Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Wer62 broke down something I said in my topic called: "Am I Anti-Mormon?"
This is a response to his reply. I called it, "Acts 17:11", as we need to search the Scriptures.
Wer62 Replies: I have had this same thought when discussing religion and religoius differences with you from a personal stand point. Even the e-mail you mailed me said that “the enemy really hates me”. By nature you are creating enemies in your approach. Throughout this Blog I have seen very little positive information on what you personally believe and what religious denomination you belong.
Rick replies: first, I cannot simply post 100's of topics at once, ranging from things I see as contradictions in the Mormon church to my personal beliefs. I have clearly stated in my topics that my email address is posted for all to see and use. People can write my and ask questions if they don't see something covered. Also, I will post more over time on what I believe. If people missed that part there is simply nothing I can do about that. As to the issue of what religious denomination I belong to, I am simply a follower of Jesus Christ. Show me where there are denominations taught in the Bible? They are made by man because we are sinners and have many disagreements. Sadly, the LDS are the same way. Just look at their own denominations, the LDS, FLDS, RLDS , and others. So don't let them tell you otherwise.
Wer62 replies: The LDS Church does not teach how to respond to people who “challenge” their beliefs. The LDS Church does not teach as a “class” on how to “rip apart” another’s religious beliefs. We as LDS state the positive aspects of our faith system and promote the Lord’s work forward instead of tearing down others faith or belief systems. The approach used by the LDS membership being much different in many aspects to your approach.
Rick replies: Let me say that my church does not teach people how to tear apart others' beliefs either. But the Bible does teach there are false prophets and wolves in sheep's clothing. The Bible also states that we are to share the Gospel. If we believe the LDS preach/teach a false gospel, we must tell others and show people what both teach and allow them to look at the evidence and decide for themselves. I really want to address ED here on this.
The LDS Church does not teach how to respond to people who “challenge” their beliefs.If this is true, how do you explain these books put out by the LDS church or LDS authors. Take Heed That Ye "BE NOT DECEIVED A book that is passed out by Mormon Missionaries on how to reply to us so called "Anti-Mormons." My copy was given to me by Mormon Missionaries.
In the book, What do Mormons Believe?>, the author shares what Mormons believe while addressing minor issues brought up by non-LDS.
In the book, Answering Challenging Mormon Questions, it states right on the cover,
Replies to 130 Queries by Friends and CRITICS of the LDS church. I think the name says it all.
In Answers to Gospel Questions Volumes 1 and 2, the books address questions asked by people, but also some questions are written in such a way as to reply to or answer the "Anti's." There is a website called, "The Mormon Answer Man." He answers questions from anyone, but he also tries to refute so-called "anti's," so I really don't feel ED is being entirely honest. So maybe the Church does not have a teaching class. I have been told by Mormon Missionaries, they have group meetings about once a month with the local stake missionaries talking about people like me and where we live so as to avoid us. I feel if we really are lost, you do us a disservice by not sharing the truth. You don't allow others to see or hear both sides, therefore, allowing LDS to think for themselves.
Then I went on to say in my eariler reply:
Read your Bibles, people. The prophets of old spoke truth to the people; they did not like it, so they killed the prophets. Does this mean that when a prophet spoke for the Lord, and he clearly spoke the truth, he was only creating enemies and promoted hate? No. But, if you teach people that anyone who thinks for themselves and follows Acts 17:11 is an enemy, then I suppose I must be.
Ed said:
This does not give license to go out with purpose to cause someone to hate you. If you speak truth and it is done “lovingly” then you get the hate response then you are fine. The fact remains based on the evidence in my e-mail box that you like the hatred. It seems to me you are attempting to breed that type of behavior and that is not of the LORD.
3 Nephi 11:29 For verily, verily I say unto you he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirith up the hearts of men to content with anger, one with another.
Let me reply by saying this: I am not trying to get anyone to hate me. I know the devil hates me, he hates the truth and wants to see people killed and destroyed. Read these verses.
1Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
John 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
The Devil only wants to destory. About the Issue of the devil, who is the father of contention.
I would dis-agree. First off you quote from only the BoM. for people who believe this book is from the devil, then he really would like you to believe this. How about you provide this kind of Scripture from the Bible? But add to that, the Bible tells us to contend for the Faith.
Acts 19:8
And he went into the synagogues [speaking of Paul here], and spake boldly for the space of three months, DISPUTING and persuading the things concerning the Kingdom of God.
Philippians 1:27-28:
Whatever happens, conduct yourself in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in one spirit, contending as one man for the faith of the gospel without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you.
Jude 3:
Dear friends, although I was eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of God into a licence for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.
Contention is not of the devil. I believe mormonism is of the devil and this is one way the devil uses in order to keep people blinded to the truth. Let's look at some things Jesus did.
He made a whip of cords and struck the backs of people. Would this classify as contention? He told his disciples to buy a sword, even though it was partly to fufill prophecy, swords were also for self- defense.
The Bible tells us God is a God of vengance. Is vengance also a form of contention? God commanded people to kill in the Old Testment. God the Father first declared war upon Lucifer. Another form of contention?
If speaking the truth in love is a form of contention, then what about all the prophets in the OT who spoke the truth yet caused much anger?
2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Eph 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.
Jesus rebuked His apostles, they understood it was love to correct them.
Pro 12:1 Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof [is] brutish.
