Alright, I know it's Halloween week -- but could we please stop with the Lds masquerade you're putting up here to try to soften what Mormon "revelation" reveals? As you mentioned, this is the second post where you've cited 2 Nephi 28:14 to try to elevate the notion that Mormons supposedly recognize "a few...humble followers of Christ."
No one's going to catch you in this deception unless they have a copy of the Book of Mormon and note that Lds say that 2 Nephi 28:14 was supposedly written between 559 and 545 B.C.!!! -- or almost 600 years before Christ even was born!!!
(Of course, non-Mormons would then ask, "Joachim, ya wanna explain how only a few followers of Christ remained when he hadn't even been born as a Bethlehem baby til almost 600 years later?" But aside from that hard-to-swallow tale, all your quoting of 2 Nephi 28:14--even in its proper Mormon "historical" context means -- is that Lds will concede that not all of Christ's followers had apostacized as of 5-6 centuries BEFORE Christ was born! That's it!)
BYU prof Kent Jackson, in his Lds Ensign article on the so-called complete Christian apostasy, writes: By a.d. 95 only John remained, as far as we know...The apostasy did not happen because the Apostles were gone; the Apostles were taken because the apostasy had occurred. EarlySignsOfTheApostasy
Will you be forthright with lurkers and myself and concede that 2 Nephi 28:14 doesn't even address the time period of the post-resurrection Christ or the church He established among His disciples? (Please, please, please, in the name of intellectual integrity, drop this wrestling-out-of-historical context)
My previous post:: Again, what's Smith['s] 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).
Your response: 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.
I guess I had to chuckle at the lengths you're proceeding to avoid the obvious. I mean just look how you've...
...redefined a clear Joseph Smith reference to "everybody" (ToPJS, p. 119 quote above)...
...& then conveniently narrowed the scope to "Smith's view of the authority of Christian LEADERS" just to make this all nice & tidy with your pre-existing assumptions about Joseph Smith v. 19.
So let me try this again, this time with a multiple-choice test, just to see if you're going to stick to your story:
When Joseph Smith answered 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." to the Q, 'Will EVERYBODY be damned, but Mormons'?, Smith really was referencing "EVERYBODY" as...
Choice A Christian LEADERS only
Choice B Everybody
Choice C Readers are simply free to "agree or disagree as they will" and insert anything they want to replace the meaning of "Everybody" according to their theological whims
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.
OK, so that we don't just go round and round on this one -- what vv. 18-19 says, and so that we really try to understand each other, let's try to weave both of our emphases into a merged interpretive summary:
Can we agree then that...
(1)...v. 18 twice references which SECT to join (which embodies ALL professing believers making up that sect)?
(2)...v. 19 specifically references what that sect teaches -- "they teach for doctrines the commandments of men"?
Even if I was to try on for size your point that Smith was primarily focusing on the teachers within these sects, who would that have included in 1820?
(a) Christian missionaries;
(b) Christian pastors;
(c) Christian writers;
(d) Christian administrative leaders;
(e) Christian evangelists like John Wesley;
(f) Christian hymn writers like John's brother, Charles, who died in 1788 [in fact, Lds hymnals include Charles Wesley's "Rejoice, the Lord is King" hymn (#66) as well as Martin Luther's "A Mighty Fortress" (#68)...and, 190 of the 358 Lds hymns in their book were written by non-Lds folks!]
(g) Christian teachers of children & adults -- which, frankly, as Lds & Christian home schoolers & Lds family home evening teachers show, includes even parents!
So, you're telling me, that...
...contemporary Mormons who realize that 2 Nephi 28:14 didn't apply to Christ's A.D. church...
...take Joseph Smith vv. 18-20 to mean that...
...the "corrupt professing believers" Smith mentioned...
...were "ALL" of the Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox missionaries, pastors, writers, administrators, evangelists, hymn writers, and teachers of children & adults within their denominational sects???
Wow! What a "relief!" Here I "thought" Smith was condemning ALL Christians as "corrupt." Instead, you're telling me, "Nope, the 'only' 'corrupt' ones were..."
...the hymn writers we incorporated into 53% of our hymnal book,
all your pastors,
all your missionaries,
all your evangelists,
all your writers,
all your teachers (broadly speaking),
and all your administrators.
(And this is all on top of us agreeing that Smith says ALL Christians embraced a track record of 100% false creeds)
What a "relief" Joachim. You've at least communicated well on the last excerpt I cited of yours -- but not really picked up much reassuring ground to the Christian community about Lds' portrayal of "tolerance" toward their Christian neighbors.
