Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ananias and Sapphira, Original Sin in the Church:-TITHING
Houston Catholic Worker, ^ | Vol. XXII, No. 7, December 2002. | by Jorge Domínguez Rojo

Posted on 06/26/2010 10:13:41 AM PDT by restornu

The Story of Ananias and Sapphira reads as follows:

The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common. With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.

There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need. . .

A man named Ananias, however, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property. He retained for himself, with his wife's knowledge, some of the purchase price, took the remainder, and put it at the feet of the apostles. But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you lied to the Holy Spirit and retained part of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain yours? And when it was sold, was it not still under your control? Why did you contrive this deed? You have lied not to human beings, but to God." When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and breathed his last, and great fear came upon all who heard of it. The young men came and wrapped him up, then carried him out and buried him.

After an interval of about three hours, his wife came in, unaware of what had happened. Peter said to her, "Tell me, did you sell the land for this amount?" She said, "Yes, for that amount." Then Peter said to her, "Why did you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen, the footsteps of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out." At once, she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. When the young men entered they found her dead, so they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things. (Acts 4:32-35; 5:1-11) New American Bible

The aim of this study is to critique Daniel Marguerat's interpretation of the passage about Ananias and Sapphira in the account of the Acts of the Apostles. The importance of analyzing this contribution by Marguerat lies in the application of the narrative of the book of Acts, and especially in the story of Ananias and Sapphira. Of course, this narrative criticism does not invalidate the contributions of literary criti-cism, but enriches the interpretation of the text and allows for a better hermeneutic understanding. Marguerat ques-tions in what narrative strategy Acts 5:1-11 takes place… how has Luke planned the reading of Acts 5:1-11 in the organization of his text?

From the very beginning, the author presents the problematic question which the story of Ananias and Sapphira raises. He considers the story of the judgment of God on Ananias and Sapphira the most tragic episode of the Book of Acts.

He asks himself: what is the intention of the author of Acts with this "blow of narrative force in the idyllic fresco of the first Christian community, developed in chapters 3 to 5. How can the tragic disproportion between the offense and the sanction that hits Ananias and Sapphira be justified? How to explain the absence of the typical offer of conversion in Luke's writing?

The reader faces the theological difficulty that Luke not only consents to assume this recounting in his work, but besides, accents its dramatic effect.

In Mediterranean societies of the first century conventional family cells were common-that is to say, groups whose individuals were committed to a reciprocal solidarity analogous to the ties within a clan. These groups, built upon a philosophical and/or religious ideology, offered the individual protection against a social setting and unfailing emotional support.

Five characteristics marked their identity: loyalty and trust in the group, preservation of communal convictions over against those outside the group, the obligation to provide for the needs of each member, and consciousness of sharing the same destiny.

The author of Acts has desired to make known to readers that the original community, the Church of Jerusalem, carried out the ideal of sharing lived in the culture of the time.

Luke's eloquence focuses on the destiny of the community more than the psychology of the individuals. The author points out how the record of the life of the community is not contradicted by the narrative treatment of the role of the apostles. Peter, whose fulmi-nating word dominates the retelling, is not presented as a heroic individual: his prophetic discernment unmasks hidden desires, but the reader has learned from the beginning of the story that the powerful word of the apostle is the work of the Spirit (4:8). Peter works the theological reading of the deceit, situating it in the framework of the combat of God and Satan (v. 3,9a), but he does not pronounce any sentence (see v. 13:1): he predicts the imminent end of Sapphira, but does not decide her death. The role of Peter, the only Christian speaker until Acts 7 (Stephen), omniscent spokes-person for the apostles, never goes beyond the status of mediator in whom the Spirit lives (4:31).

The author notes that the retelling comes from a literary genre from which ancient literature, as much biblical as nonbiblical, offers innumerable testimonies: the judgment of God. Characteristic of this genre is stating the fault of the guilty one and attributing the punishment to divine con-demnation. When the Jewish tradition appeals to the judgment of God (Gn 19; Leviticus 10:1-5; Numbers 14; Ez 11, etc.) the transgressor is generally annihilated; before God, it is a question of life and death. Thus die Judas the traitor (Acts 1, 18) and Herod (Acts 12:20-23).

