Posted on 06/01/2002 5:03:36 PM PDT by restornu
The ironies associated with this are incredibly rich but more importantly very insightful, but if you are irony-enjoyment impaired, and consequently when reading them are tempted to add or take away from them – warning -- proceed no further – lest you be "plagued"!
1. Pharisees and Sadducees
A common Biblical pattern is that "believers" are more likely to accept ancient prophets than modern ones. Christ Himself said this (Mat. 23:29-37). Stephen in Acts 7:52 said to the Jews: "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" The Bible condemns Jews who could accept ancient prophets but not Christ or John the Baptist. Because of the Jewish response, some segments of Christianity (unfortunately) have despised Judaism for 2,000 years. Ironically, some of generic Christianity's response to the LDS Church reflects remarkably well in great depth and breadth many of the same Jewish attitudes and arguments against Christianity 2,000 years ago. In common are attitudes of no openness to new revelation, little understanding, persecution, pejorative labeling, and the quick dismissal.
2. Revelation Often Excluded
A very rich irony is that this "claimed-canon-closer" Revelation passage was often itself considered not to be scripture! Revelation can quite confidently be called probably the most disputed book of the Bible. Ranging from expressing skepticism to calling Revelation a fraud, its early cynics included Origen, Eusebius (the father of church history), Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, Saint Amphilochius, Saint Philastrius, Saint Dionysius, Gaius of Rome, Bishop Theodoret, Codex Vaticanus, the Council of Laodicea in 363, the 85th Apostolic Canon (ecclesiastical decrees but not of apostolic origin) of about 385. Most of the dozen earliest known lists of canon excluded Revelation. Revelation not only was one of the last books to finally gain early or wide acceptance, but also arguably the book with the most opposition. Revelation was widely rejected in the Eastern churches (such as Syrian, Armenian, Georgian, Greek) and often waited 1,000 years to be accepted and in some cases still is not such as the Greek Orthodox Bible.
Of the thousands of Greek New Testament documents, mostly written well after 1000 A.D., a typical epistle is 2-3 times more frequently found than Revelation, and the gospels are 8-9 times more frequently found. Revelation is the least found New Testament book. In a similar vein, there were more Greek New Testaments with every book except Revelation than New Testaments that included Revelation. Of the 2,135 Greek lectionaries (books with scripture selections and commentary designed to be read at church services), the only New Testament book never quoted is Revelation.
During the Protestant Reformation, prominent critics cynical of or hostile to the Book of Revelation included Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Karlstadt, Oecolampadius, Brentz, Erasmus, Tyndale, and the Gustavus Adolphus Bible among other Bibles. Should Protestants now regard their fearless founding fathers as recipients of the Revelation passage curses?
3. Revelation Often Varied
Revelation is one of the books of the New Testament with the most wording variants between the multiple versions. And ironically, the passage under discussion itself has variants that change meaning. Verse 19 in the KJV reads: "…God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." But this third punishment becomes solely a clarification of the first two in both the NIV and RSV Bibles: "…the holy city, which are described in this book." Also for both the NIV and RSV Bibles the "book of life" becomes the "tree of life". All New Testament references to the tree of life are within Revelation. With the tree of life and holy city as heaven only being Revelation topics, the "which are described in this book" further shows "this book" only meant Revelation.
4. Self-Contradictory Interpretation
If you deny later revelation, then logically you cannot believe there was revelation in selecting the Bible books. No scripture lists a canon or even uses the words "canon" or "Bible". Ironically the common interpretation of the Revelation passage is inherently self-contradictory – proclaiming a future divine Bible, but denying the revelation necessary to indicate which canon, copy, translation, or text.
5. Self-Plagued Interpretation
Ironically one could argue that the concept of forbidding to "add unto these things" could logically be used to condemn not only added false writing but also added false interpretation. With this logic one who expounds the common but false interpretation of this passage adds plagues to oneself! But of course this is illogical as it would need to assume ill intent while the common illness is ill informed.
6. Ancient Scripture
A very large passage in the Book of Mormon (much of II Nephi 28, 29) prophesied today's common attitudes – that there can be no scripture other than the Bible. It is ironic that the core arguments against the book are an accurate fulfillment of prophecy within the book.
