Posted on 08/18/2010 4:57:29 PM PDT by Colofornian
To begin his series titled “Myths and Realities about Mormonism,” Robert L. Millet, professor of ancient scripture and former dean of Religious Education at BYU, addressed the myth that Latter-day Saints disrespect, reject and contradict the Holy Bible.
After quoting extensively from an April 2007 general conference talk by Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve, titled “The Miracle of the Holy Bible,” Millet explained that part of the public’s misconceptions about the LDS view of the Bible might be a result of church members spending too little time with it.
“The fact of the matter is that the Holy Bible is deeply significant in our family of scripture,” he said. “Frankly, I don’t love one member of the family more than any other.”
Millet next addressed the eighth Article of Faith, a common passage church members use to describe that they believe in the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly.” He acknowledged that though translation is a difficult process and errors are a concern, he believes there is an added layer of meaning to the verse.
“I’m convinced that Joseph Smith, as much as anything, meant transmission — that’s moving from one generation to the next,” he said.
Millet added that conversion is not entirely dependent on scripture, though it is an important element in the conversion process.
“A person doesn’t become fully a Christian by reading, nor do they become a Christian by having a certain vocabulary,” he said. “I don’t think salvation comes by proper vocabulary.”
To wrap up his discussion on translation, Millet quoted President George Q. Cannon, a counselor to four early presidents of the Church: “The clause in the Articles of Faith regarding mistakes in the translation of the Bible was never intended to encourage us to spend our time in searching out and studying the errors, but to emphasize the idea that it is the truth and the truth only that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts, no matter where it is found.”
Next, Millet addressed how The Book of Mormon and other modern revelation establish the truth of the Bible. He cited Doctrine and Covenants 20:5-11, which recounts Joseph Smith’s efforts to bring forth The Book of Mormon, “which was given by inspiration … proving to the world that the holy scriptures are true.”
“What holy scriptures would have been around in 1830?” Millet asked. “The Bible.”
This idea of establishing truth, Millet added, is evident in the number of biblical allusions made by those who wrote The Book of Mormon.
“If you and I read The Book of Mormon carefully,” he said, “we will see that The Book of Mormon writers presupposed that we had a Bible.”
By a careful, systematic study of both the Old and New Testaments, Millet said church members can use them to clarify passages in modern scripture. One example he gave was 3 Nephi 23:14, which states that Jesus “expounded all the scriptures in one.” To understand this phrase better, Millet directed the audience to Luke 24:27, in which the resurrected Savior walked with two disciples on the road to Emmaus.
Without revealing His identity, the verse reads, “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”
Millet acknowledged that many Latter-day Saints frequently do the opposite: use modern-day scripture to clarify the Bible. He exhorted them to apply that idea in reverse, as well.
“I promise you there are scores and hundreds of [examples],” he said. “That’s just as it should be. The greatest commentary on scripture is scripture, and it needs to work in both directions.”
To conclude his remarks, Millet quoted Joseph Smith: “He that can mark the power of omnipotence inscribed upon the heavens can also see God’s own handwriting in the sacred volume [the Bible]. And he who reads it oftenest will like it the best.”
Millet added his testimony of the truthfulness of the Bible and its importance in the LDS canon.
“The Bible is a part of the family of holy scripture,” he said. “Never, never, never let us treat it as an ugly stepsister.”
Or even the Book of MORMON.
For that matter; one cannot find, in ANY of the MORMON 'scriptures', the things that are done in the Temples!
In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.
1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
Ezra Taft Benson
(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)
28. Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29. Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."
C’mon Elsie...you know a bit more about early Church history than that...magritte
Argument from silence. No proof offered. Just conjecture, in which you ignore even what Jesus said that has impacted those Christians (let alone the original disciples like Peter...author of two books of the NT; John, 5 books; Luke, 2 books; James; Matthew; Mark).
Neither does Christianity. Mormonism is to Christianity, what Christianity is to Judaism. Two false interpretations of the real thing.
Well, Yeshua is the real deal.
"It is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." (Lev. 17:11)...so, you imply in other places that Ps. 49 indicates no man can ransom his brother, yet the blood of a lamb is of more import the blood of the designated Lamb of God?
