the apostasy to occur:
www.fairmormon.org/answers/Apostasy/Why_did_God_allow_it
Now, just as God’s mercy allows all men to repent and return from personal apostasy through the atonement of Jesus Christ, it also allows for restoration from generalized apostasy and for His truth to be restored as a people are ready to receive it.
But how is this fair to those who, during apostasy, remained faithful to teachings, covenants, ordinances, and powers that had been altered by men and were no longer as God had intended? Those who remained faithful to the degree of truth they were given while on earth, and died without knowing a fulness of God’s truth, and without having been baptized by immersion by proper priesthood authority because it was lost to the earth or was never introduced to them, will, after their death, be given a chance to accept or reject a fullness of the gospel and a proxy baptism, performed for them by those on earth who have had the fullness of the gospel and priesthood authority restored to them. (please see the video I did called Solving the Christian Dilemma - Baptism for the Dead, here is the link):
ruclips.net/video/KjGkDMUk7IE/видео.html
So I am left to believe that God allowed the apostasy because the people used their agency to choose it, just as had been done throughout biblical history. We believe strongly that the renewing and restoring of the covenant in the last days, spoken of repeatedly as the “gathering of Israel” prior to the 2nd coming of the Lord, needed to be done through a Divine Restoration, as a man-made reformation would not be enough.
If this restoration truly happened, it would be considered so revolutionary, in our secular day, that “proof” would be needed to test its divinity - that proof came via the physical, tangible evidence of the Book of Mormon, produced in 65 days by a farm boy with a 3rd grade equivalent education (see my favorite video produced, “Book of Mormon - Match It”; here is the link):
ruclips.net/video/pnkrQOEhuHA/видео.html
At the end of The Book of Mormon, the final author Moroni (Moroni 10:3-5) challenges the reader to read it & pray to know if it is from God and the truth will be made manifest through the Holy Ghost.
In closing, I did want to share my video, “ Understanding One True Church” in which I share how I struggle in my mind to understand why God allowed so many people to live their lives without ever knowing the fulness of His gospel. As I even admit in the video, it’s not how I would have done it, but then I remember the scripture in Isaiah 55:8,9, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the Heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.” God knows what His children need and everyone of them will be given of His fulness in His time. (here is the link to that video):
ruclips.net/video/8OmA8Pc75A8/видео.html
Hope this helps and glad you asked the question. If you want to correspond directly with me, please go to my website latterdaysaintsqa.com and use the contact me link at the top.
Thanks!
Disputing the Catholic’s “unbroken line of priesthood authority”:
In order for them to claim that unbroken link to the Apostle Peter-they needed “Pope Linus.” But the truth was that Linus was never a pope nor an Apostle..…HE WAS A BISHOP.
The Catholics claim that Peter was a bishop and he was the first Bishop of Rome (which made him the Pope) and then Linus was the second. But the truth of the matter was that Linus was THE FIRST BISHOP OF ROME…not the second. Peter was never a Bishop.
Linus is in my family tree. Linus was the son of the British Warlord Caraticus. King Caraticus was captured by Emperor Claudius and his royal family was brought to Rome. Caracticus had at least two sons (Linus and Celinius) and a daughter (Gladys 35:16 ) who were taken as prisoners of war. It was believed that Caraticus had married Anna the daughter of Joseph of Arimaethia and they were Christians before coming to Rome.
Emperor Claudius adopted Gladys and renamed her Claudia. Claudia married Rufus Pudens the son of a Roman Senator and Claudius gave the couple a palatial home to live in Rome. That home became the first underground Christian Church, of which her brother Linus was the Bishop. Later, under the rule of Nero the family was put to death when it was found out.
It was believed that Rufus and Paul were half brothers through their mother Pricilla. This is why Paul came to be a Roman citizen and had the freedom to travel….it was through his step-father Aquila.
Claudia, Rufus, Linus, Aquila, Pricilla, and the Apostle Paul lived in that palatial house/underground Church in Rome. All of these saints are listed in the Pauline Epistles and they were Paul’s traveling companions spreading the gospel with him. They were all enemies of the Roman Empire and eventually they were put to death for not leaving Rome when Christians and Jews were ordered to leave, but they stayed instead to run the underground Christian Church and help other saints escape the city.
Thank you for sharing!
Who was the Catholic scholar who made that comment to Elder Whitney? Anti-Mormons loved to berate Whitney, suggesting in the strongest terms that he made the whole thing up! It turns out, though, that it was Dr. John M. Reiner. In 1898, Dr. Reiner, a Roman Catholic scholar, visited Utah. In a talk given at the Salt Lake Tabernacle at the invitation of President Wilford Woodruff, he described in striking terms the parallels he found between ancient and modern Israel.
