The vast majority of Christians (everyone except members of the LDS, Community of Christ, and a few others) accept that Paul was a messenger of the Christian god, but say that Joseph Smith (writer of the Book of Mormon and self-proclaimed prophet) was a charlatan. This is remarkable because, from what we know from historical records, there are so many similarities between the two people:
+ Both claimed to see ethereal visions of Jesus, but neither met him during his lifetime
+ Both wrote works later considered scripture by their followers (Paul with seven New Testament books, Smith with the BoM and related Mormon writings)
+ Both had histories of violence (Paul claimed to turn over Christians for execution, JS went to prison for a gun battle)
+ Both were avowed misogynists and male supremacists
+ Both identified as Christians, but had different theologies from most Christians of their times (Paul had very different views from Jesus and James (an early Christian leader, and Smith's movement was [is] different than mainstream Christianity)
So, with these similarities, what reason (other than presupposition--"I already believe X") is there to reject (or accept) one as an apostle/prophet, but not the other?
Debate question: Why accept Paul but not Joseph Smith? Why not reject both as false apostles/prophets or accept both as messengers of god? Is there any evidence that supports one's message but discounts the other's?
Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Moderator: Moderators
-
dianaiad
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10220
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
- Location: Southern California
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #31Actually, they were both saints. So am I, since in my belief system, 'saint' is defined as 'member of the church,' and certainly doesn't mean anything special or holy. We don't recognize the Catholic idea of 'Saint" (capital 'S').Haven wrote:You're not exempt from the rules of logic simply because you claim to be a "saint." Circular reasoning--which you've engaged in numerous times--is a logical fallacy. Period. It's irrational, no matter who you are.[color=indigo]Psalm139[/color] wrote: Those of us who possess the Truth do not need to use terms like, "circular reasoning". Only the confused use terms like this.
Why would I be mistaken about my true created existence? It's you who doesn't know your true self.
Anyway, this is off topic; the thread was about Paul and Joseph Smith. Do you have any comments on distinguishing between those two? How can one be a "saint" and not the other? And please use actual arguments, not claims to hearing "The Voice of the Lord." Not everyone believes that your lord exists.
Since that church is rather dependent upon the belief that Joseph Smith was a prophet, that means our definition of 'saint' is important.
Perhaps we could get a common understanding of what 'the other guy' means when the word 'saint' shows up?
However, for the purposes of addressing the OP...if Paul was a prophet, then there certainly is no reason that JS could not be, at least, not for any reason that would prohibit any prophet of any description showing up.
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #32The same way Christians have done so for generations...you wait until you are told so by the Holy Spirit, by faith. Faith is the best we have because by faith we are saved. It seems to me to not have faith in GOD's leading is to have faith there is no GOD and no Godly prophets.Zzyzx wrote:
...
How can we know that those who claim to be "saints" are anything more than self-identified "prophets" who are false prophets?
...
No one is forced to have faith in an other person as a person of GOD, we have to make our choice, by faith, yea or nay and live with it. It is how GOD shows how we separated ourselves into the different groups, good seed and tares.
Peace, Ted
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
-
ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #33The truth is nothing. Satan spoke the truth to both Eve and Jesus to deceive them.Psalm139 wrote: [quote="[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?
...
I have been writing scripture ( written testimonies ) ever since June 16th, 2008. Here's an example;
No man has the truth except for those who have received it and is guarded by the one who gave it.
...
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #34ttruscott wrote:The truth is nothing. Satan spoke the truth to both Eve and Jesus to deceive them.Psalm139 wrote: [quote="[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?
...
I have been writing scripture ( written testimonies ) ever since June 16th, 2008. Here's an example;
No man has the truth except for those who have received it and is guarded by the one who gave it.
...
WOW
the truth is nothing to you.
So the truth of what you believe in doesn't concern you at all?
You don't care that what you believe in is true or not?
AMAZING.. wow... wowie
-
dianaiad
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10220
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
- Location: Southern California
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #35Blastcat wrote:ttruscott wrote:The truth is nothing. Satan spoke the truth to both Eve and Jesus to deceive them.Psalm139 wrote: [quote="[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?
...
I have been writing scripture ( written testimonies ) ever since June 16th, 2008. Here's an example;
No man has the truth except for those who have received it and is guarded by the one who gave it.
...
WOW
the truth is nothing to you.
So the truth of what you believe in doesn't concern you at all?
You don't care that what you believe in is true or not?
AMAZING.. wow... wowie
I think that he is saying something rather profound here; that the most effective lies are those based upon a truth.
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #36dianaiad wrote:Blastcat wrote:ttruscott wrote:The truth is nothing. Satan spoke the truth to both Eve and Jesus to deceive them.Psalm139 wrote: [quote="[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?
...
I have been writing scripture ( written testimonies ) ever since June 16th, 2008. Here's an example;
No man has the truth except for those who have received it and is guarded by the one who gave it.
...
WOW
the truth is nothing to you.
So the truth of what you believe in doesn't concern you at all?
You don't care that what you believe in is true or not?
AMAZING.. wow... wowie
I think that he is saying something rather profound here; that the most effective lies are those based upon a truth.
No, I think he is saying that he doen't care that what he believes in is true or not
-
dianaiad
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10220
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
- Location: Southern California
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #38Absolutely yes.dianaiad wrote:Perhaps we should allow him to clarify this one for himself.
I challenged him on that point.. still waiting...
I'm NOT actually holding my breath.
I don't think he understands the concept, frankly.. he doesn't seem to CARE about the concept of truth.
He believes what he believes.. when I ask him how does he know that what he believes is TRUE?... no answer whatsoever.
You can do the search.. it's a question I usually ask believers..
I usually ask them.. and usually NEVER get an answer.
What I get is some bible quote .. or.. silence.
Re: Paul vs. Joseph Smith
Post #39Ah, excellent conclusion. Maybe not "spot on" information. Maybe more like "word" with some interesting twists to "think about." After all, what good is a liar without a dose or 2 of truth?ttruscott wrote:
The truth is nothing. Satan spoke the truth to both Eve and Jesus to deceive them.
"As to the ultimate things we can know nothing, and only when we admit this do we return to equilibrium." Carl Jung
-
otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20520
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 337 times
- Contact:
Post #40
Psalm139 wrote: It's you who doesn't know your true self.
Psalm139 wrote: I'm not here to defend God's biblical stories. I'm only here as the voice of the Lord and whoever is chosen to listen to His voice will understand Him.
Moderator WarningPlease do not make personal comments about others.
The purpose of this forum is to debate, not as an outlet for people to preach.
Please review our Rules.
______________
Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
