h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Moses said, "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take anything from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." Deuteronomy 4:2.
Jesus COULD add to the commands of God, because Jesus IS God in the flesh. Jesus had all the authority of God Himself, and therefore IS justified in adding to the recorded history and commands that God would inspire men to write. The Jews didn't just reject Jesus, they crucified Him!! Christianity didn't come into existence until after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. God does have the authority to limit what his people should hold to be HIS Word. Why? Becuase He created EVERYTHING! The earth and everything on it, and each and every one of us! We belong to Him. Our lives are lived on borrowed time. When HE wants us back, He takes us. God IS all-powerful and all-knowing. He loves us SO much, that He sent Jesus to earth, to die on the cross, so that our sins could be forgiven. Without that sacrifice, it would be simply impossible for us to ever come into the presence of God. He provided His Word, the Bible, so that we could come to understand what His will is for our lives. The Bible is the way God speaks to us. Mankind, not God, created all the "religions" of the earth. Christianity fits the needs of all people on earth, but cannot accomodate sin. Jesus' sacrifice was for all mankind. That includes Buddhists, Hindus, Moslems, Mormons, everyone. But there is only one way that we can be saved, regardless of what we want to call ourselves. That is to accept Christ as our savior and to repent from our sinful life. That is all that is required. God loves all mankind, and wants us to give our lives to Him. Sadly, much of the world will reject Him and will face their fate when they are judged.

I like what you said

i have to agree well i dont have to but i amand im glad every one has decided to take some positve argueing oh ya little bit of in fo it takes twice as much effort to work against some one than to work with them

As a member of the church for 25+ years I will give my opinion.

Polygamy (Bygamy): Started by Prophecy, Ended by Prophecy, will it start again by Prophecy? Who knows? If it does will I practice it? Only if I'm required to (most members were not required to...only a small percentage ever were.) Ever hear of Abraham? He had multiple wives... I don't hear you bashing him. Our Prophets and Apostles of the past are no different than ancient Prophets and Apostles...so why would the rules be different?

Fundamentalists: These people didn't follow the Prophecy received by the President of the Church. The have fallen into apostacy. End of discussion.

The Bible: The Bible is The Word of God. Not a suspect book...it is THE WORD OF GOD.

The Book of Mormon: ALSO The Word of God.

The Same Jesus? The reason why most people say we don't worship the same Jesus is because we don't believe in the Trinity. Where did the idea of the Trinity come from? Ever heard of the Nicene Creed? The Pope and many church leaders back in 400AD had a conference and came up with the idea for the Trinity. (Do a search on ask.com for NICENE CREED and read about it.) They 'decided' that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost were one. Certainly not based on the Bible because if you read the Bible it tells you many times they are separate... Christ praying to the Father in Gethsemane...etc.

If an average Joe read the Bible (with no prior religion) they would never come up with the idea that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost were one and the same. Look at Christ's baptism in the River Jordan. Christ is baptized, the Spirit of God decends like a dove, the voice of God calling down saying "this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased".
I can name many scriptures...including these I found the other day:
John 8:17-18 "It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true." "I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me."

Christ says the testimony of 'two men' is true...and then procedes to name the TWO MEN...Himself and His Father. We believe in Jesus Christ...our brother...the Son of God...the Savior of the World... which one do you believe in?

The Temple: The Temple is SACRED not SECRET...the reason we say SACRED is because we don't want Anti-Mormon's like yourself making light of VERY SERIOUS covenants that are made there. The covenants we make in the temple are ones that someone would not make unless they were 100% committed to God and the church. If they made these covenants and broke them...well...let me just say I wouldn't want to be that person...

The Temple Ceremony is not something that should ever be discussed in public...Habakkuk 2:20

Call the Missionaries and enlighten yourself about our religion.

