Posted on 10/08/2007 7:49:32 AM PDT by colorcountry
Not only is Mormonism a Christian faith, it is the truest form of Christianity, said speaker after speaker on the first day of the 177th Semiannual LDS General Conference. LDS authorities were responding to the allegation that Mormonism isn't part of Christianity. Made by different mainline Protestant and Catholic churches and repeated constantly during coverage of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, the claim is based on Mormonism's beliefs about God, its rejection of ancient ideas about the Trinity still widely accepted, and the LDS Church's extra-biblical scriptures. "It is not our purpose to demean any person's belief nor the doctrine of any religion," said Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland in the afternoon session. "But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?"
{snip}
The day's sermons included many familiar themes, including the importance of faith, the need for pure thoughts and actions, avoiding pornography reaching out to neighbors and eliminating spiritual procrastination. Hinckley talked about the destructive nature of anger in marriages, on the road, and in life, urging Mormons to "control your tempers, to put a smile upon your faces, which will erase anger; speak with words of love and peace, appreciation and respect."
“Can you tell me why you believe it?”
2 Timothy 3:15-17
For starters.
>> The JST doesn’t claim to be an alternate translation of existing texts, it claims to be a restoration of the original text received by revelation. You are being mislead about what the JST is. <<
LSD itself claims to be a restoration, but the version of scripture claims to be an “inspired translation,” not a restoration.
>> It is made clear in the introduction. <<
The introduction makes clear that a restoration is involved, yes. But, given the absence of any reference to restoring missing verses to Genesis 50, that seems to refer to restoring a proper interpretation / translation, not to restoring missing verses to Genesis 50. This is particularly troubling, because the introduction broaches the topic by discussing the restoration of Matthew. It’s like walking into a bar, and surrendering your holstered pistol, but not the one in your socks: it gives the impression you’re disarming yourself, without actually doing so.
I actually did re-read the introduction, preface, etc., before commenting to see if I was missing something.
I left something a little ambiguous which I should correct: I have also certainly been testing to see if, in fact, Mormonism belongs in the first category I mentioned: Reasonable, even if not convincingly correct. The failure of anyone to objectively define “testimony of the Holy Ghost” has frustrated any attempts to do so, much to discredit in my eyes those who refer to it.
|
John received a revelation from Jesus Christ and delivered it to the leaders over the seven churches in Asia. (compare Revelation 1: 1-8) |
|
| Rev. 2: 22 |
The wicked will be cast into hell. (compare Revelation 2: 22) |
| Rev. 2: 26-27 |
|
| Rev. 5: 6 |
Twelve servants of God are sent to all the earth. (compare Revelation 5: 6) |
| Rev. 12: 1-17 |
The woman [the Church], the child [the kingdom of God], the rod of iron [the word of God], the dragon [Satan], and Michael are explained. The war in heaven is continued on the earth. (compare Revelation 12: 1-17; Doctrine and Covenants 77) |
| Rev. 19: 15, 21 |
God uses the word of Christ to smite the nations. (compare Revelation 19: 15, 21) |
REVELATION 12: 1-17
The woman the Church, the child [the kingdom of God], the rod of iron [the word of God], the dragon [Satan], and Michael are explained. The war in heaven is continued on the earth. (compare Revelation 12: 1-17; Doctrine and Covenants 77)
1 And there appeared a great sign in heaven, in the likeness of things on the earth; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars.
2 And the woman being with child, cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
3 And she brought for a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up unto God and his throne.
4 And there appeared another sign in heaven; and behold, a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman which was delivered, ready to devour her child after it was born.
5 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore years.
6 And there was war in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought against Michael;
7 And the dragon prevailed not against Michael, neither the child, nor the woman which was the church of God, who had been delivered of her pains, and brought forth the kingdom of our God and his Christ.
8 Neither was there place found in heaven for the great dragon, who was cast out; that old serpent called the devil, and also called Satan, which deceiveth the whole world; he was cast out into earth; and his angels were cast out with him.