Throughout his talk, he wove in colorful and informative allusions to the story of Balaam, who had blessed Israel in spite of himself. Reiner also spoke vigorously of the strength of the claims of apostolic authority that, in his view, had been credibly put forth by only two churches: the Roman Catholics and the Mormons.
Reiner’s eloquent words of appreciation and friendship for the Latter-day Saints were sincere and generous. Once his identity was known, critics of the church moved on to other baseless claims.
Thank you for sharing these additional details
So if this isn't the Catholic church, what is it talking about?
1 Nephi 13
26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.
27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.
I would refer you to my video called “New Testament Issues That Can Challenge Faith”. Here is the direct link to that video:
ruclips.net/video/9ENGUi6zje4/видео.html
I went to the transcript and did a copy/paste of a key section related to your question (begins at about the 13 minute mark of the video):
Okay, the next thing I want to share is actually on these plain and precious things. And in fact, Alexander Morrison, he used to be Elder Alexander Morrison of the Seventy, great Bible scholar, wrote this book, Turning from Truth: A New Look at the Great Apostasy. And then, actually, I’m going to really recommend if you’re interested in this stuff, How the New Testament Came to Be. This was at the 35th Sidney Symposium, and Elder Morrison submitted a paper there, and you can get it online. I’ll link that in the program here. But I want to share a few things from it.
So, this first one here, he says, “I must part company with Ehrman … “, so this is Bart Ehrman he’s talking about here. We’ve been going through that throughout the video. ” … when he claims that ‘orthodox’ scribes, though they clearly made errors and made some changes deliberately, did not do so out of malice. Nephi wrote that someone or more likely a group of people, ‘have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious,’ and that this was done so ‘they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.'”
And remember, also, in another section by the way, it says that this happened before they went out to the masses, essentially, to the Gentles. It says, “It seems certain that most of the changes that have significantly corrupted the scriptures came early in the Christian era, before the end of the first century when many variations on the Christian message were wide-spread. There are indeed many allegations by second-century Christian writers that others were corrupting the scriptures, and with malice of forethought,” or premeditated in other words.
“Tertullian, the first Christian Father who wrote in Latin and who lived and worked during the last half of the second and early third centuries wrote extensively about a number of heretic Christian sects, including that of Marcion. Of Marcion, Tertullian wrote, ‘He expressly and openly used the knife, not the pen, since he made such an excision of the scriptures as suited his own subject matter. He,’ continued Tertullian, ‘mutilated the Gospel according to Luke, removing all the narrative of the Lord’s birth and also removing much of the teachings of the discourses of the Lord.”
Okay. And then, “Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyon at the end of the second century AD, claimed that the followers of Valentinus, perhaps the most influential of the Gnostics, changed the scriptures ‘by transferring passages and dressing them up anew and making one thing out of another.'”
“Clement of Alexandria railed similarly against another Gnostic sect. Charges of deliberate falsification of the scriptures flew thick and fast. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth in the late second century, complained that his own epistle had been tampered with, and added ruefully, ‘Small wonder then if some have dared to tamper even with the word of the Lord Himself when they have conspired to mutilate my own humble efforts.’ Without going into more detail, it is clear that allegations of scriptural tampering and downright forgery were common in the second century of the Christian era. No individual or group was immune.”
Then he goes on to say, “How could this have been done? Several categories,” and he goes into detail in the paper on these: Misinterpretation and subsequent wresting of the scriptures, reinterpretation of the scriptures, changing the meaning of the words, deletion or substitution of words or ideas, and forgery of the text. This is just a great paper.
And then he concludes, “It is most probable, I believe, that the great and abominable church which …” Now, let me pause for a second. Look on the right. Stephen Robinson, great Latter-day Saint scholar said … I love this. “Membership in the great and abominable church is based more on who has your heart than on who has your records.” I love that.
And I will actually just even say too, as a side note, he actually said that this tampering could have even been the canon along the way, controlling the canon. And we know there’s a lot of lost books that are mentioned in the Bible, but we don’t have. The video I just did on Enoch is a great example, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, we found out how much tremendous impact it had on the New Testament, but yet it didn’t get canonized and then went underground for however many … 1,600 years, or whatever. Something like that.
So, okay, back to what Elder Alexander Morrison said, “It is most probable, I believe, that the great and abominable church, which maliciously corrupted the scriptures early in the Christian era, was actually not a single entity but a coalition or at least a conglomerate of people who rebelled against God. Those who called themselves Christian but rebelled against the leaders and quarreled with their fellows, who practiced idolatry, who wallowed in mysticism, who could not fully leave Judaism, who betrayed other Christians (as occurred many times and may have resulted in the death of Peter and Paul), and who responded to persecution by craven recanting of their testimony of Christ -those and others like them ensured that the infant church would receive a fatal blow, such that the mystery of iniquity would prevail. The deliberate corrupters of the scriptures surely are found among this group.”