Peace,
Matziq

All of this correspondence has been quite fascinating. I have always been interested in the human need for religion (which is often cited as the final proof of God), and when I was a teenager I tried hard to be some sort of Christian, then some sort of Hindu, Mormon and so on. I even went along to a Sufi group, and tried to read the Koran. The more you actually read of other religions and their various scriptures, the more you realise that people are incredibly willing to believe in anything, as long as it is written in a book!
Now, many people who are firm believers in one of these books instinctively know that if they do read the other scriptures it will become increasingly difficult to go on believing in their own, so their warning is always "Don't mess about with cults - that is other religions/denominations". Sometimes it seems that it would be a dull old world without all the irrationality, but then we see religious zealots waging war on one another - or, even worse, forcing non-religious people to belong to their faiths - and it becomes glaringly obvious that humanity has got to start exchanging information on all this religion stuff, to the point where it all begins to atrophy and people can get on with their lives in peace. So to all you Mormons out there - and to the more mainstream Christians - have you actually read The Talmud, the Bhagavad Gita, the Suras, the Koran - to name just a few of the many, many scriptures that millions regard as the Truth?

This post has been removed.

bravo!!!

Ouch! That must have hurt! Pan Da, if you're listening, try writing in your space, you never know what may come of it.
^. .^
= ' =

I am Catholic and just read your quote "That is to accept Christ as our savior and to repent from our sinful life. That is all that is required." Why do you need the Bible if that is all you have to do to acquire salvation? Two things I want you to look at in Scriture 1) the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Out of the 30,000 different Prostestant denominations some believe it to be a only a symbol some believe in the Presence as in consubstantion but Catholics believe in Transubstantion. Look at Jn 6:35-71 Eucharist promised,Mt 26:26 Eucharist instituted, 1 Cor 10:16 Eucharist= participation in Christ's body and blood 1Cor 11:23-29 receiving unworthily=quilty of his body and blood, Ex 12:8,46- Paschal lamb had to be eaten, Jn1:29 Jesus called "Lamb of God",1 Cor 5:7 Jesus called "paschal lamb who has been sacrificed. My question to you is Would you be one of the people in the Bible who walked away from Jesus teaching when He said "You must eat my body and drink my blood to have life in you?" Not me He meant it!!For this life and the next life.
Now the 2nd thing.

Past event (I have been saved)
Rom 8:24 for in hope we were saved
Eph 2:5,8 by grace you have been saved through faith
2Tim 1:9 he saved us, called us, according to his grace
Tit 3:5 he saved us thru bath of rebirth, renewal by Holy Spirit

Present Process (I am being saved)
Phil 2:12 work out your salvation with fear and trembling
1 Pet 1:9 as you attain the goal of your faith, salvation

Future Event (I will be saved)
Mt10:22 he who endures to the end will be saved
Mt24:13 he who perseveres to the end will be saved
Mk 8:3-5 whoever loses his life for my sake will save it
Acts 15:11 we shall be saved through the grace of Jesus
Rom 5:9-10 since we are justified, we shall be saved
1Cor 3:15 he will be saved, but only as through fire
1Cor 5:5 deliver man to Satan so his spirit may be saved
Heb 9:28 Jesus will appear second time, to bring salvation

Catholic do not believe in Once Saved Always Saved theory.
The Catholic Church was started in 33AD by Jesus and it is the same Church teaching the same doctrines it did 2000 years ago. Look in any secular book such as the World Amanac that list the different churches starting date.

The early Church creeds, which were adaped to include those doctrines that were being attacked, were never adapted to defend against a charge of a "mass apostasy" A good example of this adaptation creeds is the doctrine of the divinity of Chris. The early Apostles' Creed calls Jesus simply, "his only Son, our Lord" When the Arians in the early fourth centruy began to deny the divinity of Jesus, the Nicene Creed was formulated to include the unmistakable affirmation of Christ's divinity: "eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father." The Church responded to the Arian heresy by adapting her creed to support the challenged doctrine.

1)If we can prove the divinity of Christ, we can prove the existence of the Trinity. When I show you that Jesus is truly God like the Father, then they must accept that there can be more than one person in the Godhead.