A Crime Against the Spirit

Marguerat concludes that Ananias' crime is a crime against the Spirit. Ananias has been made into Satan's instrument in his battle against the Church. Satan has led Ananias against the work of the Spirit, and this opposition has to result in death. Peter's discourse says nothing else: it is not man to whom Ananias has lied, but to God (v.4b).

The transgression is not ethical but theological; the lie is not denounced as hypocrisy but as dishonesty, a fraud against God. Opposing the Spirit in this way, Ananias and Sapphira have made a lie of the ideal of chapter 4, verse 32. This places the community in danger, and in turn, due to not responding to the ideal of one heart and one soul (4:32a) threatens in its missionary efficacy. The couple, who excluded themselves from the ecclesiastical unity, damage the community ideal. Far from resolving this crisis by founding an ecclesiastical jurisdiction of ex-communion, the text shows the work of the Spirit in its role of "infallible guarantor of the communion of inner-community."

For the author, the conflict presented in this writing also is meant to lead to an awareness of the terrible efficacy of the Word. The pragmatic effect of the story is to evoke the fear of God (v.5b, 11). Marguerat asks, "Why, on two occasions, does the author feel the need to specify the effect of the news on 'those who hear it'?" Everything happens as if in this account, Luke were writing about the effect he wants to lead to in the listener/reader. But what does Luke want the reader to fear? The terrible judgment of God? The power of the Spirit? For the author, more likely: fear of the power of the Word.

From beginning to end, the story is woven from words and sayings. Like Ananias' offense, Sapphira's is also one of dishonesty (v.3b, 8b); Ananias dies upon hearing the words of Peter (v.5a); "all who heard" were afraid (v.5b, 11). The three-time mention of fear must capture our attention: here the words of truth bring death (v.5a); there they lead to religious fear (v.5b, 11). The word that is heard has the power of life and death, which is what the story explains.

A theology of the Word works the text, allowing the vision to be heard, recognizing a very Lukan insistence that we have previously encountered. From Acts 2:37 on, faith is presented as the fruit of listening to the Word. This theme pervades chapters 2-5, in which the faith of the newly converted results in the formation of the Apostles (4:4; 5:5, 11, 20), and in which the gift of the Spirit becomes concrete in the boldness of the Christian proclamation (4:31). The conclusion of the sequence confirms this tie between pneuma and logos; the activity of the community animated by the Spirit is an activity of word: (5:42). The hostility of the Jewish authorities consists partially in wanting to silence the Apostles (4:17; 5:28,40).

Marguerat concludes that what matters to Luke is not instilling a "fear of the sacred," but relating the powerful elimination of an impediment to the spreading of the Word. Weakened in its missionary development by an act that damages its unity, the community is not left on its own. Much like God concerns Himself with the incarceration of the Apostles and liberates them, ordering them to speak (5:20), here God becomes terribly involved with an obstacle to the spreading of the Word.

An Original Sin

Acts 5 does not simply stigmatize Sapphira because of her husband's evil act; the text is dedicated to showing her culpability (v.8); a man-woman duality develops here, which structures the text in two frames and makes it stand out.

For the author, a curious characteristic of the story orients the reading towards another plane: the emphasis on the complicity of the man and his wife (v.2); this shared knowledge is explicitly confirmed by the answer to Peter's interrogation (v.8). The Apostle returns to this theme to ask Sapphira: "Why did you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord?" Ananias and Sapphira form one body, one with the other, and this tie of complicity has undermined the solidarity of the community. Accomplices in the lie, the couple has made clan against the ecclesiastical group; in place of the communion of believers, they have substituted their own complicity.

The author points out that the collusion of the original spouses (the first couple of the Acts) brings to mind another original couple. The analogy that comes in this spirit is the story of the fall (Gen 3). Examination of the narrative context demonstrates that the drama of Acts 5 constitutes the first crisis in the history of the origins of Christianity. The reference to Gen 3 is supported by a constellation of characteristics: 1) the destruction of the original harmony (v.4:32); 2) the figure of Satan, usually perceived by the Jewish tradition as a serpent; 3) the origin of the flaw in the sin of the couple; 4) the lying to God (Gen 3:1; Acts 5:4b); 5) the expulsion at the end of the account (cf. Gen 3:23).

