It is here that the LDS (Latter-Day Saints) help us out by clearly indicating that they believe we are wrong and that they are the only true Church on the face of the earth. In a day and age of wishy-washy, “be careful not to offend anyone” spirituality; I find these statements almost refreshing.

LDS President and Prophet Spencer W. Kimball said:

This is the only true church.… This is not a church. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. There are churches of men all over the land and they have great cathedrals, synagogues, and other houses of worship.… (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, [President] Spencer W. Kimball, 1982, p. 421)

LDS President and Prophet Ezra Taft Benson said:

This is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth, according to the Lord’s own words (see Doctrine and Covenants 1:30). His Church—it bears His name and it is directed under the authority of His priesthood … is a message that will save and exalt the souls of the children of men. There is no other way, because this is the only true message and the only true church upon the face of the whole earth. Those are not my words; they are the words of the Lord Jesus Christ as found in the revelations. (D&C 1) This gospel in its purity, now restored to the earth.… (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, 1988, pp. 164–65, 177)

God allegedly told, Founder and Prophet, Joseph Smith in 1820 that no other churches were right.

My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” … I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”
(Joseph Smith—History 1:18–20, in Pearl of Great Price).

God allegedly said that Mormonism is the only true and living church on the face of the earth.

And also those [Joseph Smith and others] to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased …
(1831 [date of the alleged revelation], Doctrine and Covenants 1:30).

1805
Joseph Smith, Jr., the founder of the organization now called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormon Church), is born on December 23rd in Sharon, Vermont, the fourth child of Lucy Mack and Joseph Smith.

1816
The Smiths move to the Palmyra, New York, area (about forty miles east of Rochester).

1820
In the spring Joseph Smith, Jr., at the age of 14, allegedly receives a visit from God the Father and Jesus Christ, who tell him that all churches are wrong, their creeds are an abomination, and the professors of those creeds are corrupt.

My [Joseph Smith’s] object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” … I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”
(Joseph Smith—History 1:18–20, in Pearl of Great Price, a work viewed by Mormons as scripture)

1823
The angel Moroni allegedly visits Joseph in his bedroom three times one September night. These visits are the start of a series of lessons that results in Joseph’s getting gold plates that were allegedly buried in Hill Cumorah, just a few miles south of Palmyra, in Manchester, New York.

“He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was *Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.” (Joseph Smith—History 1:33)

*Note: His name was also Nephi according to the first edition of the Pearl of Great Price [1851] and the April 15, 1842, Times and Seasons 3:753, under “History of Joseph Smith.” This official version was not written until 1838, eighteen years after the alleged event. Also, there is some discrepancy regarding the age of Joseph Smith at this time. The official position of the LDS (Latter-Day Saints) is that he was 17, but some records indicate he was 15.

1826
Court records of Chenango County, State of New York, People v. Joseph Smith The Glass Looker, March 20, 1826, reveal that Joseph Smith was brought to trial on charges of money digging, using a “peep stone” to locate buried treasure.

1827
Joseph allegedly receives from the angel Moroni the gold plates that were buried in Hill Cumorah. Written on them in “Reformed Egyptian” is the history of a previously unknown New World people. With the help of God Joseph translates the writing into what is now the Book of Mormon.

1829
On May 15 John the Baptist allegedly gives the Aaronic Priesthood to Joseph Smith and his scribe Oliver Cowdery as part of the restoration of God’s Church on Earth—authority that had been lost after the death of the last Apostle.

1829
Probably in the summer, as a continuation of the restoration of God’s Church, the Apostles Peter, James, and John allegedly give Joseph and Oliver the Melchizedek Priesthood.

1830
The Book of Mormon is printed by the Grandin Print Shop in Palmyra, New York.

1830
On April 6, the Mormon Church is organized with a handful of people as God’s one true Church on Earth. At this time it is named the Church of Christ.

1831
The Mormon Church moves to Kirtland, Ohio. At its peak in the 1830s Kirtland reaches a population of around 3,200—about equal to nearby Cleveland.

1832
Mormons start settlements in Missouri.

1833
A collection of sixty-five alleged revelations from God to Joseph Smith is published as the Book of Commandments.

1834
The name of the Church is changed to the Church of the Latter Day Saints.

1838
Joseph leaves Kirtland and goes to Far West, Missouri, fleeing the wrath of the law and disgruntled members.

1838
The name of the Church is changed to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

1838
About nineteen Mormon men, women, and children are massacred by non-Mormons at Hauns Mill, Missouri.

1839
Mormons are driven out of Missouri due to conflicts between them and non-Mormons.

1839
Settlement of what is to become Nauvoo, Illinois, starts.

1840
The Mormon Church has swelled to about 17,000 members.

1844
Joseph Smith, John Taylor, and other members of the community, in the Mormon Church newspaper, deny that polygamy is practiced, even though it is.