2)Jesus is the central figure in the New Testament. We have abundant verses discusing who and what Jesus is.

3) The early Church Fathers focus their writing on the Person of Jesus. These numerous references from the Fathers allow us to determine clearly wheter or not the very early Christians believed that Jesus is God.

Sacred Scripture
Mt1:23
Comment Jesus is referred to as 'God," not "a god"

John 20:28-29
Comment Thomas says to Jesus, "My Lord and my God" Notice that Jesus accepts the worship of Thomas. Instead of correcting Thomas, Jesus praises those who would believe that He is the risen Lord and God without having to touch His wounds.

John 14:9
comment Jesus tells us that seeing Him is the same as seeing the Father. Thus He states that He is equal to the Father

Col 2:9
comment: St Paul stress that the fullness of the Godhead,the fullness of divinity, is in Jesus

Isaiah 43:11
Titus 3:6
Titus 3:4
Comment: In Isaiah 43:11,we are told that there is no savior besides God. In Titus 3:6 Jesus is called the Savior. In Titus 3:4 Jesus is called 'Our Savior, God." It is important to recognize that these passages refer to a very unique type of Savior who must necessarily be divine because He redeems the entire human race. No mere creature can be called a savior in this special sense.

Isaiah 9:5
comment: This is a prophecy about Jesus the Messiah. Yet this Messiah is called "Mighty God" This couldn't refer to the Father because this person is a "a child born to us" This passage can only refer to Jesus , the Mighty God.

Rev 1:8
Comment: God is called the Alpha and Omega. In Rev 22:13 Jesus is also called the Alpha and Omega. Therefore Jesus is equal to God.

Deut 10:17
Rev 19:16
Comment: In Deut 10:17 we are told that God is Lord of lords;in Rev 19:16 we are told that Jesus is Lord of lords. Again, Jesus'position is the same as God's

Mt 28:19
comment The disciples are commanded to baptize in the name (not names) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirt. The Son and the Holy Spirit are listed as separate persons from the Father, yet they are given equal status with the Father. Note that the name is singular because there is only one God. We have in this verse a clear teaching of the doctrine of the Trinity: three distinct persons in one God.

The early Church had to deal with heresies which either denied Jesus' divinity or His humanity. The Church always taught that in order to redeem us, Jesus had to be both true God and true man. He had to be truly human so that he could make atonement for the sins of the human race. He had to be truly God so that the atonement would have infinite value, and thus make reparation to an infinite God.

It is banal to quibble about about the absence of an s on the end of a word. If we consider that the Bible was originally written in another language and translated countless times, we cannot use a case like this to prove anything. What if the grammar rules back then required people to say name instead of names in this case, or what if it were common practice, or what if a translator missed the s or decided it was more appropiate without the s? Such a variable factor cannot be as important piece of evidence as you suggest.

How can you say that if we prove the divinity of Christ we can also prove the existence of the Trinity? Besides this, your first statement is confusing. First you say that the divinity of Christ proves the Trinity, then you say that if Jesus is God like the Father, then there can be more than one person in the Godhead. The term Godhead is not the same as Trinity. Can you clarify your meaning?

In many scriptures Jesus refers to Himself as "on the right hand of the Father". When Jesus is baptised all three parts of the Godhead are mentioned doing different things. This is for me a powerful reason why there is no Trinity as such.

Prove Please that the Catholics Church as we know it today did not exist til the 10th or 11th century. O please!! Read the Early Church Doctors Saints, Clement, Ignatius,Justin Martyr,Polycarp, and Irenaeus.

I was obviously too quiet for this heated debate
I'LL BE A BIT LOUDER THIS TIME. ANYONE WHO HASN'T WRITTEN ANYTHING ON THEIR SPACE, IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO DO SO, BY CLICKING ON EDIT PAGE. OK?