For Marguerat, this parallel sheds new light on the typology with which the story plays: the transgression of Ananias and Sapphira is seen as the duplication of the original sin of Adam and Eve. Lying to the Spirit constitutes, in the narration of the Acts, the original sin of the Church. Conclusion of the story of Acts 5: the ekklesia is a community whose members are weakened, but whose project of communion is saved by the judgment of God.

An Ethic of Sharing

Upon identifying the offense of Ananias and Sapphira as an assault on the work of the Spirit, the interpretation of Marguerat unites with an essential result of the salvation history reading indicated above. However, the author indicates that a dimension of the text that has not been taken into account remains to be evaluated: the nature of the transgression. The act of the damned couple is a monetary offense. Luke's sensitivity regarding the power of money is manifest throughout his Gospel, from the denunciation of the pride of the wealthy in the Magnificat (Luke 1:53) to the praising of the widow's offering at the start of the Passion (21:1-4). Acts takes over with this theme from the very first chapter, upon reporting the curse adjudicated to the "wage of injustice" that Judas had obtained through his betrayal (1:18).

Monetary Transgression

For the author, it is not fortuitous that according to Luke, the two crises that span the "Golden Age" of Christianity both originate in an economic matter: the straying of Ananias and Sapphira, and the recrimination of the Hellenists in the face of the prejudice against their widows (6:1). Taking the traditional account of the death of Ananias and Sapphira and strategically placing it in this part of the narration, Luke wants to make known to his readers that the original sin of the Church is a sin of money. The relation of believers to their belongings takes on an eschatological dimension. Luke had already expressed this in the first two summaries in which the divine Spirit impels the sharing of possessions, simultaneously ful-filling the Deuteronomic demand for the removal of poverty from the bosom of the people of God (4:34 quote from Dt 15:4), and the ideal of friendship ( 2:44; 4:32).

Spirit and money go together in Luke, who would in no way subscribe to the antibiblical dichotomy between "material things" and "spiritual things." One of the moral realities of his account is, money can kill one who clings to it.

An Ontological Dimension of the Church

For the author, the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira demonstrates that this economic sharing does not reduce to a philosophical ideal, even if it were Greek or a romanticism of love. The altruistic management of possessions can be said to be an ontological dimension of the Church; wealth carries with it, in relation to the poor, a responsibility sanctioned by the God-Judge. In light of the judgment of Ananias and Sapphira, a foreshadowing of the eschatological judgement, the ethic of sharing possessions acquires extreme import. Mammon (Luke 16:13), destroyer of life, is also destroyer of the Church.

It is from this perspective that the added wording of verse 4 must be understood, that it alters the imperative character of 4:32-24 (the renunciation of one's belongings is not obligatory, but voluntary) and readapts the critique of Peter in 5:3 (the crime is having lied about the whole commitment). After the attribution of the sin to Satan in verse 3, verse 4 returns to an ethic of individual responsi-bility.

Marguerat asked why this wording correction was made and considers that it has a parenthetic effect: maintaining the free choice to give and profiling the responsibility of the individual, Luke adds to the eschatological threat an exhorta-tive dimension intended for the well-to-do readers to whom it is directed. If God's judgment of the damned couple pertains to the time of origin, and as a result is not repeatable as such, the call to share remains.

The story of Ananias and Sapphira takes place in the narrative sequence of Acts 2-5, which can be qualified as a story of origin, with the same title as Gen 1-11. The literary genre of the account explains both the marvelous dimension of the narration (irresistible develop-ment of the Church) and its tragic aspect (two thunderous deaths without the least bit of compassion from the narrator).

The author of Luke-Acts has situated this account in more of an ecclesiological perspective rather than focusing on redemption; instead of develo-ping the drama of individual salvation, he magnifies the power of the Spirit and its work of spreading the Word. However, if the theme of Acts 5:1-11 is the original wound to the community, the social fiber of Luke's writing has not been insensitive to the fact that this first sin of the Church was a monetary transgression.

Translated and excerpted from VOCES: Revista de Teología Misionera de la Universidad Intercontinental , No. 19, Jul-Dec 2001: "Acts of the Apostles- Narrative Approaches."


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: catholic; culture; faith; tithing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 561-566 next last
To: 1010RD

“Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum? Is that ol’ Fruchtenbaum the prophet?”

No, neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet. I accessed this thread because it looked interesting. I merely shared a thought that some may find helpful. Dr. F. can speak for himself. See ariel.org


281 posted on 06/30/2010 5:09:24 AM PDT by 1951Boomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: caww

Absolutely agree, but faith without works is dead. It is a false faith.