7. Modern Scripture
Also intriguing is a modern scripture given just before the LDS Church was organized in 1830. D.C. 20 touches on modern prophets, modern revelation, and particularly modern scripture (the Book of Mormon). Then apparently anticipating how the Revelation passage would be so widely quoted, verse 35 very artfully responds: "…these things are true and according to the revelations of John, neither adding to, nor diminishing from the prophecy of his book, the holy scriptures, or the revelations of God which shall come hereafter…"
8. Closing Scripture
While many use Revelation's closing to say the Bible has all past inspiration, ironically three of John's subsequent books have closings that lend themselves otherwise. With two previously quoted, the third is II John 12 where John decides to not write the rest of his inspired message: "Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face."
9. Contested Scripture
Very ironically, most arguments against the Book of Mormon have comparable arguments at least equally strong against the Bible!
10. Contemporaneous Scripture
Often a Protestant blithely dismisses the Book of Mormon, confidently believing his own canon was settled 2,000 years ago and has withstood the test of time. (Most Christians, including LDS, have little Bible history background.) Yet the final major catalyst to mostly settling the Protestant canon was the decision of the British and Foreign Bible Society to drop the Apocrypha. This was done in 1826, one year before the Book of Mormon was received. It is ironic that these two canons were contemporaneously settled, and both in modern times.
11. Prophesied Scripture
Ezekiel 37:15-20 does prophesy of a future Bible (not just a generic reference to scripture). It is ironic that the one passage that prophesies of a future Bible also prophesies of the Book of Mormon (see prior discussion).
12. Creed Above Bible?
It is ironic that some who believe in no more scripture often treat the Nicene Creed (written three centuries later) as being above the Bible. Particularly ironic because of the colorful political history of the creed, and because a common interpretation of the creed has a very difficult view of the Godhead (3=1, 1=3) that goes against how the Bible represents three unique beings though one in purpose.
13. Church Above Bible?
In a similar vein, many people today put their church teachings above that of the scriptures. Yet if they deny additional revelation exists, how can they justify extra-Biblical teaching? While many proclaim the Bible to be the sole source of authority, yet in reality they follow their leaders, perhaps because they just trust that somehow surely their leaders must know what they are talking about.
14. Edifying Enlightenment
Apologists frequently state a key factor in settling the "correct" canon was the edifying enlightenment most readers received upon reading divine truth, thus leading to general acceptance. For instance, the beauty of the Beatitudes is clearly compelling. However this argument, while having some merit, has many weaknesses and ironies. First, it cannot explain inclusion of books like the Song of Solomon or, ironically, Revelation itself. Second, history shows canon conclusions were both deeply disputed and also put in place by people in prominent positions. Third, it ignores groupthink, particularly when it is from childhood – while we Christians reverence the Bible, most Muslims also cherish the Koran. Fourth, while most apologists reject the Book of Mormon, ironically, it has by any standard tremendously far more compelling reader appeal than the Bible. (The Book of Mormon has the advantages of having been intended for this era, and also compiled and translated by inspiration.) And finally, ironically, this argument is largely launched by the dismal desperation of apologists appalled by the disconcerting details of the chronicles of canon choosing. This is particularly painful for Catholic-condemning paradox-perplexed Protestants who have to exasperatingly explain how a Catholic Church could correctly conclude canon of the New Testament.
15. Factual or False? Find the Fruits!
While Rev. 22:18-19 is "wrested" (II Pet. 3:16) to say that any scripture-producing prophet must be false, we should instead follow the Lord's counsel about discerning prophets. In Matthew 7:15-20 the Lord told us to "beware of false prophets" and that "ye shall know them by their fruits". Ironically even anti-LDS writings frequently extol the highly exemplary lives generally led by most LDS members, the key the Lord said to look for when trying to find true prophets.
16. Non-Prophet Organizations, Non-Profit Outcomes
It is ironic that Christian sects today proclaim no more prophets or scripture, while also proclaiming they are Christ's church with all the keys and knowledge to secure salvation. Now I hasten to add I have truly tremendous respect and regard for the countless Christian churches – both because they teach tremendous and true Christian concepts and because they are full of great and genuine people. The overall positive impact of Christianity on society in the last two millennia is in my opinion the world's greatest success story! But still feel-fine fuzziness is not an admirable approach to seeking salvation, and while delicacy delivers diplomacy, it is disastrous for determining eternity. Either a church has God's guidance that can be seen as sacred scripture (whether or not it is written or officially canonized), or it does not. Either clear voices or council votes. Prophetic counsel or political compromise. Holy inspiration or human intelligence. Wise answers or waffling ambiguities. Clear doctrine or constant debate. Precise edict or perennial equivocation. Heavenly whisperings or human wisdom. His church or a human club. Spoken authoritatively or "scribe-like" answers (Mat. 7:28-29). Distinct dogma or nebulous notions. Lucid logic or contradictory conjecture. Always answers or more mysteries. Straightforward simplicity or confusing complexity. Comforting clarity or troubling theology. Definitive direction or tentative timidity. Edifying enlightenment or endless enigmas. Perfectly-placed puzzle pieces or internally-inconsistent incongruous ideology! (Yes I know – extremely excessive annoying alliteration.) A spiritual prophet yields spiritual profit. If a church does not give you more than the past tense for an actual and active God, and does not give you the present tense for prophets and prophecy – then it does not guarantee you the future tense for happiness and heaven!
Upon an assiduously acute hard core review of the issues, the regular rendering of Revelation 22:18-19 that believes there will never be more scripture other than the Bible, is simply an untenable passage interpretation. Untenable independent of one's religious beliefs and of one's beliefs on the plausibility of any particular claim to post-Biblical revelation and scripture.
Saving the best evidence for last, a topic that deserves volumes, the Book of Mormon is in my opinion the most persuasive evidence of further scripture about Christ. I invite you to follow I The. 5:20-21 and simply examine it yourself! For a free copy call (888) 537-7111.
It is the humble but clear declaration of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that the Lord has once again in modern times given modern scripture and a modern church, guided once again by modern revelation to a modern prophet and a modern twelve apostles. Just as the first coming of Christ was not an unprophesied unforetold enigmatic event to the faithful follower, so this profusely prophesied preparatory period prior to the Savior's second showing should also not surprise the serious student of scripture. The Bible foretells this boldly-bannered (Isa. 13:2) exuberantly-ensigned (Isa. 11:10-12) triumphantly-trumpeted (Mat. 24:31) dispensation-declaring (Eph. 1:10) restitution of the Gospel prior to the Lord's return (Acts 3:20-21). This wondrous work (Isa. 29:14) is widely witnessed by marvelous miracles of verifiable veracity and by many millions of dedicated disciples leading lives indicative of the indelible imprint of illuminating inspiration. It is also magnificently manifested by amply answering quizzical questions with a deep detailed theologically-thorough coherent clarity that astute analysis aids, rational reason reinforces, exhaustive examination exonerates, lucid logic loves, and scientific skepticism strengthens! An unparalleled unique clarion call of such striking singularity that fully fulfills profound prophetic promises of such splendorous significance decidedly deserves real review, not canon-closing cliches sourced in superficial shallow scholarship of Revelation readings!
You folks have many good things to say the LDS who are practicing their religion, but because of the traditions of men are restrained to find out why the Spirit of the Lord continues to bear fruits in them.
That said, Mormonism is the precursor to scientology, minus the Hollywood hair-dressers. They are anti-Trinitarian, deny the divinity of Christ, and each plans on ruling over their own planet in the after-life. Literally.
Very gainsaying of you, Dr. Eckleburg!
My vote goes to the Romanists. At least with them you know their brains are still on planet Earth.
I thought the Lord commanded us to be in the world, but not of this world? And of course this where your doctrine started with the RCC
12. Creed Above Bible?
It is ironic that some who believe in no more scripture often treat the Nicene Creed (written three centuries later) as being above the Bible. Particularly ironic because of the colorful political history of the creed, and because a common interpretation of the creed has a very difficult view of the Godhead (3=1, 1=3) that goes against how the Bible represents three unique beings though one in purpose.