1843
The alleged revelation from God that allows the practice of polygamy is received, but is not formally announced until 1852, is not included in Mormon scripture until 1876, and is not voted on until 1880. (This is the present-day D&C 132, which says in its heading that Joseph had known the doctrine and principles since 1831.)

1844
The city of Nauvoo, Illinois, has a population of about 12,000; it is the second largest city in the state, after Chicago. Joseph Smith is the mayor and lieutenant-general of the Nauvoo legion.

On April 7, 1844 Joseph Smith delivers the “King Follett Discourse” in which various heretical doctrines are taught. See the full text of the-king-follett-discourse. This message has been called, “the the greatest talk ever given in this dispensation.”
(LDS teacher Karl T. Haglund in Theological Questions, Sept. 1971, p.24)

1844
On June 7, William Law publishes The Nauvoo Expositor, which exposes the practice of polygamy in Nauvoo and the teaching by Joseph Smith that there is more than one God.

1844
On June 10, under the authority of Mayor Smith and the Nauvoo City Council, police led by Smith destroy the press, office, and papers of The Nauvoo Expositor.

1844
On June 25 Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith are arrested for their part in the illegal destruction of The Nauvoo Expositor press and office. Joseph Smith and three others are held in the jail in Carthage, Illinois when, on June 27, a mob attacks the jail, killing Joseph in spite of his efforts at self-defense with a six-shooter.

1846
Brigham Young, the second President of the LDS Church, leads the Mormon trek to what is then a portion of Mexico and will become Salt Lake City, Utah. They arrive there in 1847.

1850
Mormon Church membership numbers about 52,000.

1851
The first edition of the Pearl of Great Price is published. It is added to the Mormon scriptures in 1880.

1852
In August, polygamy is announced for the first time at a public Mormon meeting.

1857
On September 11 a combined force of Indians and Mormon militia led by Mormon Bishop John D. Lee attacks and annihilates a wagon train of 120 non-Mormon men, women, and children in the infamous Mountain Meadows Massacre.

1862
The Morrill Act prohibiting polygamy is passed by the U.S. Congress.

1876
Doctrine and Covenants 132, which allows polygamy, is first printed in a volume of Mormon scripture.

1880
In October D&C 132, on polygamy, is first voted on by the Mormon membership.

1882
Congress passes the Edmunds Act, providing heavy penalties for practicing polygamy. The practice continues by many in hiding.

1890
The Edmunds-Tucker Act dissolves the Mormon Church corporation and seizes its property. The Idaho test oath law disenfranchises Mormon voters. A short time later the Supreme Court finds the Idaho test oath constitutional. Legislation is drafted to disenfranchise Mormons in Utah.

1890
On September 25 Mormon Church President Wilford Woodruff issues his Manifesto asking Mormons to stop the practice of polygamy. At a Mormon Church General Conference on October 6 this Manifesto, now called Official Declaration—1, is accepted by the general membership as “authoritative and binding.” This does not reject the revelation allowing polygamy (D&C 132); it just puts the practice aside.

1890
Mormon Church membership is about 188,000.

1950
Mormon Church membership is about 1,111,000.

1970
Mormon Church membership is about 2,931,000.

1980
Mormon Church has about 4,640,000 members.

1991
Mormon Church swells to about 8,100,000 members, about 267 mission centers, and about 43,000 missionaries in the field.

1993
The Mormon Church has about 8,700,000 members.

2008
Today, there are an estimated 12,868,606 members of the Mormon Church world-wide.

Mormon was an ancient prophet born in 310 AD Central America. He spent his life observing and participating in warfare. His people, the Nephites, defended themselves against the Lamanites. In 385 AD, the Lamanites annihilated the Nephites in one great, last battle.

In addition to leading men into battle, Mormon, as instructed by the Lord, made a historical compilation of His people, mainly of the house of Israel, whom He had led out of Jerusalem to inhabit the regions in and around Central America. By referring to many volumes of records, which were engraved upon thin gold or brass plates, Mormon engraved his own narrative style history of the Lord’s dealings with His people in the New World. Before going out against the Lamanites for the last time, Mormon gave his son Moroni charge of his book. Moroni finished the book and became the last known survivor of the Nephite nation.

For decades, Moroni wandered alone throughout central and northern America, hiding from the Lamanites–ancestors of today’s Native Americans. Before he died, Moroni buried his father’s book of gold plates in a hillside in present day Wayne County, New York. There the plates rested for 1,400 years.

To fulfill the covenant that God the Father made with Abraham, with his son Isaac, and with Isaac’s son Jacob (Israel), Mormon’s record was destined to come forth to all of Israel’s descendants in the last days. This record was to contain the gospel of Jesus Christ and the ancient account of His visit among Israel’s descendants in the New World. Mormon’s record, the gospel of Christ, came forth to a latter-day prophet, Joseph Smith, a descendant of Jacob’s son, Joseph, who was sold into Egypt.

As a resurrected being, Moroni gave Joseph Smith charge of Mormon’s plates on September 22nd, 1827. Before returning the plates to Moroni, Joseph was given the power to translate the reformed Egyptian characters engraved upon them into English, and The Book of Mormon was published in 1830. However, there was a second printing in 1837 and a third in 1840 to correct errors that were found

In the book of Mormon (140 million in print), Jesus states that the act of Israel’s latter-day descendants reading this book is in itself a sign to them that the Father’s work has begun…that He will soon fulfill His covenant to all the house of Israel, to bring them knowledge of their Redeemer and restore them to their lands of inheritance. This is why the Book of Mormon is referred to as “Another Testament of Jesus Christ.”

Read the entire interview by Justin Taylor
Scott’s forthcoming book, The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage Culture, will be published by Crossway in March 2009.

JT: Just how bad was this election for pro-lifers? Give us the big picture.

SK: There’s no doubt we’ve experienced a crushing defeat in the current political cycle. The executive and legislative branches of the federal government are now firmly in the hands of those deeply committed to the proposition that an entire class of human beings can be set aside to be killed simply because they are in the way of something we want. In the weeks ahead, even before the inaugural events get underway, we can expect abortion-choicers, along with their allies in the media, to declare the abortion debate over–at least politically.

They have reason to gloat. President-elect Obama, with eager support from a Democrat Congress, can easily deliver on his promises to sign the federal Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), provide federal funding for destructive embryo research (including cloning), stack the federal courts with activist judges, and craft a national health care plan that includes abortion coverage. This is all very bad.

But surrender is not an option. We have work to do.

JT: You’ve said before that FOCA could strangle pro-life efforts for decades to come. Why is it dangerous?

SK: Indeed, there’s no mistaking that FOCA is the most dangerous piece of pro-abortion legislation to date. Obama has said this would be his first objective. In its current form, FOCA creates a federally guaranteed right to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy that goes way beyond Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Should the federal courts ever reverse or otherwise gut Roe and Doe, FOCA would enshrine abortion rights into law at the legislative level. Parental consent, informed consent, restrictions on tax-funded abortions, and physician conscience laws would be swept away, along with federal and state bans on partial-birth abortion.

JT: Do you think Obama can successfully sell FOCA to the American public?

SK: Yes. He will justify it by telling the nation that abortion is a tragic choice, but laws regulating abortion don’t work. What’s needed are social programs aimed at reducing the underlying causes that lead women to abort in the first place.

The moral logic in play here is baffling.

First, if abortion does not unjustly kill an innocent human being, why is Obama worried about reducing it? But if it does unjustly kill a human being, isn’t that good reason to legislate against it?

Second, laws which allow—indeed, promote—the killing of unborn human beings are unjust even if no one has abortions. Imagine a candidate who said he was personally opposed to spousal abuse while he had a 100% voting record in favor of men having a right to beat their wives. Suppose he told the public the underlying cause of spousal abuse is psychological, so instead of making it illegal for husbands to beat their wives, the solution is to provide federally funded counseling for men. It’s no stretch to say the voting public would see right through his smokescreen, even if he favored social programs to treat the underlying causes that allegedly contribute to abuse. After all, there are underlying causes for rape, murder, theft, and so on, but that in no way makes it misguided to have laws banning such actions. Moreover, Obama is just plain wrong to say that abortion control laws don’t work. Sure they do. Michael New points out that between 1992 and 2000, many states that passed modest abortion-control legislation saw their abortion rates drop by 21 percent or greater. Meanwhile, Tom McCulsky writes that states with FOCA-style laws saw their abortion rates go up while the national average went down. Nevertheless, Obama is poised to sweep all these pro-life gains away with the stroke of a pen, and the public will buy his explanation.

