Posted on 08/15/2010 2:44:17 PM PDT by greyfoxx39
One of the noteworthy examples of the Latter-day Saint commitment to treasure up true principles and cultivate affirmative gratitude is the admiration that Church leaders have expressed over the years for the spiritual contributions of Muhammad.
As early as 1855, at a time when Christian literature generally ridiculed Muhammad as the Antichrist and the archenemy of Western civilization, Elders George A. Smith (1817–75) and Parley P. Pratt (1807–57) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles delivered lengthy sermons demonstrating an accurate and balanced understanding of Islamic history and speaking highly of Muhammad’s leadership. Elder Smith observed that Muhammad was “descended from Abraham and was no doubt raised up by God on purpose” to preach against idolatry. He sympathized with the plight of Muslims, who, like Latter-day Saints, found it difficult “to get an honest history” written about them. Speaking next, Elder Pratt went on to express his admiration for Muhammad’s teachings, asserting that “upon the whole, … [Muslims] have better morals and better institutions than many Christian nations.” 9
Latter-day Saint appreciation of Muhammad’s role in history can also be found in the 1978 First Presidency statement regarding God’s love for all mankind. This declaration specifically mentions Muhammad as one of “the great religious leaders of the world” who received “a portion of God’s light” and affirms that “moral truths were given to [these leaders] by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.” 10
In recent years, respect for the spiritual legacy of Muhammad and for the religious values of the Islamic community has led to increasing contact and cooperation between Latter-day Saints and Muslims around the world. This is due in part to the presence of Latter-day Saint congregations in areas such as the Levant, North Africa, the Persian Gulf, and Southeast Asia. The Church has sought to respect Islamic laws and traditions that prohibit conversion of Muslims to other faiths by adopting a policy of nonproselyting in Islamic countries of the Middle East. Yet examples of dialogue and cooperation abound, including visits of Muslim dignitaries at Church headquarters in Salt Lake City; Muslim use of Church canning facilities to produce halal (ritually clean) food products; Church humanitarian aid and disaster relief sent to predominantly Muslim areas including Jordan, Kosovo, and Turkey; academic agreements between Brigham Young University and various educational and governmental institutions in the Islamic world; the existence of the Muslim Student Association at BYU; and expanding collaboration between the Church and Islamic organizations to safeguard traditional family values worldwide. 11 The recent initiation of the Islamic Translation Series, cosponsored by BYU and the Church, has resulted in several significant exchanges between Muslim officials and Latter-day Saint Church leaders. A Muslim ambassador to the United Nations predicted that this translation series “will play a positive role in the West’s quest for a better understanding of Islam.” 12
A cabinet minister in Egypt, aware of the common ground shared by Muslims and Latter-day Saints, once remarked to Elder Howard W. Hunter of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles that “if a bridge is ever built between Christianity and Islam it must be built by the Mormon Church.” 13 The examples of Latter-day Saint–Muslim interaction mentioned above, together with the Church’s establishment in 1989 of two major centers for educational and cultural exchange in the Middle East (Jerusalem and Amman), reflect the traditional attitude of respect for Islam that Church leaders have exhibited from earliest times. These activities represent tangible evidence of Latter-day Saint commitment to promote greater understanding of the Muslim world and witness an emerging role for the Church in helping to bridge the gap that has existed historically between Muslims and Christians.
Also, Christ has two titles: Lord and Son of Man.
_______________________________________________
Kid if you ever read the Biblke you will find that the LORD Jesus Christ has dozens odf “titles”
Meanwhile little grasshopper, heres a few for ya...
Jesus is God,
The Everlasting Father
Prince of Peace
Only Begotten Son of God
Savior
Healer
Deliverer
Master
Redeemer
Immanuel
Wonderful Counselor
The Alpha and the Omega
The Beginning and the End
The I Am
Love
The Way
The Truth
The Life
Creator
The Lamb of God
The Word of God
All Powerful
Faithful and True
Worthy
The LORD of lords
The KING of kings
The Good Shepherd
The Gate
The Door of the Sheepfold
The Light of thge World
The Bread of Life
Our Mediator
Our Advocate
Our Maker
The Bright and Morning Star
Too bad that in all of your 'teaching' you never 'learned' what JS did about the UNTRUEness of PRESBYTERIANism of his day.
Bible
Particularly yours.
We’ve established the following:
Well, lets see about this.
1. The Bible is our source of truth(commonly accepted)
Depends upon your flavor 10, but for the purposes of your little chalk talk it is adequate for the moment.