And, as it applies to this thread, my comment is: So Glenn Beck believes this about much of his audience -- what I just elaborated upon since it's both the founding Lds vision & it's Lds "scripture" to boot?
It's no deception. Read it in context, especially together with the preceding chapter 27, and see.
If you read in context, you will see that, as you said, mormons do believe that 2 Nephi 28 was written many years before Christ, but you will also see that mormons believe in prophets and prophecies. As you can also see, 2 Nephi chapter 28 is believed by mormons to include a prophecy (of the prophet Nephi) about conditions before and at the time of Joseph Smith. Thus mormons who believe the Book of Mormon also believe that there existed "humble followers of Christ" after the apostles and before Joseph Smith.
Mormons do believe in a "complete apostasy" as you point out, and in the restoration of "the Church of Jesus Christ (of Latter-Day Saints)" as they call it, which they believe is the only current "true and living" church, that is, the only current one authorized by God. Thus although according to mormons there were "humble followers of Christ" before Smith, mormons do not believe in the churches such followers may have belonged to. You are perfectly correct on that point. This means, to mormons, that no church existed at the time of Joseph Smith, and no other church exists today, that is actually authorized by God to act in God's name, such as to perform baptisms recognized by God, for example. Mormons also believe that without such God-authorized baptism, voluntarily received, in this life (or in the next by means of a living proxy), people will be "damned" as stated in your previous quotation (although mormon "damnation" in this sense is more like Catholic "purgatory"). Mormons view such baptism as necessary but not sufficient, and view being "a humble follower of Christ" as equally (if not more) important. This is why mormons would see the statement that "non-mormons will be damned (and a good many mormons too)" more as a somewhat hyperbolic comment on the authority of existing churches than as a comment about the people (individual Christian believers) themselves, as such people may well be among the "humble followers of Christ."
Belief in an exclusive authorization of God is understandably offensive to some, but mormons are not alone in believing in some kind of exclusive religious authority, and why would they believe in a "restoration" of Christ's church and authority anyway, if they didn't believe also in a need for such a restoration?
What mormons do not believe is that there were no "humble followers of Christ" at the time of and before Joseph Smith, or that members of other churches are themselves "corrupt" or "abominable," or even that leaders of all churches everywhere anytime between the apostles and Joseph Smith are or were corrupt.
If you go read Joseph Smith History 1 as a whole to get the "professors" term in context, you will see that, in context, "professors" is used synonymously with "preacher(s)", "men of high standing", and "great ones of the leading sects of the day." (See for example, verses 21-24.) Given this use in context, it seems likely that Smith had these same people in mind in your quotation about the hope of salvation. But regardless of that, not only do mormons understand the "professors" of the Joseph Smith History reference you orginally pointed to (1:18-20) to refer specifically to leaders of churches, they also understand it to refer to the specific leaders of the specific churches or congregations of the particular time and place. You will also see that it appears to be these "professors" who "teach for doctrines the precepts of men."
As you point out, mormons sing hymns from many of the great protestant hymn writers. Further, mormon leaders have also acknowledged a debt of gratitude to various protestant reformers, including Luther and the Wesley brothers and others. Mormons also seem frequently to quote from C. S. Lewis. This all seems inconsistent with mormons believing that all non-mormon Christian believers are "corrupt" or "abominable."
The reason for the inconsistency is simply that mormons generally (and presumably Glenn Beck in particular) just do not believe that all non-mormon Christian believers are "corrupt" or "abominable."
As I see your argument, the outline is (1) mormons believe X Y Z; (2) X Y Z is bad or dangerous or offensive; (3) so we should call them (including Glenn Beck) on it (or should not take them seriously, or should treat them as mentally suspect, or should get angry at them, or should be suspicious of their motives, or whatever). Some posters have disagreed with number (3) or number (2). Some have probably agreed with all. I am just disagreeing with some of your points under number (1), that's all.
BYU prof Kent Jackson, in his Lds Ensign article on the so-called complete Christian apostasy, writes: By a.d. 95 only John remained, as far as we know...The apostasy did not happen because the Apostles were gone; the Apostles were taken because the apostasy had occurred. EarlySignsOfTheApostasy
____________________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
That doesnt explain why John was still here AFTER the others were dead...
Why didnt they all just DROP DEAD the moment the so called “apostacy” had occured ???
BTW Joey Smith was an “apostate” ...
The apostacy had been going on for 1800 years when he was born...
The church was gone, the gospel was gone...
Since the gospel and the church had not yet been restored until he come along, he had to be an apostate...
Why would anyone listen to an apostate ???