Messianic Judaism simply proclaims "nothing other than what was foretold by the prophets and by Moses: that the Messiah must suffer, and that as the first to rise from the dead, he would announce the dawn to Israel and the Gentiles" (Acts 26:22-23, NEB)
[Notice how in contrast to all the OT passages that reference Judaism to becoming a missionary world-wide religion that would include Gentiles, it has become largely dormant in that vein -- provided you rule out Messianic Judaism, that is]
Aside from Isaiah 53 about the Suffering Messiah, we have Dan. 9:26 where the Jewish Scriptures teach mashiach yicarate" -- "the Messiah shall be cut off". [Phillip Goble, p. 6, Everything You Need to Know to Grow a Messianic Synagogue, William Carey library, 1974]
Acts 1 mentions the risen Jesus appearing to 120 brethren -- orthodox Jews. Were they lying? What about the 500 orthodox Jews claiming to have seen Yeshua at one time (1 Cor. 15:6)?
No wonder 3,000 Jews responded to the apostles' message on the first day out of preaching (Acts 2:41).
As Phillip Goble put it in his book (p. 9): ...the crucial issue between Messianic Judaism and any other sort of Judaism centers on the hope of the resurrection of the dead. The only question is whether there is such a hope and whether that hope has been realized in the historical resurrection of Yeshua Ha Mashiach.
Job 19:25-26: For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand upon the earth at last, and after my skin has been destroyed, then from my flesh I shall see my God."
56Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad." 57"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!" 58"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" (John 8:56-58)
So who do you say this Jesus was?
Typically I refrain from responding on these daily anti-mormon threads. But in this case I will, because I agree with the statement you have made here.
But it is true. Many LDS look at the Bible as an afterthought, if at all. Those are the Mormons that I call Mormon Mormons (yes double) as opposed to LDS or just Mormon.
Yes there are Christian Mormons too (not all Mormons are Christians...just like not all Christians are Christians) but that's another debate I'm not getting into either. Just adding it to my personal list of Mormon classifications for reference.
Come on, the majority of Christians in the USA take their walking papers from Paul. Paul is who has shaped Christianity from the time of Rome until today. Paul abandoned the law, abandoned circumcision, abandoned the Sabbath, abandoned Kashrut....And this the chruch teaches today.
Paul the REAL founder of Christianity
"It is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." (Lev. 17:11)
See, this is a classic case of building doctrine around one out of context....half of a verse. Lev 17:10-14, IN CONTEXT says do not eat blood! It is not to be used as a food. No blood sausage..No blood pudding..No eating your steak rare. Why? because blood is for atonement on the alter. It doesnt say that blood is the ONLY means of atonement and blood atonement was for UNintentional sins anyway. Only a few intentional sins were to be covered by blood, cheating your neighbor, bearing false witness and a couple of others.
Rabbi Blumenthal: The Scriptures explicitly state that the forgiveness of sin is achieved through sincere repentance. This teaching is repeated many times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in a clear and unambiguous manner (Deuteronomy 30:1-10, Ezekiel 18:21-23,27,28,31,32,33:11,14-16,19, Isaiah 1:16-18, 55:7, Hosea 14:2-10, Jonah 3:10, Micah 6:7,8, Psalm 51:19)10. These passages directly address the issue of forgiveness from sin, yet they make no mention of a blood offering. Some of these passages11 actually preclude the requirement of a blood offering as a necessary component in the process of forgiveness from sin. Yet on the basis of the misinterpretation of one solitary verse (Leviticus 17:11)12 from a passage that does not directly address the issue of forgiveness from sin at all, Christianity teaches that repentance cannot achieve atonement without a blood offering!
yet the blood of a lamb is of more import the blood of the designated Lamb of God?
Jesus wasnt a real lamb...he was a human being, 100%god and 100%man, a god-man. A)G-d forbids human sacrifice and B) the Tanakh (OT) NEVER says the messiah will be a god-man hybrid demigod.
In Deuteronomy, God calls Human sacrifice something that He hates, and an abomination to Him!
Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou inquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do so unto the Eternal thy God: for every abomination to the Eternal, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. [Deuteronomy 12:30-31]
In Jeremiah, God tells us that Human sacrifice is so horrible a concept to Him, that it did not even come into His mind!
Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind: Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Eternal, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but The Valley of Slaughter. [Jeremiah 19:4-6]
We see the same thing in Psalm 106 and in Ezekiel 16:
Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. [Psalm 106:37-38]
Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter? [Ezekiel 16:20]
Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? Micah 6:7
And yet we are to then turn around and believe that God changed His mind, and required human sacrifice, and then it was the sacrifice of His own human son that God wanted? After telling the Jews to stay away from pagan practices, and pagan beliefs, God then changes His mind and says, "Okay, now go ahead and believe in a human sacrifice, just as these very pagans believe?"
Notice how in contrast to all the OT passages that reference Judaism to becoming a missionary world-wide religion that would include Gentiles, it has become largely dormant in that vein --
Yes, of course and all these passages are messianic...in the messianic era. When we enter that era, the Jews will be the light unto the nations and:
And many peoples(Gentiles) shall come, and say: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths," for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. (Isaiah 2:3)
The gentiles will go to Jerusalem....for out of Zion shall go forth the LAW...not Grace?
And Israel will follow the Law too:
And I shall give them one heart, and shall put a new spirit within them. And I shall take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances, and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. (Ezekiel 11:19-20)
My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. (Ezekiel 37:24)
And the gentiles will regret all they have been taught:
Jer 16:19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.
Aside from Isaiah 53 about the Suffering Messiah, we have Dan. 9:26 where the Jewish Scriptures teach mashiach yicarate" -- "the Messiah shall be cut off".
Isaiah 53 is about Israel, the Jewish people suffering. Throughout Isaiah, Israel, Jacob, Zion....are named by Isaiah as the servant. You cant shoehorn Jesus into that role. Daniel 9, when read in CONTEXT is a wicked messiah who is cut-off. Never in scripture is a righteous person ever cut-off.
Acts 1 mentions the risen Jesus appearing to 120 brethren -- orthodox Jews. Were they lying? What about the 500 orthodox Jews claiming to have seen Yeshua at one time (1 Cor. 15:6)? No wonder 3,000 Jews responded to the apostles' message on the first day out of preaching (Acts 2:41).
Those things are irrelevant. So, is turning water into wine and walking on water. Why? Because Jesus didnt fulfill the requirements of The Messiah. Is there world peace? Universal knowlege of G-d? A 3rd Temple? Restored sacrifices? Why are sacrfices returning if Jesus was the once for all sacrfice? The lost ribes returned? The exile complete? NO. And there are no do-overs. Bar Kochba was closer than Jesus to meeting the requirements and he missed by a mile. Maybe Bar Kochba will return and finish the job? No.
As Phillip Goble put it in his book (p. 9): ...the crucial issue between Messianic Judaism and any other sort of Judaism centers on the hope of the resurrection of the dead. The only question is whether there is such a hope and whether that hope has been realized in the historical resurrection of Yeshua Ha Mashiach.
Goble doesnt know what he is talking about. Jews,have always believed in the resurrection. At least the pharisee's, which overtime have become todays Orthodox.
So who do you say this Jesus was?
Not Mashiach ben David. Not by a long shot. He is a creation of Paul. An unrecognizable Grecco-Roman hybrid god-man.
If Christians realized the truth of Paulism and all its fabrications, they would return to “original” like I did...magritte
NOW we are getting somewhere!
Agreed on the B o M...like the “New Testament”, it’s “based on a true story,” but is full of distortion and outright lies that make them false religions...magritte
Paul pointed to the Messiah. Joseph Smith pointed to himself.
Christians don't sing "Praise to Paul".
Paul pointed to the Messiah. Joseph Smith pointed to himself.
Christians don't sing "Praise to Paul".
And, what do YOU claim is the "original".
There are probably some of my fellow LDS Christians that personally give one scripture source more weight than another. I never really asked them. Given proper interpretation though they are all equally good and Holy.
I can speak for myself though that I love the way we have an ever repeating 4 year cycle in Sunday School.
1 - Old Testament
2 - New Testament
3 - Book of Mormon
4 - Doctrine and Covenants
Then back to 1 again of course. As you can see, we spend 2 out of 4 years on the Holy Bible.
Judaism, of course...or in my case, as a Gentile, Noahidism...G-d gave us a great chance and the final word a long time ago...no need to muck it up with the pale, distorted reflection of Christianity...a good example is “original sin”...unheard of in Jewish thought, a contrived concept by Paul and the early Christians to convince Gentiles of the importance of Jesus...there are many more examples like this...it’s all out there to find...magritte
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.