By the way, Obama won’t be the only one telling pro-lifers to surrender politically. Voices within Christendom will assert that evangelicals have spent too much time on politics, with little to show for it. What’s really needed, so the claim will go, is more time preaching the gospel. Well, I’m all for preaching the gospel, but why should anyone suppose that political efforts aimed at protecting human life detract from the biblical command to go make disciples? Why can’t pro-life Christians do both? Simply put, the answer to a lack of evangelical fervor for the gospel is not to withdraw our political advocacy for the weak and vulnerable; it’s to encourage Christians to do a better job presenting the gospel. We don’t have to stop advocating protections for the innocent to do that. At the same time, it’s unfair to say that because we have not achieved everything we set out to politically accomplish in the last 28 years, we have wasted our time on political distractions. Wilberforce and Lincoln suffered crushing political setbacks before their respective nations finally did away with slavery, yet no one suggests they wasted time that should have been devoted to preaching or evangelizing. Truth is, pro-lifers are simply outnumbered and underpowered. But this in no way justifies political silence in the face of evil, the likes of which we are about to witness at a whole new level.

JT: Given our political options will be limited in the immediate years ahead, what should Christian leaders do right now to advance the pro-life cause?

SK: Rather than giving up, we should commit ourselves to four vitally important tasks.

1. Christian leaders should purposefully preach and teach a biblical view of human value, and do it often.

2. Christian leaders must not only preach about human value; they must equip their people to engage the culture. Theology gives church members a biblical foundation for their pro-life beliefs. Apologetics gives them the tools to take those biblically informed beliefs into the marketplace of ideas.

3. Pro-life Christians must hold their churches and parachurch organizations to account. I rarely–very rarely, in fact–say critical things about the church. My preference is to equip Christian leaders rather than criticize them. Yet there’s no escaping the fact that if you talk to any pro-life group reaching out to students, you’ll soon learn it’s now axiomatic that with rare exception, campus fellowship groups want nothing to do with the pro-life movement. Generally speaking, they are too afraid they might turn people off if they get involved saving innocent human lives.

4. Pro-life Christians must recruit more full-time apologists. Gregg Cunningham of the Center for Bioethical Reform once said:

There are more people working full-time to kill babies than there are working full-time to save them. That’s because killing babies is very profitable while saving them is very costly. So costly, that large numbers of Americans who say they oppose abortion are not lifting a finger to stop it. And those that do lift a finger to stop it do just enough to salve the conscience but not enough to stop the killing.

What does this mean? Since California voters have approved the amendment, this effectively outlaws some 18,000 same-sex marriage that have taken place over the last 4 1/2 months. The voters have overturned the California State Supreme Court decision that gave gay couples the right to marry.

The passage of Proposition 8 represents a crushing political defeat for gay rights activists. They had hoped public opinion on the contentious issue had shifted enough to help them defeat the measure.

It also represents a personal loss for the thousands of couples from California and others states who got married in the brief window when they could. Legal experts have said it will have to be resolved in court whether their unions still are valid.

Take time to thank the Lord for His mercy in giving us some more time to extend the Gospel to others without the added distraction of having to define what a marriage is… for now.

Read the Article (L.A. Times).

This is one issue that both Protestant and Roman Catholic can agree on: every child conceived has a right to live!

Since a majority of the questions I received related to the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, I thought it would be helpful to take a run at the answering this issue over several posts. The following is an overview of spiritual concentration of power starting at (roughly) 461 A.D. and culminated with the megalomaniac that was Pope Boniface the VIII in 1303. So this post will concern itself with a ramping up to the leadership of Pope Leo “the Great” starting at 366 A.D. It was throughout this period (366-461 A.D.) that some critical events occurred that would change the Church from being a spiritually nurturing entity to slowly having power centered in one man (the Pope) and, thereby, committing blatant spiritual malpractice.

The following are some key developments.

Damasus I (366-384)

An important early figure in the rise of the papacy is Damasus I. During his reign as bishop of Rome, Damasus contended against the heresies of Apollinarianism and Arianism, presiding over two Roman synods in 368 and 369 and sending his legates to the important Council of Constantinople in 381, all of which condemned these and other heresies. This was a very good thing. He also commissioned the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, which became the standard translation used by the church throughout the Middle Ages. Again, honorable and helpful. However, it is with Damasus we see the first leaning toward a centrality of power since Damasus was the first to declare himself the “Apostolic See.” Although this term will come to mean much more than was intended by Damasus, we do see the foreshadowing of the wrongful use of this term in the writing of St. Jerome, Damasus’ secretary and the translator of the Vulgate.

As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none save your Beatitude, that is, with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the Rock on which the Church is built. This is Noah’s ark, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood overwhelms all. …

In 381, during Damasus’ reign, the Council of Constantinople granted the bishop of Constantinople “primacy of honor next after the Bishop of Rome.” Now we can see not just a person beginning to grow in significant power, but also we see the city of Rome growing in its prestige. Both are slight leanings toward laying a foundation for, eventually, an apostate Roman Catholic Church.

