Let's start with your last comments first: Here's the KJV of Jude 4 -- which you claim Lds commentators have added to try to explain away part of Joseph Smith, History, vv. 19-20: For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."
I'm sorry, but there's no reference to these "ungodly men" in Jude 4 being "prophets" -- even false ones.
You equate "professors" to all believers--mormons do not do so, which you may not have known (but will now)...As I understand it, "professors" here, as understood by mormons, refers not to believers "professing" a belief, but to learned or credentialed religious leaders claiming, without authority, to represent God.
Smith didn't write out the "official first vision" account you're citing -- the one that uses terms "professors," "corrupt," "abomination," "creeds" until 1838...around 18 years after it happened. Even the earlier handwritten diary versions don't have these words.
So, Joachim, we need to go by historical context -- not by after-thought "smoothies" by 20th century Lds commentators. So what you quoted above is the official 1838 version of Smith's "first vision." In comparison, we need to judge how Smith utilized the word "professors" in that same era -- not how contemporary Mormons "equate" (or don't equate) -- cause we all know individual Mormons may individually reject all kinds of things taught by their leaders.
Let's look at Joseph Smith, 1842, shall we? Smith was conveying a story he heard indirectly -- from a Christian, Mr. James Mullone of Springfield, via Mr. Sollars. Mr. Mullone apparently claimed that Smith told him he got a gray horse from a white cloud, and Smith then concluded: "This is a fair specimen of the ten thousand foolish lies circulated by this generation to bring the truth and its advocates into disrepute. What is it that inspires PROFESSORS OF CHRISTIANITY generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.270).
OK, who in context is Joseph Smith talking about? False prophets? (No. NO mention of such prophets). Credentialed religious teachers? (No. Smith doesn't say, "Rev. Mullone" or "Pastor Mullone" or even identify Mullone as a Christian lay leader). Instead, what are the two clues Smith gives us in context as to who Mr. Mullone represents?
(a) "this generation"
(b) whoever "generally...[has] a hope of salvation."
Joachim:
Are you trying to make the case that only "false prophets" and "credentialed religious leaders" represent "this generation?"
Are you trying to make the case that only "false prophets" and "credentialed religious leaders" represent those who have "a hope of salvation"?
So who is contextually out of sync, you or me?
The context makes it obvious. Authorityless religious leaders aren't the only ones "hoping" for salvation, grassroots Christians are the ones doing that! So when Smith uses the word "professors," he's not only talking about some obscure pulpit preacher-professor at some backwoods Christian campus from early in the 19th century.
Again, what's Smith broader view of Christian people? When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119).
This goes with what Brigham Young said: "Should you ask why we differ from other Christians, as they are called, it is simply because they are not Christians as the New Testament defines Christianity" (Journal of Discourses 10:230).
What did Lds apostle under Smith, Orson Pratt, have to say about Christians? "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent" (The Seer, p. 255).
There ya have it! He even uses the same word as Smith ("corrupt").
What about more contemporary LDS general authorities, like LDS apostle Bruce R. McConkie? "virtually all the millions of apostate Christendom have abased themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ whom they vainly suppose to be a spirit essence who is incorporeal uncreated, immaterial and three-in-one with the Father and Holy Spirit" (Mormon Doctrine, p.269)
OK, who are "themselves?" That's not just "false Christian prophets" and "authorityless credentialed religious leaders." (We don't have "millions" of such people)
So, will I ever hear a Mormon concede that my historical-based interpretation is accurate? Their fearless founding leader indeed meant and taught that "those professors were ALL corrupt..."??? -- and he meant the millions of supposed "apostate" Christian believers.
In other words, even without an authorized church, even before Joseph Smith and the "mormons" came along, there were some who were "humble followers of Christ" who were not really "astray" but did "err" because of incorrect teachings. This is what mormons believe.
Jesus said the gates of hell wouldn't prevail against his church (Matt. 18:16). But what? You claim God the Father "de-authorized" the church of Jesus for 1500 to 1700 years? The apostle Paul said that God would be glorified through His church through ALL generations. (Eph. 3:21). There's that word "ALL" again -- in sharp contradiction to Smith's "ALL" words in the Pearl of Great Price.
So you're saying both Paul AND Jesus falsely prophesied in these verses? What gall.
I am not the one citing this account (Joseph Smith History 1:18-20), you started that (as far as I am aware) on this thread, nor am I the one now changing the subject by referring to other accounts. I was just using actual quotation of the account you cited to point out that mormons do not understand this account--their "scripture" here--the way you say they do. The "professors" here who are "corrupt" are not generic christian believers, they are those that "teach . . . doctrine" as the quoted text goes, or, as mormons understand it, persons who claim to speak for God but without authority. Mormons do not understand this scripture to say that all Christian believers are (or were) corrupt. You don't need a specific special meaning of "professors" to understand this--just look at it in context--"professors" in this case teach doctrine--they are not the same as all Christian believers.
In your additional quotation from Joseph Smith using "professors of Christianity," it would seem the horse story is just a convenient object lesson, and the term "professors of Christianity" could be intended either way--to refer to teachers or leaders only, or to believers as a whole. Assuming for purposes of discussion that the term is used for believers as a whole, the quotation is still consistent with how mormons understand the state of the churches and of people generally in the time after the apostles and before Joseph Smith. According to your quotation, Smith said: What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world. According to the Book of Mormon, as I quoted before, as of the time immediately before Joseph Smith: . . . [the former people of God] have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men. (2 Nephi 28:14) So according to Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, almost all had gone astray, that is, "professors of Christianity" (believers, for the sake of this discussion) "generally" had gone astray, "except for a few, who are the humble followers of Christ."
As I said, I am just pointing out that mormons do not believe that members of various Christian denominations, past or present, are themselves corrupt or abominable, as you claimed. As a counter example, mormons even believe that there were before and at the time of Smith (and presumably now also) at least some "humble followers of Christ" who are not "mormons". That was all I was saying, and now I've said it again.
Again, what's Smith broader view of Christian people? When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119). You see this as "Smith's broader view of Christian people." Mormons would see it as Smith's view of the authority of Christian leaders after the time of the apostles to receive revelation, teach doctrine and perform ordinances such as baptism.
Your real argument seems to be (1) mormons believe what I say they do (or they ought to and they would if they would just read the sources I use and give them the proper interpretation and weight, as I do); (2) what I way they believe is ridiculous and intolerant on its face; (3) so everyone here should call them on it.
I am just disagreeing with number (1) here. Others can agree or disagree as they will.
I am not the one citing this account (Joseph Smith History 1:18-20), you started that (as far as I am aware) on this thread, nor am I the one now changing the subject by referring to other accounts. I was just using actual quotation of the account you cited to point out that mormons do not understand this account--their "scripture" here--the way you say they do. The "professors" here who are "corrupt" are not generic christian believers, they are those that "teach . . . doctrine" as the quoted text goes, or, as mormons understand it, persons who claim to speak for God but without authority. Mormons do not understand this scripture to say that all Christian believers are (or were) corrupt. You don't need a specific special meaning of "professors" to understand this--just look at it in context--"professors" in this case teach doctrine--they are not the same as all Christian believers.
In your additional quotation from Joseph Smith using "professors of Christianity," it would seem the horse story is just a convenient object lesson, and the term "professors of Christianity" could be intended either way--to refer to teachers or leaders only, or to believers as a whole. Assuming for purposes of discussion that the term is used for believers as a whole, the quotation is still consistent with how mormons understand the state of the churches and of people generally in the time after the apostles and before Joseph Smith. According to your quotation, Smith said: What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world. According to the Book of Mormon, as I quoted before, as of the time immediately before Joseph Smith: . . . [the former people of God] have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men. (2 Nephi 28:14) So according to Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, almost all had gone astray, that is, "professors of Christianity" (believers, for the sake of this discussion) "generally" had gone astray, "except for a few, who are the humble followers of Christ."
As I said, I am just pointing out that mormons do not believe that members of various Christian denominations, past or present, are themselves corrupt or abominable, as you claimed. As a counter example, mormons even believe that there were before and at the time of Smith (and presumably now also) at least some "humble followers of Christ" who are not "mormons". That was all I was saying, and now I've said it again.
Again, what's Smith broader view of Christian people? When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119). You see this as "Smith's broader view of Christian people." Mormons would see it as Smith's view of the authority of Christian leaders after the time of the apostles to receive revelation, teach doctrine and perform ordinances such as baptism.
Your real argument seems to be (1) mormons believe what I say they do (or they ought to and they would if they would just read the sources I use and give them the proper interpretation and weight, as I do); (2) what I way they believe is ridiculous and intolerant on its face; (3) so everyone here should call them on it.
I am just disagreeing with number (1) here. Others can agree or disagree as they will.