9 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ;
10 For the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 For they have overcome him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; for they loved not their own lives, but kept the testimony even unto death. Therefore, rejoice O heavens, and ye that dwell in them.
12 And after these things I heard another voice saying, Woe to the inhabiters of the earth, yea, and they who dwell upon the islands of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 For when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 Therefore, to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might flee into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent casteth out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helpeth the woman, and the earth openeth her mouth, and swalloweth up the flood which the dragon casteth out of his mouth.
17 Therefore, the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
[Note the changed sequence of verses in the JST.]
*******
And here's the curse upon those adding to or taking away from that Book:,P> Revelations 22:18 For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book.
22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book. {Douay Rheims Version}
“But how do you know it was GOD that answered your question?”
>The same way Peter knew it the dream he had was from God and that it was time for the gospel to go to the Gentiles. The same way the apostles knew that the Spirit of God was in agreement with them on no longer requiring circumcision.<
And how do you KNOW it was the same as Peter and the Apostles
instead of how Reverend Sun Myung Moon knows he is the Christ, or how the polygamist Jeffords knows he is a mormon
prophet of God???
The bible is replete w/ scriptures that implore the reader to ask the Lord for answers. The reader is also told that those answers will come by the Holy Ghost. And yet, seemingly, there are those here that refuse to receive those answers as instructed by the Lord through the scriptures.
Even though the Lord says they can & will receive those answers, they feel the need to determine those things on their own. Some mockingly ask how one receives answers from the Holy Ghost. If all answers are found in the bible, wouldn’t they find that answer there? The Lord tells us to ask & we will receive. Would He tell us to do that w/o telling us how to do it? I appreciate them asking us, but they don’t know the answers from the bible? It’s quite perplexing to me.
A book w/ all the answers & yet so many questions. I can understand the perplexity about the contradictory answers found therein, but most are pretty clear cut. I can’t even imagine putting all my eggs in the basket of basing my beliefs on what “wise” men have told me to believe. Why not go to the author of all this & avoid all the confusion as the Lord has instructed? Although some claim to believe in all the bible, they refuse that instruction. Baffling.
Let me try again.
The Holy Ghost can communicate in many ways. I know a man who says he heard a voice from heaven declaring the Book of Mormon to be true. Others describe experiences similar to those that occurred on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:2-4). Some say "our heart burned within us," just as the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:32; see also D&C 9:8-9).
Other manifestations are less dramatic, but no less impressive. At times, the Holy Spirit can enlighten one's mind to understand spiritual things (D&C 6:15). At other times, the Spirit can "speak peace to your mind" (D&C 6:23). Or as the Lord told Oliver Cowdery, "behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart." (D&C 8:2). And sometimes, the Holy Spirit speaks as a "still, small voice" to those who are prepared to listen.
Does that answer your question?
>> How do you know any of this? That is what the Gospels say—and I firmly believe the Gospels to be true, as I am sure yo do. But you and I were not present to witness any of the events described in the Bible. We saw no empty tomb or miracles performed. We cannot speak to those who claimed to have witnessed these things. We do not even possess the original manuscripts of their records. So how do we know?<<
>> Skeptics say that the stories about Jesus were made up. Oh, they might admit that perhaps there was a preacher named Jesus; but they will say that most of the sayings and miracles attributed to him are fabrications. (Miracles abound in old documents.) They say that the Gospel stories appear to fulfill Old Testament prophecy because they were deliberately written that way. (Everybody knows that it is impossible to tell the future.) And so on, ad nauseum. ... What evidence do you have of the truth of the Gospels? <<
I do believe that evangelicals do a disservice when they rely solely on the bible itself to give testimony to itself. I certainly do imagine that many non-believers ask, “yes, but why should I believe the bible?” But even so: historically, neither the Romans nor the Jews never made any attempt to refute the outlandish claims of the bible. If the miracle of Pentecost simply never happened, how come disbelievers such as Josephus never point out, “and they attest to thousands of people witnessing such things, yet we know not of such witnesses,” or “they claim that the altar of the Most Holy Temple was destroyed when Jesus died, but any fool recalls it was broken by the Romans after such-and-such revolt.”