282 posted on 06/30/2010 5:15:04 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

What about if ye love me keep my commandments? John 14:15

You cannot read minds, you can only know yourself. Was it a duty to you while you practiced Mormonism? If it wasn’t out of love isn’t that on you?

Secondly, it’s not an “epic fail” you’ve just defined it that way out of convenience.

Jesus Christ clearly states go and sin no more. He’s got an expectation, at least as it goes to adultery, that she has self-control and can at the very least avoid that particular sin.

In doing that work, avoiding the sin of adultery, she partakes both of faith in Jesus Christ and his abundant Grace and works.

Don’t avoid the words because the conclusions make one uncomfortable.


283 posted on 06/30/2010 5:20:03 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: caww; restornu

Let’s ask Restornu. R, would you look at my post 262 which quotes in the entirety what caww said.

Isn’t that the same claim the LDS make?


284 posted on 06/30/2010 5:21:55 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: caww

It’s tomorrow. How did you sleep?


285 posted on 06/30/2010 5:22:10 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
Where does Christ refute the 10 Commandments? He refutes hypocrisy and the myriad of Law man-made by the Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees.

Without faith one can not be justified.

True, if you mean faith in Jesus Christ as the only way, but He himself calls for works.

The Law can not save a person. Matter of fact the more they try on their own to keep the law the further they rely less on God.

Absolutely true. Without the proper orientation, towards Christ, keeping the law is moot. That's the Gospel, OT & New.

They think they are doing a “good” thing but the trouble is, you can not work your way to salvation.

Without Christ first, true. Well done.

286 posted on 06/30/2010 5:26:36 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
Where does Christ refute the 10 Commandments? He refutes hypocrisy and the myriad of Law man-made by the Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees.

Without faith one can not be justified.

True, if you mean faith in Jesus Christ as the only way, but He himself calls for works.

The Law can not save a person. Matter of fact the more they try on their own to keep the law the further they rely less on God.

Absolutely true. Without the proper orientation, towards Christ, keeping the law is moot. That's the Gospel, OT & New.

They think they are doing a “good” thing but the trouble is, you can not work your way to salvation.

Without Christ first, true. Well done.

287 posted on 06/30/2010 5:26:52 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut
You are very sadly mistaken. I did use my language skills and my own research, not going by what I was told or taught.

Fantastic, then take me on as your student. Show me how, using the Bible alone you found the Trinity? Let's start at Genesis 1:1.

But apparently your mind is made up, so I will not bother with you anymore.

Don't run away, no one's mind is ever fully made up, at least not thinking people. God gave us our reason and logic just so we could discover him. Don't be afraid. Let's work together to find the truth. I'll use only the Bible and will never appeal to any other authority. If I use a logical fallacy you point it out and I'll do the same for you.

Your pride is what will keep you out of Heaven.

That's true of anyone. It's actually the real sin of Sodom and why Lot's descendants lost their way. When pride steps in the Fall is sure to come.

That is the root of Mormonism.

That remains unproven, but it's irrelevant to our discussion.

BTW, since you are not a Christian, I am not your ‘sister’.

Who appointed you to credential Christians? Sister, that's prideful. LOL. The reality is you're my Sister if I say you are. You can reject it, but I won't stop believing it. You sound like a wonderful person. The very kind I'd like for a Sister.

288 posted on 06/30/2010 5:35:23 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD; fish hawk
They think they are doing a “good” thing but the trouble is, you can not work your way to salvation.

Without Christ first, true. Well done.


What the God of Israel has to say about salvation:
21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. 23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

24 "But if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked man does, will he live? None of the righteous things he has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness he is guilty of and because of the sins he has committed, he will die.

25 "Yet you say, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Hear, O house of Israel: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26 If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die. 27 But if a wicked man turns away from the wickedness he has committed and does what is just and right, he will save his life. 28 Because he considers all the offenses he has committed and turns away from them, he will surely live; he will not die. 29 Yet the house of Israel says, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' Are my ways unjust, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are unjust?

30 "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!

Ezekiel 18
The Apostle Paul's take on this:
1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.

