mormon prophet and catholic pope

[shadowhunter]

So i am wondering what are the differences and simlirates between the prophets and the popes

[bytor2112]

Pope and Prophet and Evangelical Preacher were in a boat fishing in the middle of a lake. Pope Says, " I gotta go to the bathroom", so he jumps out of the boat and walks across the lake to the bathroom and then comes back. Mormon Prophet says, " I gotta go too", so he jumps out of the boat and walks across the water and goes to the bathroom and then walks back. A few minutes later the Evangelical preacher says, " I gotta go too", so he jumps out of the boat and and immediately starts floundering around. The Pope looks at the Prophet and says, " Should we tell him about the rocks?", the Prophet replies, " what rocks?"

[applepansy]

Originally Posted by shadowhunter

So i am wondering what are the differences and simlirates between the prophets and the popes

You deserve a serious answer. I'm not the person to do that. I don't know what "authority" the pope has.

I do know that President Monson is a Prophet of God. He holds all the priesthood keys and his line of priesthood authority goes back to Christ.

applepansy

[tubaloth]

Similarities
They both are the “head” of there church.
Both Claim to have the same priesthood as Peter, James, and John had. (One believed it was passed down over time, the other believed it was restored).
I’m guessing the pope has some type of authority given to him to be the pope? The same is true for the prophet

Differences
I don’t know if the pope believed in Revelation/guidance for the church?
Pope is called from a bunch of elders that figure out who should lead next.
Prophet is known who is next, is set apart by the other apostles.

Originally Posted by shadowhunter

So i am wondering what are the differences and simlirates between the prophets and the popes

Hi shadowhunter,

I'll take a stab at the similar ( Pope and President Monson )

Both are children of God
Both are respected leaders of their religions
Both have accepted the responsability to lead by example
Both teach LOVE
Both have a deep faith in Jesus
Both serve God
Both are admired by many

I'll leave the differences to others

[Moksha]

They are both CEOs of their oranizations and the words of both are considered inerrant by some of their followers.

[shadowhunter]

and sadly their words are also considered irreavlent by some of theire followes as well

[The_Doctor]

Originally Posted by shadowhunter

and sadly their words are also considered irreavlent by some of theire followes as well

But should those people really be called their followers then?

[changed]

Originally Posted by tubaloth

[color=black] ...One believed it was passed down over time, the other believed it was restored

It comes down to the apostasy – was the apostasy total and complete? Or not?

Apostasy of the Early Christian Church
Isa. 60:2 2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people
Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, 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:
12 And they 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.

2 Thes. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first

Most Christian church’s believe there was an apostasy, that truth was lost. That was the big restoration movement, to try and restore lost truths…

There is a big difference between restore and reform. It was noble for people to fight false doctrines and false spiritual authority. Unfortunately, their honest and sincere efforts only resulted in the creation of more churches carrying their names and their protest and adding more confusion and more divisions. In reality, two major elements were missing in the reform: revelation and authority, the Lord’s only way to communicate divine truth to mankind.

There was a talk, can’t find it, that gave the example of making a shirt from a shirt from a shirt from a shirt without the original pattern. Mistakes made in the first copy are exaggerated in the next copy and so forth. By the time you get to the nth generation of shirts made from shirts, you have something very different from the original. What you need is the original pattern, not a bunch of replications. You can try and fix mistakes, but you can’t get back to the original without the original. They said it better, but you get the point.

Restore means that G-d Himself came down with Jesus and restored the priesthood, provided additional unpolluted scriptures, gave visions and revelations, and direct guidance for how to re-establish the church. No trying to piece together bits and pieces that had been scattered around, no interpretations, no speculating, no voting. Getting the original pattern back right from the source.


I have Catholics in my family, they are good people, but the church? To write scriptures in and talk in Latin specifically to keep people from understanding what is being said, to try and take away any personal relationship with G-d by saying you have to go through the church for everything.... infant baptism - that little babies go to hell unless they are baptized...There is just something so wrong with that... again, love the people, just not the church.

Interesting comparison though. I think it is true that LDS and Catholics are the only ones who claim to have the priesthood. Am I wrong on this?

Catholics can trace it back to Peter:

Matt 16:
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, aElias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the bSon of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The rock the church is built on is direct revelation from heaven... not any specific person... or I should say no person other than Jesus, Heavenly Father, the Holy Spirit - the "Chruch of Jesus Christ" not the church of Peter, or the church of Bob or something...

Originally Posted by changed

I have Catholics in my family, they are good people, but the church? To write scriptures in and talk in Latin specifically to keep people from understanding what is being said, to try and take away any personal relationship with G-d by saying you have to go through the church for everything.... infant baptism - that little babies go to hell unless they are baptized...There is just something so wrong with that... again, love the people, just not the church.

Hello changed,

Looks like you might need a 5 hour lunch with ceeboo

Your posts strike me as rather ignorant, not to mention completly off topic

At any rate, if you would like to be educated on these matters we can have lunch

God bless,
Carl