2. God speaks to men by the use of prophets (ref: Amos 3:7)
Incomplete 10 - you've already violated #1 above. God speaks to us through the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17). 2 Peter 1:3 declares, “His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of Him who called us by his own glory and goodness.” Individually, through the Holy Spirit and the Word, and events to occur in our lives to direct us, change us, and help us to grow spiritually (James 1:2-5; Hebrews 12:5-11; First Peter 1:6-7 )
But lets delve deeper into Amos shall we. Contexturally, Amos was speaking of the OT era, yet because of Jesus those conditions changed as described in Hebrews 1:1-2 “God, who at sundry times and divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son…” that through Jesus we have all the revelation we need.
But for grins and giggles, lets ignore Hebrews and say "ok, we need living prophets", then we should apply the test that the Bible has given us to discern who a true prophet is - Deuteronomy 18:20-22 makes the test very clear and concise - God's standard is 100% accuracy in the outcome of his prophecies.
3. Stephen is a true prophet (commonly accepted)
Stephen's gifting was as a deacon and evangelist. That which could be considered prophetic was the vision in Acts 7:55.
4. Stephen was martyred by those ignorant of #3 (commonly accepted)
Stephen was martyred on the charge of blasphemy (Acts 6:11 and 7:57. He was not martyred on the charge of being a false prophet. Further, it is argueable that his murders were 'ignorant' of the prophetic nature of his vision, nor the truthfulness of his orthodoxic presentation of the Jewish faith history.
They confirm that Jesus is separate from God (Heavenly Father), but has the capacity of God to receive souls/spirits to himself.
Ah, yes, the failed attempt to use this as a proof text of smith's first vision and mormon polytheism. For starters, what does the scripture actually say?
Act 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
He saw the "glory" and Jesus standing on the "dexios" of that Glory. Also, not suprisingly, is the literal nature that mormons want to interpret this passage, while ignoring the contextural construct and usage of the phrase. Was Jesus actually standing on God's "hand"? No, so the passage cannot be taken literally in the manner they want. Rather "dexios" refers to a metaphoric / symbology of Jesus' position of honour or authority.
NB: These verses are an absolute proof of Joseph Smith’s First Vision.
They confirm that Jesus is separate from God (Heavenly Father), but has the capacity of God to receive souls/spirits to himself.
Folks, this is a leap of logic that even Evil Knevil would avoid making. But it appears you are citing someone else by the NB:, care to enlighten us your source? For starters, which VERSION of the first vision would one want to refer too - there are at least 9 by smith and on this point alone smith's accounts are very contradictory
In Smith's 1827 account, he states that a "spirit" appeared to him
IN his 1830 testimony to Bauder, smith states that an "angel" first appeared to him
In his 1832 account from his journal he states that only Jesus visited him - when he was 15 years old.
Inthe 1834-35 Messenger and Advocate, smith testifies about his first vision by saying that he was visited by an angel when 17.
In 1835-36, an account, found in smith's diary and given to a Jewish minister, smith states that an unidentified silent 'personage' infire appeared then a second unidentified personage appeared and said that Jesus was the Son of God, but neither is identified as Jesus.
In the 1838 (now official version), we have separate God and Jesus (by implication) appearing.
In 1844 — Account in An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States, smith fails to identify the 'personages' as God and Jesus
Now, this only deals with details about WHO or WHAT smith had claimed to have visited him. This then begs the question - WHICH version of the vision is "true" to begin with? If one were to examine these other testimonies of smith in greater detail, one will find more confusion and contradiction - key elements over the years. He changed:
The date / his age - from 1823 (age 16), to 1821 (age 15), to 1820 (age 14)
The reason or motive for seeking divine help - from no motive (a spirit appears with the news of gold plates), Bible reading and conviction of sins, a revival, a desire to know if God exists.
Who appears to him - a spirit, an angel, two angels, Jesus, many angels, the Father and the Son.
Thus Stephens vision in Acts does not prove smith's alledged 'vision' to be true at all - since it is apparent from smith's own inconsistent testimony that he made the whole thing up to begin with.
Also, Christ has two titles: Lord and Son of Man.
It may be humorous to see you stumble through your explanation of this
I thought I was going to be schooled here - guess I should have hoped for someone who knew what they were talking about. And we haven't even really touched the fact that smith grossly failed the Deut 18 standard for prophets not once, not twice, but every time.
That hasn't been evident so far, but not unexpected on your part.
“I was self taught too guilded by the Holy Spirit the Lord promise us!’
If you are indeed “taught by the Holy Spirit”, can you explain that the Bible teaches there is ONE God and yet the Holy Spirit has “taught” you that there are TRILLIONS OF GODS?