^. .^
= ' =

>How can you say that if we prove the divinity of Christ we can also prove the existence of the Trinity?<
answer:Because Jesus is no mere Human.He is NOT 1/2 man and 1/2 God.He is incarnate.I was able to show that Jesus is truly God like the Father using scripture.

>Besides this, your first statement is confusing.<
answer:I know your confused. You really must look at the scripture verses to understand.

>First you say that the divinity of Christ proves the Trinity,<
answer: Yes it does. Divine,not in the sense to mean simply a holy person.

>then you say that if Jesus is God like the Father, then there can be more than one person in the Godhead.<
answer: exactly now your getting it. Godhead is 3 distinct person in 1, God the Father,God the Son,and God the Holy Spirit. The analogy I can give is I am one person but I have 3 distinction: I am a wife,I am a mother, and I am a daughter but I am still 1.

>The term Godhead is not the same as Trinity. Can you clarify your meaning?<
answer:I hope I just did. There are 3 distinction in 1. The Godhead has 3 distinction.

>In many scriptures Jesus refers to Himself as "on the right hand of the Father". When Jesus is baptised all three parts of the Godhead are mentioned doing different things. This is for me a powerful reason why there is no Trinity as such.<
answer: This is all the more powerful reason your intellect should reason.

As a member of the church for 25+ years I will give my opinion.

>Polygamy (Bygamy): Started by Prophecy, Ended by Prophecy, will it start again by Prophecy?<
? You mean it was started by Joseph Smith who claimed to be a prophet and apostle.

> Who knows? If it does will I practice it? Only if I'm required to (most members were not required to...only a small percentage ever were.) Ever hear of Abraham? He had multiple wives... I don't hear you bashing him. Our Prophets and Apostles of the past are no different than ancient Prophets and Apostles...so why would the rules be different?<
answer: When Jesus came to us he taught and healed and one of his teaching says Mt19:5 leave father and mother,join wife, 2 become 1 flesh.
Mk10:7-12 What God joined together, no man separate
Eph 5:22-32 union of man and wife image of Christ and Church
1 Thess 4:4 acquire a wife for yourself in holiness and honor

He taught us how we should be living.

>Fundamentalists: These people didn't follow the Prophecy received by the President of the Church. The have fallen into apostacy. End of discussion.<
Huh!!!!! Since you believe this I am assuming you have checked out the facts for yourself.I am assuming you checked out the writing of the early Church Fathers. They begin during the time of the Apostles and end about the year 200AD. Thus they cover the period when according to you a progressive corruption of the Catholic Church and its teachings took place.When you study these early Fathers you find that they consistently teach Catholic doctrines. St. Clement (died 80AD) plainly asserts his authority as Bishop of Rome and head of the Church. St. Clement also describes the Mass as a sacrifice. St. Ignatius, a coworker of the Apostle John, writes a strong letter around 110AD condemning those who reject the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. St. Justin Martyr, in 155 AD gives a detailed description of the Catholic Mass. St. Irenaeus, between 180-199AD warns that one must follow the Church of Rome in order to follow the Apostolic teaching. These Fathers don't even mention a "great apostasy" as you would expect them to if it were occurring in their own day. They do mention and defend charges made against the Catholic faith, such as the accusation of cannibalism and attacks on the Incarnation.

Many major Mormon doctrines like Polygamy and the exlusion of blacks from the priesthood have been abandoned by the LDS Church. How could a Church that is led continuously by inspired prophets teach doctrines that are later discarded?

>The Bible: The Bible is The Word of God. Not a suspect book...it is THE WORD OF GOD<
answer:ok inspired. Let me ask you, How do you think you got the Bible? It did not fall out of the sky?

>The Book of Mormon: ALSO The Word of God<
Answer: Huh!!!!!!! Because some young boy thought he was an prophet? Apostle?