Romans 2


It's no doubt true that the sacrifice of Jesus made it possible for people to repent and to turn from their sins and, in some way, made it possible for God to overlook the wrong they have done. But it doesn't follow that failing to repent, failing to do good, failing to reject sin won't result in separation from God because repenting, doing good, and rejecting sin are all somehow "works" and we're saved by faith alone.
289 posted on 06/30/2010 5:46:45 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD; Godzilla
You have to give the LDS their due. When they get it right you have to admit it.

Good point and when or if lds ever "get it right", I'll give them their due.

290 posted on 06/30/2010 6:18:55 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
That message was for the Antiochans.

Oh??

...all the Gentiles ...

291 posted on 06/30/2010 6:19:47 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Oh, that’s what it means...Maranaptha.

"I love the smell of napalm in the morning"


292 posted on 06/30/2010 6:22:51 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Which parts are optional?

 

 
Genesis 3:1, 4-5
 
 1.  Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, `You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" 
 
 
 4.  "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
 5.  "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
 
 
His tactics haven't changed a bit!
 
1. Introduce DOUBT...
2. 'Explain' what GOD said...
 

293 posted on 06/30/2010 6:24:33 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Let’s withhold judgment until Restornu answers.

That could happen!


294 posted on 06/30/2010 6:30:21 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
True, if you mean faith in Jesus Christ as the only way, but He himself calls for works.

John 6

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."


295 posted on 06/30/2010 6:32:52 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
As an lds you must know that lds can not get into heaven without the approval of Joseph Smith.
Christ can speak for Himself and He has, unfortunately lds see what Jesus has said through the fog of JS and BY and by that have made Jesus weak and impotent.
When you (lds) add after all we can do to Salvation it demonstrates they have zero to little understanding of Grace.
296 posted on 06/30/2010 6:33:56 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

These antis/ exLDS have a tendency to throw the baby out with the bath water.

I thank the Lord for the Book of Mormon or else the Bible can seem very ambiguous in some places and a stumbling stone for those who are seeking and a free pass for those who don’t want to change their ways.

Rom. 9: 32
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith,
but as it were by the works of the law.
For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

This is a good example and why there is disagreements between the school of faith without works vise versa etc.

If works is done for show then it is NOT done by the spirit of the Lord, but by the letter of the law which is dead.

Gal. 2: 16
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, (flesh)
but by the (spirit) faith of Jesus Christ,
even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ,
and not by the works of the law: (flesh)
for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

1 Thes. 1: 3
3 Remembering without ceasing your work of faith,
and labour of love,
and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ,
in the sight of God and our Father;

The work of the Lord has to be done we are His hands, arms legs and eyes and ears on earth we are leading people to do good, uplift to magnify each other lives or we do work like the opposition when is to stall or tear down etc.

We only need to look at the Gulf Oil spill to see how the opposition works against good!

If the children of the Lord were allowed to furnished this disaster could have been mitigated.

These antis always want to paint the LDS in a us vs them yet the LDS recognized we are all God’s children.

Mosiah 8: 18
18 Thus God has provided a means that man, through faith, might work mighty miracles; therefore he becometh a great benefit to his fellow beings.

Alma 26: 22
22 Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance.

2 Nephi 3

23 Wherefore, because of this covenant thou art blessed; for thy seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book.

24 And there shall rise up one mighty among them, who shall do much good, both in word and in deed, being an instrument in the hands of God, with exceeding faith, to work mighty wonders, and do that thing which is great in the sight of God, unto the bringing to pass much restoration unto the house of Israel, and unto the seed of thy brethren.


297 posted on 06/30/2010 7:14:08 AM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Are you sure you used Bible versus that are translated correctly?
How on earth does a person use a book that their leaders are telling them is insufficient and not correct?
298 posted on 06/30/2010 7:16:57 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Are you sure you used Bible versus that are translated correctly?

****

No real come back so show how bankrupt you are think this is a cover all!

Things are not translated correctly if they leave 30k variations on the doctrine

When the Book of Mormon clarifies those passages there is no longer uncertainty or confusion


299 posted on 06/30/2010 7:32:55 AM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: restornu
So give me a listed of accepted translations of Biblical passages.
The question remains (unanswered) how do you use a book that your leaders tell you is insufficient and translated incorrectly? Or how do you know what versus are translated correctly?
300 posted on 06/30/2010 7:40:19 AM PDT by svcw (Habakkuk 2:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 561-566 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson