REVERENCE FOR THE BIBLE -Mormon- (OPEN)

SALT LAKE CITY 25 January 2008 During the past several years, scholars, religious leaders, journalists and the general public have steadily shown an increased interest in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Much of this attention has been focused on the question of whether it is a Christian faith. Central to this inquiry is the Church’s relationship with the Bible. Many have wondered whether Latter-day Saints believe in the Bible at all. Still others have supposed that the Church uses the Bible only when convenient, while shrugging it off as an inessential part of scriptural canon. With so many conflicting voices participating in this discussion, it may seem difficult to know where the Church stands on this issue.

The truth is that the Church reveres the Bible as a sacred volume of scripture. Latter-day Saints cherish its teachings and engage in a lifelong study of its divine wisdom. Moreover, during worship and instruction services the Bible and its teachings are pondered and discussed. To increase biblical understanding, the Church provides extensive resources and tools: lesson manuals, cross-reference materials, Bible maps, a Bible dictionary, and articles in various magazines. Thus, the Bible is much more than simply a collection of antiquated writings and revelations that have only scant relevance to the modern world. On the contrary, it stands in the center of the Latter-day Saints’ spiritual lives.

In a recent sermon, Church apostle Elder M. Russell Ballard characterized the Bible as the “bedrock of all Christianity” and one of the “pillars” of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Furthermore, he described the Bible as a miracle: “It is a miracle that the Bible’s 4,000 years of sacred and secular history were recorded and preserved by the prophets, apostles, and inspired churchmen. … It is a miracle that the Bible literally contains within its pages the converting, healing Spirit of Christ, which has turned men’s hearts for centuries, leading them to pray, to choose right paths, and to search to find their Savior.” It instills real, tangible power in the lives of Latter-day Saints and offers practical solutions and spiritual guidance that inspire them to overcome challenges and trials.

There is a broad range of approaches within the vast mosaic of biblical interpretation. For example, biblical inerrancy maintains that the Bible is without error and contradiction; biblical infallibility holds that the Bible is free from errors regarding faith and practice but not necessarily science or history; biblical literalism requires a literal interpretation of events and teachings in the Bible and generally discounts allegory and metaphor; and the “Bible as literature” educational approach extols the literary qualities of the Bible but disregards its miraculous elements.

The Church does not strictly subscribe to any of these interpretive approaches. Rather, in the words of Joseph Smith, it regards the Bible to be the word of God, “as far as it is translated correctly” (8^th Article of Faith). Accordingly, Church members believe that during the centuries-long process in which fallible human beings compiled, translated and transcribed the Bible, various errors entered the text. However, this does not override the overwhelming predominance of truth within the Bible. As Elder Ballard noted, “Without the Bible, we would not know of His Church then, nor would we have the fullness of His gospel now.” Part of that fullness is the Bible’s seminal instruction that God reveals Himself to those who seek Him. The Bible is a living invitation to know personally the sacred revelatory experience that fills its pages.

The scriptures, or “standard works,” of the Latter-day Saints comprise the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. According to Elder Ballard, these scriptures constitute a “great, indivisible whole” of God’s revealed word that help humankind understand the past, present and future. The great gospel plan contained in these works does not apply to one generation or one people alone but to all of God’s children throughout all time. Thus, in the words of Elder Ballard, “those who think that one part is more important or more true than the other parts are missing some of the beauty and completeness of the canon of ancient scripture.”

During previous periods of time when God organized His church, He added new revelations to pre-existing scripture, forming a connection between believers of the present and believers of the past. For example, the Old Testament book of Isaiah gives shape and meaning to the Gospel of Matthew. The two revelations need not be viewed as rivals competing with each other: the existence of one does not negate the relevance or legitimacy of the other. This ongoing revelation of scripture gives uniformity and continuity to an unfolding gospel narrative and unites people under one standard of doctrine.