>The Same Jesus? The reason why most people say we don't worship the same Jesus is because we don't believe in the Trinity. Where did the idea of the Trinity come from?<
answer: from scripture (see other post made on the Trinity that I wrote.
> Ever heard of the Nicene Creed?The Pope and many church leaders back in 400AD had a conference and came up with the idea for the Trinity.<
answer:Did they just sit around drinking tea? Rememer Jesus said, The gates of Hell shall not prevail against my Church!!! Jesus also gave the apostle the power to speak with Christ's voice LK10:16



(Do a search on ask.com for NICENE CREED and read about it.) >They 'decided' that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost were one.<
answer: Who is they????

>Certainly not based on the Bible because if you read the Bible it tells you many times they are separate... Christ praying to the Father in Gethsemane...etc.<
answer:The Trinity is certainly based on scripture.

>If an average Joe read the Bible (with no prior religion) they would never come up with the idea that God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost were one and the same.<
answer: That is why Jesus left a Church to teach and govern his flock.In the Old testament God made many convenants.First with Adam,then with Noah,Abraham,Moses--God also made a conveant with His Church.It is the same Church as it was 2000 years ago.It is One Holy Catholic Apostlic Church.


> Look at Christ's baptism in the River Jordan. Christ is baptized, the Spirit of God decends like a dove, the voice of God calling down saying "this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased".<

answer: Exactly the Son of God. You use this as your bases for not believing in the Trinity. Come on Look at Mt 1:23 This is a prophecy about Jesus who is called Emmanuel (God is with us) Jesus is referred to as "God" not "a god", John 20:28-29 Thomas says to Jesus "My Lord and my God" Jesus accepts the worship of Thomas. John 14:9 Jesus tells us that seeing Him is the same as seeing the Father. Thus He states that He is equal to the Father. I have more to show you..

>I can name many scriptures...including these I found the other day:
John 8:17-18 "It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true." "I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me."<

answer: Yeah because they are one in the same....

>Christ says the testimony of 'two men' is true...and then procedes to name the TWO MEN...Himself and His Father. We believe in Jesus Christ...our brother...the Son of God...the Savior of the World... which one do you believe in?<

answer:Yes,I believe in Jesus Christ, My Lord!!!
You believe in Joseph Smith but yet you won't believe that Jesus is God.

>The Temple: The Temple is SACRED not SECRET...the reason we say SACRED is because we don't want Anti-Mormon's like yourself making light of VERY SERIOUS covenants that are made there. The covenants we make in the temple are ones that someone would not make unless they were 100% committed to God and the church. If they made these covenants and broke them...well...let me just say I wouldn't want to be that person...<
answer: God would want everyone in his Church. Sinners included. What kind of covenants? Mormonism teaches that there are many gods. Mormons believe that the present gods were once only mortals who became gods through what they call "exaltation" Any person now living can also become a god through this same process of "exaltation" All you have to do is faithfully keep the Mormon ordinances in this life.
The temptation to want to be gods has been with the human race from the beginning. The devil tempted Eve by saying, "you shall be as gods" (Gen 3:5) In Isaiah 14:14, the king of Babylon says, " I will be like the most High" The Roman emperors were not long satisfied with being civil rulers of the greatest empire on earth. They eventually demanded to be worshipped as gods. In our time we have cults promising divinity to their followers. You are following a very dangerous path in desiring to be gods.

Baptism for the dead, as practiced by the Mormon Church, is not found in any other religion. It is unique to Mormonism. Many people identify Mormonism by this practice. Although this doctrine is NOT foundational to Mormonism, it has been an integral part of Mormon religious practice. The Mormon Church teaches that baptism for the dead is an obligation binding Mormons in a serious way.