I however think that this tack, while perhaps justified on occasion is not the best course to travel when defending the LDS church. I prefer myself, though not always the best at it, to be a builder rather than a wrecking ball.
It is very important to remember that many of the Christian Community really do have faith in some Bible principles and do on many occasions have faithful members that demonstrate by their good works a "walk with Christ".
Rather than destroy some of the more obvious ironies, I think I would prefer to correct error when it comes to our doctrines, and let our doctrinal arguments stand on their own.
While in The Netherlands I encountered a few staunch defendors for their faith. Often their tactic was to bring out the wrecking ball. The Jehovah's witnesses for example had "anti-any religion books". In these books they would present wrecking ball arguments designed to offend, shock, and cast doubt upon other religions. Some divisions of the Dutch Reformed Church were even worse. Very little attention was placed upon consideration of fact, their literature cared first to cast doubt, and fact was not going to get in the way of their goal. Quite accurately I called them "lies for Jesus", though most presenting them had no idea that they were presenting lies.
What I fear is that we should fall victim to the same type of enterprise. As you know the LDS church does not have a large amount of "anti-literature" out there. What has been written is strongly discouraged for our missionaries, and when caught using it they are disciplined.
I had a very good neighbor that had set as a goal for herself to make me a Roman Catholic. She loved God. She was sure of her faith. I would go to her house almost daily to play with her sons one a year older, the other about a year younger than me, during my teen years(12-18). She was always respectful, always praying for my welfare.
About once a week she would have a snack or small dinner waiting for us when we returned home from school. We would sit in her dining room and she would discuss religion with the three of us. First she brough out the anti-mormon literature that she had, I found some of it foolishly entertaining. The blatant lies were easy to erase, even for me a convert at age eleven. Some of it was harder and compelled me to study to find answers if not for her, for myself.
I learned about the traditions of faith in the Catholic Church. I learned the actual facts of the Catholic Church as she reverenced them and believed them. This woman was quite remarkable, her faith strong. Often when I found areas of my remarks that she considered a challenge to her beliefs, she would change the subject or just deny that I was presenting facts to her. This was her defense. She could not allow herself to think that her faith was in error.
It did not take me long to realize that I needed to drop some of my arguments to continue the teachings that she desired to teach. In a way, I would let her win, and she grew stronger in her relationship to God for it. By my losing, she became a better disciple for her Catholic faith, and it became more alive for her. All this was good for her, and she became a better person for it. I benefited by seeing her devotion to God, that devotion alone was inspirational.
I had some teaching moments of my own with her sons. Eventually one grew up with no religion at all, taking himself away from God by choices in his life. The older one while away at College, invited missionaries and became a member in less than two months. It took him much longer to tell his mother.
Now, on another thread, I took the tack to be on the offensive toward a poster that seems to have some Biblical Scholarship and some rather basic background in logic. I brought out the wrecking ball and claimed some of his tactics and declarations as being "entertaining" and "funny". You could see even in his own manipulative, defensive, and rather coarse style that my wrecking ball approach hit him hard. From that point forward, whether by tactic or not I am not sure, he refused to give any consideration at all, so I removed myself from the thread.
With you, and I think one other, I had contemplated starting another thread that would totally tear apart an article that he believed to be accurate concerning the Trinity. I certainly have the ability to toss out a rather formidable wrecking ball. I thought about doing a number of times, but the spirit in me, told me to not do it. I fought against those feelings, many times, seeing how he was treating others, but I still did not do it. Now I have decided not to post such a thread, and I am very comfortable with that decision.
I think that a good course of discussion is best entertained when we respect the beliefs of others, even if they choose not to respect ours. I their mind they may think themselves the victor, but I would prefer that they do so at times, rather than disturb the light of Christ that they know.
I agree with this original supposition. When one believes in their heart a false interpretation he has sinned by beleieving a lie condemning and judging his self making a convenant with death. I won't expound on what happens when this same individual teaches a false interpretation "to the least of these my little ones." God bless all, please stop getting threads pulled ;(
Getting what thread pulled? I don't know any thing about what you are talking about- may be Jim knows?