Of all the standard works, the Bible remains the best source for an intimate understanding of the character and personality of Jesus Christ during His mortal mission. While the Old Testament offers a prophetic foretelling of that mission, the New Testament provides an unmatched account of the events, experiences, teachings and personal interactions of Christ. The Book of Mormon strengthens and reinforces His teachings through additional witnesses and provides moving accounts of the personal experiences many individuals had with Him. According to Elder Ballard, “The Book of Mormon does not dilute nor diminish nor de-emphasize the Bible. On the contrary, it expands, extends, and exalts it.”

THis is from www.gotquestions.org:

By starting out his gospel stating, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” John is introducing Jesus with a word or a term that both his Jewish and Gentile readers would have been familiar with.

The Greek word translated “Word” in this passage is Logos, and it was common in both Greek philosophy and Jewish thought of that day. For example, in the Old Testament the “word” of God is often personified as an instrument for the execution of God’s will (Psalm 33:6; 107:20; 119:89; 147:15-18).

So, for his Jewish readers, by introducing Jesus as the “Word,” John is in a sense pointing them back to the Old Testament where the Logos or “Word” of God is associated with the personification of God’s revelation.

And in Greek philosophy, the term Logos was used to describe the intermediate agency by which God created material things and communicated with them. In the Greek worldview, the Logos was thought of as a bridge between the transcendent God and the material universe.

Therefore, for his Greek readers the use of the term Logos would have likely brought forth the idea of a mediating principle between God and the world.

So, essentially, what John is doing by introducing Jesus as the Logos is drawing upon a familiar word and concept that both Jews and Gentiles of his day would have been familiar with and using that as the starting point from which He introduces them to Jesus Christ.

But John goes beyond the familiar concept of Logos that his Jewish and Gentile readers would have had and presents Jesus Christ not as a mere mediating principle like the Greeks perceived, but as a personal being, fully divine, yet fully human.

Also, Christ was not simply a personification of God’s revelation as the Jews thought, but was indeed God’s perfect revelation of Himself in the flesh, so much so that John would record Jesus’ own words to Philip: "Jesus said unto Him, 'Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, "Show us the Father"?'" (John 14:9).

By using the term Logos or “Word” in John 1:1, John is amplifying and applying a concept that was familiar with his audience and using that to introduce his readers to the true Logos of God in Jesus Christ, the Living Word of God, fully God and yet fully man, who came to reveal God to man and redeem all who believe in Him from their sin.

I think if you would read carefully what President Hinckley was saying here you would realize that he was referring to the definition of Christ as put forth in the Nicene creed, not the Bible.

We don't only have to rely upon Hinckley's spin of distinguishing between the Mormon "jesus" and the Jesus of the Bible; we already know Lds HQ has long established a key distinction:

“It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons.” – LDS publication, Ensign Magazine, May 1977, p. 26

So the Mormon official publication says they worship a different christ...

The Mormon "prophet" said they speak about, believe and acknowledge a different Christ...
Christians say they worship, speak of and belief another Jesus...
So. We are all on the same page...are you out of harmony here???

Throughout his life, Gordon B. Hinckley taught and testified constantly and consistently of the divinity of Jesus Christ — of his atonement and resurrection.

So what? The so-called "atonement" Lds teach of is at best a partial atonement:

The Mormon "jesus" really didn't die for our personal sins or our rebellious nature...cause if we get to Mormon heaven we discover the Mormon doctrine of men are subject to punishment for their own sins--not Jesus as our Substitute [LDS second article of faith: "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression."

The Mormon second article of faith, therefore, is a half-truth and a false gospel. Men who do not place their faith in the true Jesus Christ will indeed die in their sins; beyond that, Jesus' blood covers the sin of others. The flip side of the Mormon 2nd article of faith is that the Mormon jesus was simply punished for Adam's sin to release us to "free agency."

Throughout his life, Gordon B. Hinckley taught and testified constantly and consistently of the divinity of Jesus Christ...

Give me a break! Mormons have so lowered the "standard" of divinity that they might as well air a new marketing commercial: "I'm a god-in-embryo; you're a god-in-embryo; wouldn't you like to be a Dr. Divine, too? Be a god, drink the koolaid."