How does it work in mormon teaching that the Holy Spirit can teach you things that are opposite of His inspired Word, the Bible?
OR, perhaps while he was teaching, you weren’t paying attention?
OR, perhaps, the spirit that taught you these things was not the Holy Spirit?
OR, ...?
What is the answer?
best,
ampu
bttt
Not doing much for credibility and setting up confidence.
The shallow CV doesn't help either. No real background.
Biggest question right now, are you a member of any type of the Latter Day Saints.
I am sure at some point you have specified this but I cannot find it. It is a simple question so there should be no need to act coy about it.
I’d take think of any stripe right now...
Of course if the other side was thinking there wouldn’t be an other side...
351 YAYYYY!
352
:)
Windsor
OK, while I appreciate your attempt at translation the following translations (as well as the original Greek) stand with me and the message is clear:
Acts 7:55-56 (New International Version)
55But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56”Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Acts 7:55-56 (New American Standard Bible)
55But being (A)full of the Holy Spirit, he (B)gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing (C)at the right hand of God;
56and he said, “Behold, I see the (D)heavens opened up and (E)the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Acts 7:55-56 (The Message)
54-56At that point they went wild, a rioting mob of catcalls and whistles and invective. But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, hardly noticed—he only had eyes for God, whom he saw in all his glory with Jesus standing at his side. He said, “Oh! I see heaven wide open and the Son of Man standing at God’s side!”
Acts 7:55-56 (Amplified Bible)
55But he, full of the Holy Spirit and controlled by Him, gazed into heaven and saw the glory (the splendor and majesty) of God, and Jesus standing at God’s right hand;
56And he said, Look! I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at God’s right hand!
Acts 7:55-56 (New Living Translation)
55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed steadily into heaven and saw the glory of God, and he saw Jesus standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand. 56 And he told them, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!”
Acts 7:55-56 (English Standard Version)
55But he,(A) full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw(B) the glory of God, and Jesus standing(C) at the right hand of God. 56And he said, “Behold, I see(D) the heavens opened, and(E) the Son of Man standing(F) at the right hand of God.”
Acts 7:55-56 (Contemporary English Version)
55But Stephen was filled with the Holy Spirit. He looked toward heaven, where he saw our glorious God and Jesus standing at his right side. [a] 56Then Stephen said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right side of God!”
Acts 7:55-56 (New Century Version)
55 But Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. He looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at God’s right side.56 He said, “Look! I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at God’s right side.”
Acts 7:55-56 (GOD’S WORD Translation)
55But Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. He looked into heaven, saw God’s glory, and Jesus in the position of authority that God gives. 56So Stephen said, “Look, I see heaven opened and the Son of Man in the position of authority that God has given him!”
Acts 7:55-56 (21st Century King James Version)
55But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God,
56and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Acts 7:55-56 (American Standard Version)
55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.
Acts 7:55-56 (Young’s Literal Translation)
55and being full of the Holy Spirit, having looked stedfastly to the heaven, he saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56and he said, `Lo, I see the heavens having been opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.’
Acts 7:55-56 (Darby Translation)
55But being full of [the] Holy Spirit, having fixed his eyes on heaven, he saw [the] glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God,
56and said, Lo, I behold the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God.
So now it has been established that the First Vision is supported in the New Testament. We have three Divine Beings, each separate persons.
There are, allegedly, thousands of verses supporting the Trinity. Please post the top three strongest for discussion.
Let’s move on to the LDS position on theosis, often ridiculed, but never refuted. Interestingly the Eastern Orthodox also believe in theosis and that we are full heirs with and through Christ. Are there verses to support this? Yes.
Jesus himself experiences theosis please note the following verses (I’ll use Young’s Literal and NIV for contrast/clarification):
Luke 2:40 (New International Version)
40And the child [Jesus] grew and became strong; he was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him.
Luke 2:40 (Young’s Literal Translation)
40and the child grew and was strengthened in spirit, being filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him.
Luke 2:52 (New International Version)
52And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.
Luke 2:52 (Young’s Literal Translation)
52and Jesus was advancing in wisdom, and in stature, and in favour with God and men.
John 7:38-39 (New International Version)
38Whoever believes in me, as[a] the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” 39By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
John 7:38-39 (Young’s Literal Translation)
38he who is believing in me, according as the Writing said, Rivers out of his belly shall flow of living water;’
39and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
Luke 22:42 (New International Version)
42”Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”
Luke 22:42 (Young’s Literal Translation)
42saying, `Father, if Thou be counselling to make this cup pass from me —; but, not my will, but Thine be done.’ —
John 20:17 (New International Version)
17Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’ “
John 20:17 (Young’s Literal Translation)
17Jesus saith to her, `Be not touching me, for I have not yet ascended unto my Father; and be going on to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and to your God.’