Mormons devote a great deal of time and energy baptizing qualified members on behalf of people who died without baptism. They compile extensive genealogical records to identify people needing baptism for the dead.
What exactly is this doctrine? "MORMON DOCTRINE" P.71,1966 edition.
"Indeed, so invarying is the eternal law shich states: 'Except a man be born of water and the Spirti,he cannot enter into the kingdom of God' (John 3:5), that this holy baptismal ordinance must be performed vicariously for accountable persons who departed this life unbaptized but who would have complied with the law had the privilege been afforded them. Hence, we have the doctrine of Baptism for the dead (1Cor 15:29)

As you can see from the quotation,baptism for the dead is only for those who did not have the opportunity to enter the Mormon Church while on earth. It does not apply to those who knew about the Mormon teachings and refused to accept them. This practice allows people who are dead to enter the Mormon Church after their death and so to enter heaven.

This doctrine,which is taught as a serious moral obligation, is based on a single, extremely unclear Bible passage, 1Cor 15:29."Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

The first thing to realize is that the entire chapter is concerned with the doctrine of the Resurrection. St. Paul, in order to support his argument for bodily resurrection, mentions baptism for the dead as evidence of belief in the resurrection. St. Paul does not explain what this practice is. St. Paul neither condemns nor approves this practice. He simply mentions it in passing as he builds his argument for the resurrection of the body.

? If this practice is so important why does the Bible mention it only once, in an obscure passage where the practice is neither commanded nor approved?

The New Testament teaches that baptism for the living is necessary for salvation. Baptism is repeatedly mentioned, clearly explained, and explicitly commanded. If baptism for the dead is equally necessary for salvation, there should be numerous passages stressing its importance. There is NOT.

If baptism for the dead is so important, why is it not mentioned even once in the many writings of the early Church Fathers? Why was it unheard of in all of Christian history until Joseph Smith introduced it only 150 years ago?

As a Mormon you claim that the BOOK OF MORMON contains the fullness of the Gospel. Yet the BOOK OF MORMON does not once mention baptism for the dead. Why the inconsistency????

Even the BOOK OF MORMON teaches that only in this life can you gain or lose your salvation. This rules out the Mormon practice of baptism for the dead. Read Alma 34:31-35. Verse 32 stresses that "this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God Verse 33 warns: "do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end: for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darness wherein there can be no labor performed. Verse 35 continues; For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil and he doth seal you his: and he doth seal you his:...and this is the final state of the wiked." Baptism for the dead is also refuted in Alma 5:28, 31: Nephi 9:38; Moshiah 16:5, 11: and Moshiah 26:25-27

It is written...

"If this practice is so important why does the Bible mention it only once, in an obscure passage where the practice is neither commanded nor approved? The New Testament teaches that baptism for the living is necessary for salvation. Baptism is repeatedly mentioned, clearly explained, and explicitly commanded. If baptism for the dead is equally necessary for salvation, there should be numerous passages stressing its importance. There is NOT. If baptism for the dead is so important, why is it not mentioned even once in the many writings of the early Church Fathers? Why was it unheard of in all of Christian history until Joseph Smith introduced it only 150 years ago?"

I remember reading this in one of your earlier postings:
"
answer: That is why Jesus left a Church to teach and govern his flock."

I think it is appropriate that you stick to the same answer for your own question.


"This doctrine,which is taught as a serious moral obligation, is based on a single, extremely unclear Bible passage, 1Cor 15:29."Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"

Why in the world is this passage "extremely unclear"? The way I see it, it is saying that the fact that baptism of the dead is practiced shows that there must be resurrection after this life. Otherwise, why would we be baptized for the dead? Just because this scripture doesn't outline how baptism of the dead is performed doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. This is why we need continued revelation from God. It cannot be that God revealed things to the leaders of His church thousand of years ago, but not anymore!!

This doctrine is not based entirely on this single passage. As a result of CONTINUING REVELATION, this doctrine is practiced in the church today. The leaders of the Catholic church would have received proper revelation if they had stayed in tune to the Lord.

Which brings me to another point. How can the Catholic church claim that the Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra? No man is infallible at any time! This of course does not mean that we all constantly sin, but there is never a time when we are not CAPABLE of sinning! This is kind of getting off the point, but I have been thinking about this for a long time.