Siricius (384-399)

Siricius was the first to apply the term “Pope” to himself and the first to issue a formal decretal - a ruling with binding legal precedent - on disputes in the Church. It remains the Catholic view today that “in all his decrees the pope speaks with the consciousness of his supreme ecclesiastical authority and of his pastoral care over all the churches.” So, it is at this time, we see a galvanized authority regarding the power of the Pope over the entire church.

Innocent I (402-416)

During Innocent’s pontificate, the Emperor Honorius moved the capital of the Western Empire from Rome to Ravenna, in northwest Italy, in 402. When this occurred, Rome ceased to be a strong political center (it would not regain its political strength until the rise of the papal states in the 8th century). Taking advantage of this weakness and the absence of a strong emperor, Alaric and the Visigoths sacked Rome in 410. The lack of political power of the pope made the barbarian invasion much easier.

However, Innocent did grow in power through advancing the idea of the supremacy of the pope by introducing the concept of “primacy of jurisdiction.” Replying to African bishops who had appealed to the Pope to support them against Pelagianism (refer to our Oct. 26.08 teaching), Innocent wrote:

…nothing which was done even in the most remote and distant provinces should be taken as finally settled unless it came to the notice of this See, that any just pronouncement might be confirmed by all the authority of this See, and that the other churches might from thence gather what they should teach.

Pope Leo the Great (440-461)

Leo I has been called “the master builder of the papacy.” He is considered by many to be the first pope in the modern sense of the term, for he put the idea of primacy of jurisdiction fully into practice. Leo was ideal for the task; by all accounts he was a good man, highly disciplined, and a true Christian as far as we can tell. However, the critical issue of power was to be his downfall.

Note: I say downfall with a clear understanding, in hindsight, of how his action led to a further concentration of power. However, let’s remember these men were doing what they thought was right in a very hostile world. The clash of culture, desire to serve God, and personal ambition along with a lack of Biblical accountability created a perfect storm that continued to fuel the fire of ecclesiastical power.

Leo took the title pontifex maximus,” which had been used by the Roman emperors in reference to the state cult. In his writings appeared all the traditional arguments for papal authority, including the idea that Jesus had made Peter and his successors the rock on which the church would be built, and that the bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter. Several important events for the development of the papacy occurred during Pope Leo’s reign. In 445, Emperor Valentinian said the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. In 451, Pope Leo convened the important Council of Chalcedon although that job had traditionally been reserved for emperors.
But most important of all, Pope Leo was instrumental in saving Rome from Attila the Hun. In 452, the Huns had taken a nearby Italian city, the road to Rome was open to them, the Western emperor was weak in character and resources, and the East gave no indications it would help. It seemed certain the Huns would sack Rome, but Leo left Rome and marched to meet Attila himself. We do not know what was said between the two men – legend has it that Attila saw Saints Peter and Paul marching with Leo and threatening the barbarian. Notice the mystic connection of Peter and Paul with Pope Leo? This “legend” (more likely a rumor not corrected over time) fanned the flames of the Pope’s prestige. In any case, Attila decided not to attack Rome. He turned to the north instead, and died shortly thereafter. Three years later, Pope Leo saved Rome from the Vandals. However, this time he couldn’t stop them from invading, but he led negotiations with the Vandal leader and prevented the burning of the city. Again, the Pope is seen as a victor where all civil protectors were absent.

Now the “perfect storm” of ecclesiastical authority as well as political prestige were mixed in such a way that the leader of the Roman Catholic Church would forever hold sway in the hearts and minds of the people. The Pope was now truly “the Vicar of Christ.”

“Joel said nothing and just grinned at me as we carried on with the evening.”

Victoria defines her Christian belief this way. Religion “is about appreciating what God’s given us. He’s given us this life, and he wants us to live it to the fullest.”

Victoria’s book betrays her interest in the kind of small gratifications that rarely extend to other people, let alone to the larger world. She recommends that women take “me time” every day, and indulge occasionally in a (fat-free!) ice cream. She writes repeatedly about her love for the gym. Her relationship advice is retrograde dross: submit to your man, or at least pretend you’re submitting, and then do what you want anyway. “I know if I just wait long enough,” she writes, “eventually my idea will become Joel’s idea, and it will come to pass.” When I asked her how she kept her two children interested in church, she answered that even though they were a broccoli and lean-meats household, she gave them doughnuts as a special treat on Sundays. All this is fine, in the pages of a women’s magazine or a self-help book. But what has God got to do with it?

Read the whole conversation in NEWSWEEK.

See the softball that is served to the Osteen’s by Glenn Beck on his CNN show:

Enjoy