Christianity spread so rapidly because, even as amazing as its claims were, there were simply events which could not be refuted. More modern refutations actually make little sense. For instance, many say the resurrection never took place, and that the writings of the apostles were simply understood differently. But how can one “misunderstand” categorical statements such as Paul’s when he asserted that if the Resurrection were not of the body, then all Christians are fools and should be regarded as the most pitiful of all humans?
>> Are the Gospels corroborated? Certainly the Gospel writers largely agree with each other and with Christian tradition; but do you have independent, outside corroboration from a non-Christian source of the reality of the Resurrection? <<
That’s just it: How can anybody confirm the truth of Christianity without becoming a Christian? What’s wierd about Mormonism is that the so-called “witnesses” of Mormonism didn’t remain Mormons. What’s wierd about Christianity is that those who denied Christ nonetheless wouldn’t deny the evidence for Christ.
>> The issues surrounding the witnesses of the Book of Mormon are interesting. See www.fairlds.org for links to several articles that address the points you raise. Suffice it to say that I find the witnesses to be entirely credible. <<
Actually, the articles I found addressed only one point, and it was the one you didn’t cite: It does seem that the other two witnesses *did* reaffirm their visions after they left the Mormon church, and denied having disavowed their visions. On the other hand, the link does a disservice to the site’s credibility by omitting the circumstances of Harris’ reaffirmation: he was destitute, and desperate of Mormon charity. And his assertion he had never recanted was contradicted by many who testified he had; the failure to acknowledge this controversy borders on dishonesty.
In looking up Whitmer, I also learned about the Danites, who wrote letters which could very easily be interpreted as threatening to murder Whitmer and Cowdery. This makes Whitmer’s and Cowdery’s lack of recanting hardly mysterious.
Again, I don’t actually mean to assert that Danites *were* terrorists, only that Whitmer and Cowdery had reason to fear them.
Yes, thank you. :^D
I was told by a Mormon that it is an actual “burning in the bosom” that one could feel it. Is that not true? Or is that just the experience of some?
“Not of those particuliar events, but those events are not the ones that the apostles used to establish their authority. And, of course, the Virgin birth was prophesied about, in prophesies revealed before the events in question. And given what was established about Jesus, his sinless nature is sort of presumptive, is it not?”
But those things are key to the validity of Christianity. Anti-Christians will claim Mary or Christ or the apostles just made things up to portray Christ as the fulfillment of prophecies for their own reasons.
Now I don’t believe those accusations either, but I don’t base my faith on what man’s intellect can discern, and neither did most early Christians who had nothing more to go on but the then things they were told that they had no way ot confirm.
Consider some heathen in Corinth in 150AD. Some Christian guy tells him that God himself was born of a virgin way over in Jerusalem, did all kinds of miracles, was killed and rose from the dead three days later. There is no internet, there is no way for that Corinthian to confirm any of the people being talked about even existed or that any of these events actually happened or that any of these supposed witnesses (now dead) actualy saw what they claimed or even said they saw what this Christian guy is saying they claimed. Yet by the power of the Holy Ghost his heart is touched and he has a firm conviction that it is true. Not for any logical reason, but because of a spiritual experience, and the conviction is strong even to the point where he is willing to die a horrible death rather than deny Christ.
It’s based on knowledge that comes from the Spirit of God. If you base your belief on what man can prove and reason out, then you reject the power of the Holy Spirit to lead people to the truth as promised.
“And he only “saw” the plates long after he had a very strong invested interest.”
They stuck with their testimony when they had no vested interest in maintaining that it was true.