@@latterdaysaintsqa Think you for responding to me and I will be watching that video soon.
Thank you.
Thank you 🙏🏻
Great Video! As someone who converted from Catholicism, this was super important to me in recognizing the true priesthood authority and what Jesus Christ genuinely intended for his church here on earth.
Also, more Latter-Day Saints need to be familiar with this! When I was investigating I really struggled to find information on this topic. It's super important to the authenticity of the restored Gospel.
Coming from your background, I am particularly grateful for your comment!!
I agree 100%!!!
@@latterdaysaintsqa I am also a catholic convert and absolutley LOVE your videos, especially those that deal with lost practices and doctrines. Thank you for all your hard work
Love it! Thank you for sharing!
Uplifted and enlightened as always with your insights. Thank you.
Thanks!
There was also a Prophet. Hes mentioned once. But the Twelve overssw operation of church.
So cool about Joseph Smith’s ancestor guy!
Yes - I agree!!
Thanks again brother
Today we hit Acts 8. in church. With regards to the priesthood Phillip held, it seems as though Phillip is an Elder holding the Melchizedek priesthood. He goes to Samaria and in v. 6 he performed miracles. V. 7 unclean spirits are cast out and others are healed. And again in v. 13, Simon is with Phillip and is amazed by miracles and signs.
I understand that if Phillip had the M priesthood, you'd think he would have conferred the HG on the baptized, but there again, if he only held the Aaronic priesthood, I would not expect to hear he performed miracles, healed, or cast out unclean spirits.
The way the church has speculated on these verses can be found in the New Testament institute manual on the church website:
Acts 8:5-8. Philip and the Aaronic Priesthood
Philip was one of the seven men chosen to assist the Apostles in caring for the needy (see Acts 6:1-6). In fulfilling his responsibilities, Philip preached, baptized, cast out unclean spirits, and performed other miracles (see Acts 8). Philip appears to have ministered as a holder of the Aaronic Priesthood-he had the authority to baptize but did not have the authority to give the gift of the Holy Ghost (see D&C 84:107-8). Those whom Philip baptized had to wait for the arrival of Peter and John, holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood, to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
🆗
Thank you again. Great presentation which further strengthen my testimony
wonderful to hear - thank you!
14:05 the great apostasy!
Always excited to get a notification you've published a new video 🤓
Very nice video, thank you
Thanks - this was one of my favorites!
Curious if there was any reference to a "stake president" office in the early church.
No, it doesn’t appear there was an equivalent of a stake level organization in the early church.
Let me share an excerpt from the book Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity by Barry Bickmore, p189-190. I shared this in the video but not the exact quote - here it is:
The Lord did not merely restore “the priesthood” through Joseph Smith, however. Specific offices within the priesthood were also given, forming a hierarchy of authority and function within the Church. These can be compared to those offices known to have existed within the early Church, but one caveat must be taken into account before we proceed with this comparison. Specifically, this dispensation includes the priesthood and power given in all other dispensations. “For unto you…is the power of this priesthood given, for the last days and for the last time…in connection with all those who have received a dispensation at any time from the beginning of the creation…” (D&C 112:30-31). It is a “welding together” of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories….” (D&C 128:18)
Therefore, since different variations on the basic organization of God’s kingdom have existed during the various dispensations, it should not be expected that the organization of the Restored Church would necessarily correspond exactly to that of the early Church. For example, the offices present in the Church in ancient America after the advent of the Savior are included in the present LDS organization, but the Restored Church also includes many additional priesthood offices . (See Moroni 2 - 3).
You may also enjoy this article by Grant Underwood entitled ‘The “Same” Organization That Existed in the Primitive Church’ published by the BYU Religious Studies Center:
rsc.byu.edu/go-ye-all-world/same-organization-existed-primitive-church
@@latterdaysaintsqa Thank you for answering and for the response. I appreciated the quote from Bickmore, but I'm going to push back a bit...respectfully...on Grant's article. 1. Sometimes I think we members of the church overdo what needs to be explained to the point of not making sense or rather...sounding desperate when we are already on a sound footing....just a subjective criticism after watching talks on RUclips 2. and more concrete...loud alarms go off in my formerly Catholic head with Grant's lose and free description of apostles and prophets.
I have a good Catholic friend who I often tell that Peter was not a Bishop. That the office of Bishop was below that of Apostle and that they did not have the keys...etc. That the people that held that office after the death of the Apostle knew they could not take upon themselves the office of Apostle. I mean...I'm just a RUclips chump viewer...but, to me, something about that lose use of the term Apostle (and I agree that the term is used more freely in scriptures) should be done with care. Why? Because...if anyone could be an apostle...then what was special about Peter? I don't recall reading anywhere that Peter was designated "the Prophet" either. Oh and yes...I am confused as to why Paul was an Apostle if he was not one of the 12...but that's probably for another day. I almost expect to see a capital "A" apostle and a lower case "a" Apostle then. You know?