Sorry Wormrow, It has been a while. I would like to address continuing revelation first, then I will address the Papacy.

All orthodox Christians believe that public revelation ended with the death of John the last Apostle (about 100AD) This means that there can be no new doctrines, no new Scriptures, and no new prophecies after the close of the apostolic age. There can be no new prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Daniel, who could communicate inspired revelation.

Let's go to Scripture-Jude 3: "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (KJV).

In the above passage, St. Jude indicates that the full Apostolic teaching has already been delivered to the saints.

Gal4:4:"But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son..."(KJV)

In the above verse God sent His Son at the "fulness of time" indicating that Jesus will communicate the fulness of God's Revelation

2Tim 2:2 "And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" (KJV)

In this verse it clearly suggests a completed deposit of faith which Timothy is to safeguard and transmit to successors.

Mt 28:18-20 "And Jesus came and spake unto them saying, 'All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world' Amen" (KJV)

In Matthew 28 Our Lord is telling the Apostles that the revelation He gave them during His earthly ministry, and which the Holy Spirit would clarify and complete (see Jn14:26; Jn 16:12-13), was the fullness of God's Revelation that they were to teach all men until the end of time.

Heb 1:1-2 " God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these days spoken unto us by his Son" (KJV)

This passage tells us that the inspired prophets of the OT, who communicated God's revelation in an incomplete form, have now given way to the Son of God who has given us the full and perfect Revelation of God. "The Son is His Father's definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him. Jesus is the fulfillment of all prophecy.

The Early Church Fathers

"You shall not abandon the commandments of the Lord; but you shall keep what you have received, adding nothing to it nor taking anything away." (DIDACHE, 4,13; 50-140 AD)

"When therefore, we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek among others the truth which is easily obtained from the Church. For the Apostles, like a rich man in a bank, deposited with her most copiously everything which pertains to the truth..." )St. Irenaeus, 180-199 AD)

THIS PASSAGE IS VERY IMPORTANT.St. Irenaeus tells us in clear, unmistakable language that the deposit of faith was completed by the Apostles and is safeguarded and transmitted by the Church. Remember, St. Irenaeus was taught by St. Polycarp (a disciple of St.John the Apostle) and is considered the greatest theologian in the immediate post-Apostolic period.

"After Jesus Christ, there is no need of further search; nor, after the Gospel, is there any further inquiry. Inasmuch as we believe, we desire nothing further to believe. For beyond what we already have, we believe there is nothing further that we ought to believe." (Tertullian, 200AD)

I have to ask you another question. Why are there so many failed prophecies of your prophets in the Mormon Church? For example, Joseph Smith clearly prophesied he would be alive at the Second Coming (DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS,112). In 1832, Smith predicted that before the generation that was then alive passed away, a Mormon temple (the city "New Jerusalem") would be built in western Missouri (DOCTRINES AND COVENANTS, 84) Over 160 years later, with everyone in that generation long dead, there is still no Mormon temple there.
In 1843, Smith also predicted that if the United States would not redress the wrongs suffered by the Mormons in the state of Missouri, then "in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted" (HISTORY OF THE CHURCH, VOL.5, p.394) This is obviously another false prophecy.
In 1862, Smith's successor Brigham Young foretold that the Civil War would not result in freeing the black slaves (JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, Vol.10, p350).
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 tells us how to distinguish a true prophet from a false one: "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of the other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumtuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him" (KJV)
Even a single failed prophecy proves that the prophet is false. Since official Mormon prophets have made many false prophecies, they are not true prophets.
I have written this before but it needs to be asked again. Many major Mormon doctrines like polygamy and the exclusion of blacks from the priesthood have been abandoned by the LDS Church. How could a Church that is led continuously by inspired prophets teach doctrines that are later discarded?

Now for the Papacy:
Ex Cathedra actually translated means from the Chair.
This web site gives the accurate translation of infalliblity.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

Enjoy the reading!!