The Mormon "jesus" upon spirit birth was not unique other than his spirit birth order. He's just one god among perhaps millions of Mormon "gods." (Lds "prophet" Spencer W. Kimball not all that long ago told 225,000 gathered that perhaps "225,000 gods" were among them then!!!)

So just as Jesus' uniqueness status as the Son of God from eternity has been greatly undermined by Mormons, the Mormon christ is also one savior among many:

"...we are the only people that know how to save our progenitors, how to save ourselves, and how to save our posterity in the celestial kingdom of God;...we in fact are the saviours of the world..." (lds "prophet" John Taylor; Journal of Discourses, vol.6, p.163).

No, "saviors of the world" are NOT plentiful (1 John 4:14; John 4:42).

We unequivocally declare with the centurion who said at His death, “Truly this man was the Son of God”’

The Mormon "Christ" is a pre-existent spirit, they say, like you or me...whose difference is...
(a) mere spiritual birth order--having been first; (b) was twice made a son of God via Mary; and (c) died for Adam's sin so folks could be resurrected (his role as Savior).

The true Messiah was born in Bethlehem as the Bible foretold and affirmed post-birth--not like the Mormon jesus of Mormon "scriptures" supposedly born in Jerusalem.

Other than that, the lds jesus is not the Son of God from eternity past. He worked his way up to godhood status. He's not an exalted God-become-man, but an exalted man-become-God. He was an elder spirit bro of Lucipher. Had you or your brother been "first" in that pre-existent spirit world birth order, he could have been Christ!!!

This "jesus" is foreign to the Bible. The Messiah of the Bible shared the glory with the Father in the beginning (John 17:5). This Jesus is THE Son of God, not just a son of God. And THE Son of God did not consider equality with His Father something he couldn't let go of while becoming a man (see Philippians 2). Phil. 2 makes it clear He was already divine, not just a "wannabe" God like Dear Ole Dad.

And, finally, what statements by Mormon general authorities do we find Mormon posters like Normandy leaving out re: Lds beliefs about Jesus?

The True Jesus Christ: Savior, not a Saved Being

In contrast, the Mormon christ is but a "saved being"--a mere creature like dear ole Dad: "Christ is a saved being” (lds apostle McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol. 3, p 257) “Modern revelation speaks of our Lord as he that ‘ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth‘ (D&C 88:6). Christ's rise to the throne of exaltation was preceded by his descent below all things. Only by submitting to the powers of demons and death and hell could he, in the resurrection, serve as our exemplar of a saved being...” (McConkie and Millet, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, vol. 1, p. 234) (Please also see McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol. 3, p. 238 where he said the Mormon "jesus" "Needs salvation...Came to earth to work out His own salvation”)

I'm sorry, Normandy. The real Christ did not need to "work out His own salvation" as Lds apostles teach; in fact, He is THE Savior of the world: And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be THE Savior of the world. (1 John 4:14; cf. John 4:42).

I worship this Messiah, just like God told the angels to do in Hebrews 1:6. And I challenge grassroots Mormons to defy their leaders when they tell them NOT to directly worship Jesus (see Mormon 7:7; 2 Nephi 25:29; 4 Nephi 4:37; 3 Nephi 11:17; 3 Nephi 17:10).

I directly pray to this Jesus as Stephen did in Acts (7:59) -- and even as the supposed Book of Mormon disciple characters DIRECTLY and repeatedly did to Jesus in 3 Nephi 19: 6-26...again -- a Mormon "scripture" de-emphasized & ignored by Mormon leaders.

Thomas calls Jesus his God in John 20:28; even the Nephite disciples likewise called Jesus “their Lord and God” (3 Nephi 19:18). D&C says Jesus is God (19:4; 62:1; etc.) Since there’s only one true God in the bible and in the LDS scriptures (for example, Pearl of Great Price says "no God besides me" (1:6), either Jesus is a false god or the one true God. As Jesus Christ is a God to Thomas (John 20:28) -- so Thomas has two gods?

Jesus Christ is my Lord, my Savior, my God! He is the Only Lord, the Only Savior, the Only True God!

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.