The above verses establish several things:
1. Obedience is critical to salvation.
In Luke 2:40 we see the young man Jesus practicing wisdom, wisdom being the righteous application of knowledge. His actions are critical and the results clear in Luke 2:52: to “grow” in wisdom is to practice obedience to the Divine Will.
2. They reiterate the separateness of the Holy Ghost, Jesus Christ and God/Heavenly Father.
3. They demonstrate theosis, that is the ability to grow toward godhood, through righteous living and obedience to the laws and ordinances of Heavenly Father. This growth, though is unachievable without the Grace of Jesus Christ which the Bible fully supports as well.
See the below from Websters 1913/1828 Dictionaries (I prefer them as they avoid the liberal bias imposed on words by Progressives in the 20th/21st centuries)
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1913 edition: Blasphemy (Page: 153)
Blas"phe*my (?), n. [L. blasphemia, Gr. : cf. OF. blasphemie.]
1. An indignity offered to God in words, writing, or signs; impiously irreverent words or signs addressed to, or used in reference to, God; speaking evil of God; also, the act of claiming the attributes or prerogatives of deity. &hand; When used generally in statutes or at common law, blasphemy is the use of irreverent words or signs in reference to the Supreme Being in such a way as to produce scandal or provoke violence.
2. Figuratively, of things held in high honor: Calumny; abuse; vilification.
Punished for his blasphemy against learning. Bacon.
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:
BLAS''PHEMY, n. An indignity offered to God by words or writing; reproachful, contemptuous or irreverent words uttered impiously against Jehovah.
Blasphemy is an injury offered to God, by denying that which is due and belonging to him, or attributing to him that which is not agreeable to his nature.
In the middle ages, blasphemy was used to denote simply the blaming or condemning of a person or thing. Among the Greeks, to blaspheme was to use words of ill omen, which they were careful to avoid.
1. That which derogates from the prerogatives of God. Mark 2.
******* Nothing could be more blasphemous than pretending to be a messenger/prophet of God. Clearly the Devil appearing as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14) is both false and blasphemous. False prophecy is blasphemy by definition.
Only God can delegate the authority to act in his Holy Name. (see Hebrews 5:4, although by definition the above is true)
Those angels of light sure get around.
The true onus of proof is on the Reformers. Why take on reform only to stop short, retaining some foolish traditions when Gutenberg offered complete liberty?
Was the time not yet ripe for a full Restoration?
The questions that need answering are:
1. Why must God be in the form of a Trinity?
2. Why can’t God have a physical body?
3. Why can’t God speak in our day by way of prophets?
4. Why isn’t there one united Church of Jesus Christ (see Ephesians 4)?
The LDS claim that they rest on continuing revelation, but as shown their beliefs are solidly Biblical and not beyond the apprehension of those willing to read with their own minds and understand.
Let the Spirit be your guide and not men. God’s Holy Word is clear. To pretend that LDS belief is unBiblical is a lie. You may interpret it differently, but that is your opinion and choice.
Ironically, Acts 20:28-30 discusses the Church of Jesus Christ. The wolves are often erroneously attributed as the LDS, et. al. If that were so then the LDS were/are the Church of Jesus Christ as Paul is talking to the faithful of Ephesus:
Acts 20:28-30 (New International Version)
28Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.[a] Be shepherds of the church of God,[b] which he bought with his own blood. 29I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.
Footnotes:
1. Acts 20:28 Traditionally bishops
2. Acts 20:28 Many manuscripts of the Lord
Acts 20:28-30 (Young’s Literal Translation)
28`Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit made you overseers, to feed the assembly of God that He acquired through His own blood,
29for I have known this, that there shall enter in, after my departing, grievous wolves unto you, not sparing the flock,
30and of your own selves there shall arise men, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.
NB: that the “wolves” are within the flock and rise up among the men (Priesthood?) of the flock to mislead them. Therefore for Paul’s warning to be true the LDS would have to be within the Church of Jesus Christ. They cannot be both.
So if Acts 20 is referring to the true church and the LDS it is a warning to the LDS to beware of those whose pride/blasphemy will lead the flock astray.
If the LDS are not the true church then Paul’s reference is not to them at all, but to and against the members of the true church. Which is it?
What is your affiliation?
Between that and being late for class our confidence in your credentials and expertise on the subject is waning...
And my lunch grows stale...
No; it isn't.
NEVER is GOD the Father 'seen' in the NT.
NEVER is the Father described as having a PHYSICAL body.
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.