Maybe I'm reading Grant wrong...it is late on a Friday night...but I would expect some concrete correlation between the primitive church and Brigham Young's statement “the keys of the eternal Priesthood, which is after the order of the Son of God, are comprehended by being an Apostle. All the Priesthood, all the keys, all the gifts, all the endowments, and everything preparatory to entering into the presence of the Father and of the Son, are in, composed of, circumscribed by, or I might say incorporated within the circumference of, the Apostleship.”
That is fine if you want to pushback on that article - I just found it when answering your question and thought you might like some of the detail he went into on some of those early offices since you were asking about it - I didn’t use the article in the video. A book I would recommend to you, which I used heavily in the first half of the video, and particularly with your background, is “Catholic and Mormon: A Theological Conversation”, and would recommend the first chapter particularly - which is entitled “Authority”. The book is organized as a civil debate on important religious issues between a Catholic (Steven Webb) and a Latter-day Saint (Alonzo Gaskill).
@@latterdaysaintsqa Thank you for referring the book and for responding. Very interesting period of time.
@@latterdaysaintsqa Hey, what about the metropolitans? They appear to fill a similar role to Stake Presidents. They were leaders over smaller congregations.
Thanks for the transcripts! That's awesome!!
Why is it that some Roman Catholics state that the LDS Church claims the Catholics lost Priesthood Authority in the year 420? What happened in 420? This also doesn’t line up with your timeline.
I am not familiar with any formal LDS teaching related to the date 420 - the focus has always been the lost of priesthood authority with the death of the apostles, so very early on. Here is a copy/paste from the church website from the pamphlet entitled The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ - under the subheading “The Great Apostasy”:
Following the death of Jesus Christ, wicked people persecuted and killed many Church members. Other Church members drifted from the principles taught by Jesus Christ and His Apostles. The Apostles were killed, and priesthood authority-including the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church-was taken from the earth. Because the Church was no longer led by priesthood authority, error crept into Church teachings. Good people and much truth remained, but the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost. This period is called the Great Apostasy.
With the death of the Apostles of Jesus Christ, the truth was lost once again.
This apostasy resulted in the formation of many churches with conflicting teachings. During this time, many men and women sought the truth, but they were unable to find it. Many good people believed in God and Jesus Christ and tried to understand and teach truth, but they did not have the full gospel or priesthood authority. As a result, each generation inherited a state of apostasy as people were influenced by what previous generations passed on, including changes to Christ’s gospel.
God knew there would be an apostasy. Through an Old Testament prophet, He said:
“Behold, the days come … that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
“And [people] shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.”
Amos 8:11-12
Some inspired people, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, recognized that practices and doctrines had been changed or lost. They tried to reform the churches to which they belonged. Without priesthood authority, however, Christ’s gospel could not be returned to its original form. A restoration was needed.
Thank you for your kind and prompt response. The only reference I can find to the year 420 is: “Church Newsroom -
The Book of Mormon contains religious writings of civilizations in ancient America between about 2200 BC and AD 420.” But I don’t see how that would signal the Priesthood Keys being removed, so that date is probably of little consequence.
As an inactive LDS, this is an issue I’ve struggled with. Also, the many visitations of the Mother of Christ, Mary around world, many of which have occurred after the founding of the LDS Church in 1830. For example, it’s estimated that up to 70K people witnessed the Miracle of the Sun in Fatima in 1917. Then there is Lourdes, Zeitoon, and many others. It’s hard to dispute the miracles and healings, and her constant call for prayer and penance.
Again, thank you very much. Peace …
Peace to you as well. Glad you are visiting the channel. Another video you may enjoy particularly is “Understanding One True Church” - here is the direct link:
ruclips.net/video/8OmA8Pc75A8/видео.html
Great vids.
Thanks!
Great work
Thanks!
Can I get video on Catholic false Priesthood from Linux.
Please
I am not sure what you are referring to. If you would like to communicate directly with me you can email me through the website latterdaysaintsqa.com using the contact me link.
Was Linux having the Priesthood, if yes who gives it him ???
PLEASE HELP ME
Hi. Some ex members of the LDS church claim that the succession in the leadership of the church was theough lineage in the past (Old Testament), in the N T church (they say that not Peter, but John, brother of Jesus, was the president of the church). Finally they claim that the succession of the church today should have been through lineage. They use scriptures from D&C that supposedly show a succession in the church though lineage. PLEASE send something to me.
This is a helpful link addressing the issue (and would recommend also the video links you will see embedded):
www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_church_leadership/Succession_in_the_Presidency_of_the_Church
Thank you!