“But isn’t odd how with all the archaeological discoveries (King Tut’s tomb, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the City of Jericho), no-one’s ever found significant corroboration for the existence of reformed Egyptian?”
http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Reformed_Egyptian
“The point is that Smith couldn’t recreate what he had already written, “
For a time after that the gift of translating was taken from Joseph altogether until he and Martin repented of not taking the Lord’s council as seriously as they should have. He was unable to translate any portion of it then. After a time his gift was restored and he was told not to re-translate that part again as doing so would fall into the trap being set for him.
Martin Harris supports Joseph’s version of events, he sacrificed much to help bring the BoM forth and never denied the truth of it even when he had motive to do so.
“A very broad brush should be easy to disprove, no?”
Sure, I can say that Joseph claimed Jesus was the Christ and there certainly are records supporting that claim so you are wrong to say ‘there’s no record of anything Smith claims’. If you want to have a meaningful discussion of these things however it would help to be more focused and not paint with so broad a brush.
“No, but you could come up with a reason I should believe you.”
That sounds so very much like ‘except you show me a sign I will not believe’. I’m not even asking you to believe me, I’m asking you to find out from God. You can choose to rely on God’s wisdom and do that or to rely on man’s wisdom and not do that. No skin off my nose either way, but for your sake I hope you trust in God, not man.
The faith you need is faith in Christ and faith that your prayers will be answered. If you can’t muster that up why call yourself a Christian?
Oh give me a break. It would be inserted in there as soon as you could say urim & thummim if it wasn't for the small little fact of copyright issues.
I guess the sovereign mormon god forgot to arrange for the "only true church" to be left with the "only true translation" of the Bible.
“Are LDS followers inherently anti-rational?”
We believe in applying ourselves to understanding things as best we can using reason and logic. The church encourages getting as much education as possible and has programs to help members in poorer countries get better education. We however recognize that there are limits to what objective reasoning can accomplish (especialy in the areas of religion), and we also see revelation from God as a source of true and reliable information that is not limited as man’s reasoning is.
“Is there any point to ecumenical dialog?”
There are many issues of common concern (pornography, gay marriage etc.) where we have worked together with other faith quite well, but there is no point trying to negotiate any kind of merging of faiths with us.
“Can I trust a Mormon president to think rationally?”
Yes, but as a prophet his knowledge of what is true and what is not true is not limited to only what objective reasoning can establish as true.
You cling to objective reasoning like it is your life raft. We have a different outlook. Revelation is very real to us, not just to the President of the Church but to every faithful member, and we put more stock in what God can and does reveal to us than in the reasoning of men. That means at time we will cling to things that for a time will seem foolish to the world, but are yet the wisdom of God. Smoking used to be considered good for your health for example.
If you are going to argue that everything God would reveal would appear rational to an objective observer, you are implying that God is no smarter than the observer.
From the intro:
...The Lord inspired the Prophet Joseph Smith to restore truths to the Bible text that had become lost or changed since the original words were written
It seems pretty clear to me that in order to restore things that had become lost, you would have to add them back in.
When that happens, get back to me.
Let's define some terms:
rational: consistent with or based on or using reason;
irrational: not consistent with or using reason;
anti-rational: opposed to the use of reason.
There is nothing in Mormonism that requires or promotes either irrationality or anti-rationality. Quite the contrary: in my experience, Mormons tend to be rational and practical.
When I used to be a pentecostal, the manifestation of the Holy Ghost was speaking in tongues.
A burning in the bossom works for me.
I wonder from what manuscript Smith ‘translated’ to add all the verses to the King James Bible? And with direct revelation, why were changes needed to the text Smith presented to his people? ... The apologists will blame it on errors made by scribes working for Smith, but the changes were not all directed by Smith, as far as i am aware. I’ve always found it curious that Smith wrote the B of M in King James English (as he supposedly ‘translated’ reformed egyptian using a peepstone, though it was not the spoken English of his day in upstate New York, especially since there are words in the B of M that had opposite meaning in Smith’s day to what they meant in King James’ day.
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.