My mistake, I won't be posting on any LDS threads in the future.
THIS IS ALL YOU GOOD PEOPLE WHO LOVE GOD ON AN EMOTIONAL LEVEL FUNCTION-maybe you should let the LORD teach you what love is, That it is to "Love One Another" just because you feel and think LDS is taboo does not make it so!!!!
Really?? So how far to we extend this?
You have some that believe in a "Oneness Trinity"(A), some that believe in a "Generational Trinity"(B), some that believe in a "Modal Trinity"(C), and some that believe in a "Godhead of three unified beings"(D). Now the really fun part is that there are even more that say they are Christians that can't fit themselves into any of those options at all(E).
So making the extension of your argument, you are saying that believing a lie is sin and a covenant with death. Which one above is not sinning and how do you know?
Let me make this more difficult. What about grace, foreordination, baptism, repentence, faith healings, rapture, resurrection, transubstantiation, priesthood, etc. ? My point is how many doctrinal exclusions are you willing to make? Again, how is your judgement of such things superior?
How many fathers when their children ask for a fish would give them a stone? By your argument a stone of death?
I hold my beliefs very seriously because of this view and have learned how to handle the responsibility of being given truth. The most important one most lacking here on these threads is simply saying "I don't know." When you say you know and do not, you sin by lieing. At the same time you are misrepresenting God and bearing false witness, add teaching to others a lie and you are well on your way to offending God. God through His apostle Paul provided ample warning regarding false prophets yet we always think it is speaking of someone else when we ourselves are doing that very thing. I have been here long enough to know that most posting here have no fear or respect for the spiritual warfare going on right before our very eyes.
James 3 1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.
2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.
3 Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body.
4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.
11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?
12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.
14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.
But we are making some progress here. First it was just believing a lie that sends me to hell. Now it is saying that you know something when you don't that offends God.
I suppose the safe course here would be to say nothing at all about what you believe so that you can avoid strife and not be accused of lying or bearing false witness.
"Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing". Yes it does. Yes it does.
I suppose since you hold your beliefs very seriously, and since you have learned how to handle the responsibility of being given truth, that I certainly must be bereft of sobriety and truth! How foolish I have been! I should remain silent, since I know nothing at all!
Please accept my apologies for bearing a false witness. You are most correct for not having dialog with me, for I know nothing at all.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if we would all be silent for a while and listen for the Spirit? I haven't accused you of none of the things you say but if you feel I have, please accept my sincere apologies.
Please accept my apologies for bearing a false witness. You are most correct for not having dialog with me, for I know nothing at all.
Again, my sincere apologies. I consider all believers in Christ my brothers, errant as they may be and will not give up on a single one the Lord willing. I would like nothing better than a dialog with you or any believer in Christ. You know Christ, and that is far from nothing my dear friend. God bless you and yours.
My apologies for confusion, but I thought that you were no longer participating on LDS threads because of the standard insults, (1)we believe and say lies and (2)we are not believers in Christ.
The individual who addressed JimRob when I asked that everyone stop getting threads pulled. I felt unwelcome and uncomfortable at that time and generally avoid denominational threads anyway so I thought increasing self imposed limitations would further my message.
My apologies for confusion, but I thought that you were no longer participating on LDS threads because of the standard insults, (1)we believe and say lies and (2)we are not believers in Christ.
Most who would criticize LDS are no more or less in error than LDS. I do not accept Joseph Smith anymore than the pope, Calvin, Wesley or any of the others. I have read the Book of Mormon and have made it a lifelong study to understand the various beliefs of denominations in order to see where they went wrong. God has allowed me to be an eternal optimist in the face of overwhelming odds. Take care and God bless.
May God continue to prosper all of your good work that you do in praise and honor to Him.
Thank you and please know that I hold no grudge or offense I simply must follow the Spirit in these matters or risk disobeying. I am ready always to give anyone an answer for the hope that lies within me. My time cannot be spent foolishly when it comes to the things of God. Take care and God bless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.