REVERENCE FOR THE BIBLE -Mormon- (OPEN)

LDS Newsroom ^ | January, 2008

[greyfoxx39]

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.”

[Utah Binger]

On another note, my great great grandfather did come with Brigham, arriving in the second company.

I have long since departed, however I am proud of my heritage even though the dogma is false.

[greyfoxx39]

On another note, my great great grandfather did come with Brigham, arriving in the second company.

Have we discussed your status as a royal? You too, CC. ;)

[Utah Binger]

A Royal? Why of course! Come down here my dear and kiss my ring. LOL

I get up very early in the morning, but not early enough to get my shirt stuffed as a ROYAL.

[Tennessee Nana]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

A “caste” system...

How very Hindu...

[Elsie]

I had just gotten it as an e-mail.

Cleaned it up a bit and - viola! - here it is!

[Normandy]

Hi TMF

Of course we cannot be saved by our own efforts — we are dependent upon the atoning sacrifice of our Savior, for without him we would be lost forever.

You ask how we should follow Christ. I would point to the Sermon on the Mount — these are instructions that Jesus gave to his followers and provide a thorough guide on how he wants his followers to live.

At the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says:

“Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (Matthew 7)

So it is important that we be “doers of the word, not hearers only”(James 1:22)

[Elsie]

...a physical manifestation confirmed in both the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants.

I wouldn't say confirmed, for if one BELIEVES the Bible, then no 'confirmation' is needed.

Agreeing with; maybe.

Plagiarized? Definitely!

[Elsie]

 

I don't know that we teach it

In case you don't recognize the title of this post, it is part of President Hinckley's answer to a reporter's question that appeared in the August 4 1997 issue of Time magazine. The reporter referenced the King Follett discourse. The answer supplied and the manner in which it was delivered caused the reporter to draw some false conclusions about a very important doctrine.

In that discourse, the prophet Joseph Smith said, "If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by His power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man." (See also D&C 130:22)

The article referred to Lorenzo Snow's couplet, "As man is now, God once was; as God now is, man may become." The reporter said, "God the Father was once a man as we are. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing." President Hinckley was then asked, "Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?"

The bothersome reply

"I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it."

The reporter wrote, "On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man, he sounded uncertain." That's an unfortunate conclusion. Of course I wasn't at the interview and neither were you but I'll bet the reporter mistook careful thoughtfulness for uncertainty. This doctrine is indeed deep territory and not something that is taught outside the LDS Church.

An earlier and similar interview

The San Francisco Chronicle, published an interview with President Hinckley in April of 1997. The reporter asked, "There are some significant differences in your beliefs. For instance, don't Mormon's believe that God was once a man?" President Hinckley responded, "I wouldn't say that. There is a little couplet coined, 'As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.'"

He then said, "Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about." The reporter pounced on this. "So you're saying that the church is still struggling to understand this? " President Hinckley responded, "Well, as God is, man may become. We believe in eternal progression. Very strongly."

President Hinckley's response

President Hinckley said in October 1997 General Conference: "I personally have been much quoted, and in a few instances misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine.

"I think I understand them thoroughly, and it is unfortunate that the reporting may not make this clear. I hope you will never look to the public press as the authority on the doctrines of the Church." And there lies the whole point of my post today. Some members did indeed become a little concerned by the exchanges they read in the press reports of those interviews.

Does the Church still teach this?

I know this is old news but it still bothers some people when they discover the anti-Mormon attacks floating around on the Internet. President Hinckley was right. We really don't know much about how our Heavenly Father became a God. The idea that he passed through a mortal probationary state like you and me is certainly not documented in any scripture of which I know.

However, it is still taught. In the Gospel Principles manual in the chapter on exaltation we read, "Joseph Smith taught: "It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God. . . . He was once a man like us; . . . God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-46)."

Summary and conclusion

I don't know why this should bother anyone. The doctrine is true. Joseph Smith knew a whole lot more about this than I do. President Hinckley also knew a whole lot more about this doctrine than he was willing to share with reporters who did not have the background to understand it. It must have been difficult for President Hinckley to hold back and not teach it in those interviews.

It didn't bother me when I read the interviews back in 1997 and it doesn't bother me today. However, I know it does bother some people. We each have trials of our faith. I have never depended on an intellectual understanding of the gospel in order to accept it and live it. There are some things that just can't be fully comprehended without the temple, prayer and faith.

 

---

---

 There are some things that just can't be fully comprehended without the temple, prayer and faith. alrighty then!!!

 

 

 

[svcw]

Stuffed shirt, is that sorta like the “puffy pirate shirt”?

[Elsie]

If it is the only means of salvation - why slum around with the bom, d&c and pogp?

Ding ding DING!!

We have a winner!

[svcw]

Of course we cannot be saved by our own efforts and doers of the word

Both huh?

[Elsie]

Be alert!!

Only 500 to go!

[Elsie]

Chuck-El

[Elsie]

STOP stop saying that!

[Elsie]

How can your belief in something result in a genetic marker that matches those of a certain other people, say the 10 lost tribes or in their case Trope.

Well; if one can watch them adopted kids get whiter and whiter...

[Elsie]

STOP your SAYING of “STOP SAYING THAT!”

[svcw]

Then “offer me money”.

[Elsie]

Called covering your bases.’

It don’t matter how many get proved wrong, at least ONE of them could BE RIGHT!

(Kinda like MORMON propchecies. The FALSE ones get ignored, the co-incidental ones get glorified.)

[Elsie]

The views of he and his followers are really not worth the exhibited effort. In short, one does not bandy words with fools.

True; but there are lurkers around that may get sucked in to this Satanic scheme, and we work to keep that from happening.

[Utah Binger]

No, no, you don’t understand. As a ROYAL I look down upon you poor simple converts without history legs to sustain you.

After all, we have the blood. You don’t!