I guess as far as contention goes, it depends on how you view it. I share the truth in hopes people avoid going to hell, but they view it as a spirit of contention. Just as Romans tells us, people love a lie.
At the very least, if Mormons feel their belief is correct, and we're wrong for speaking to them because we "cause" contention, then so be it. I would rather speak the truth and hope you avoid hell than to not share, and you find out you were wrong and end up there.
Let me ask you this question: if you feel contention is of the devil, and I am in the wrong for speaking to you guys, why bother coming here to this website, knowing I will tell you you're wrong, and put yourself through this contention?
Now to address this issue: If you speak truth and it is done “lovingly” then you get the hate response then you are fine.
Let's look at some things the apostles and disciples said.
1Cor 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Ed, am I missing something here? These verse are in the Bible spoken by apostles. This does not sound very loving. Saying if you don't love Jesus Christ, may you be damned for all of eternity. Yet this is the truth given here. I don't know Ed, but I have always believed that it is more loving to tell someone the truth, even if it hurts, than to not tell them because they might not like it. I like this saying,
LOVE THAT TOLERATES DECPTION IS NOT LOVE AT ALL.
Ed said:
It doesn’t appear to me or any other LDS that you are offering anything better. You only point out what you perceive as flaws in the LDS belief system. While that is important it is also important to show what you have is better and why, while doing this in a loving non-confrontational way as humanly possible.
I did this on another blog; I offered something better. Here is my reply that I gave to Davinci.
Davinci,
I think you know as well as I do, No matter what I tell you or offer you as you say, your simply gonna believe what you want to believe. Jesus offered Life to all who would follow, He spoke the truth, what did the people do? They picked up stones to stone him. Mormonism teaches grace plus works after all you can do. Read what Your Prophet Spencer Kimball said, in the book Mircale of forgivness. I say, It's a wonder you can be forgiven. No mormon can say with 100 percent assurance I am saved and will enter heaven. You might be the first, but I have never meet one. To many works to follow to be sure your saved. Then add to that, Spencer taught, No death bed repentance no murders can be forgiven. How can you go to death row inmates and preach your gospel, or go to a hospital and talk with people on their death bed. What can you offer them. Or will you talk to them, but forget what your prophet said about these issues?
The bible offers Grace alone, no works, how can you get better than that. That is all We can offer if you choose to use that word. If your not happy with Grace alone, then add your works, but you will be lost according to the bible. Remember, It is not what I can offer you, but what God offers you. And as I said before, It is not Me who saves but God who saves.
Ed, As I told Davinci, I cannot offer anything, Only God can. He offered His son that we might live, And it is by faith through Grace alone, NO WORKS. How can Mormonism trully offer anything better than Grace alone.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Notice we are Created UNTO GOOD works, Not created and SAVED by our works.
Lets add to the works issue, If you really want to do works it is simple, read this verse here.
Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Notice the Religous Leaders asked Jesus, what must WE DO to WORK the WORKS, Plural, of God. Jesus replyed with the WORK, Singular, is to simple believe on whom God sent. That is Jesus. No other works needed or must be done in order to be saved.
Wer62 Replies: Just because you mis-use the JOD and/or mis-interpret scripture does not make it true. It is true by your opinion which is far from true to my opinion. There is a difference. We can go back and forth on this all day long. The bottom line is that you have in previous conversations with me: Mis-intetrepted Scripture, Twisted Doctrine into unrecognizable forms, and quoted the JOD as if it were scripture. The simple truth you fail to recognize in all these cases is that the JOD is not scripture.
Rick replys, Opinions dont really matter. I notice that the LDS use the JOD when it fits their needs, I or another so-called Anti uses it, the LDS cry foul and claim it is not scripture. Here is just one of many examples. The King Follet Discourse is said to be Joseph Smiths Greatest sermon ever given. LDS use it this day as doctrine. Read over the 14 fundamentiles of following the prophet, Ezra Taft Benson, quotes a lot from the JoD to support his views. So dont tell me I cant quote from it but LDS can. You accuse me of misquoting scripture and twisting it, Provide evidence. I can and will do a topic soon on the JoD. I will provide scanned photo Copies of pages from the JoD to prove the prophets said certain things, their will be plenty of added pages for evidence given for anyone to try and refute.
ED said:
IS Brigham Young entittled to his “opinion”? Is there evidence to show that other prophets have mis-interpreted the Lord’s words and prophecies. Yes. Take Jonah for example. He stated the city would be destroyed and it wasn’t. In fact he got mad at God because the city didn’t get destroyed. [Jonah Chapter 4] This is a clear example of a prophet having “knowledge” from God and initerpreting it wrong. Is it possible for Brigham Young to have an opinion that is wrong to actual doctrinal and scriptural reference? Yes. If he is quoted in the JOD as stating something it is NOT scripture nor is it stated that it is? Are there some good things in the JOD, yes, just as there is in the Apocrapha. Athiests use Apocrapha in the same manner you use the JOD to prove Christianity is wrong and untrue. Second point about using the JOD for your “quotes”. It was not published by the LDS Church! In fact it was discontinued because of the errors that were published. So to stated you use LDS sources and quote the JOD is actually a “misrepresentation of the facts” as it was not published by the LDS Church. I have personally brought this to your attention and you continue with the same tact.
Rick replys: First off much of what Brigham yound said, is/was not his mere opinion, he clearly states in the Adam God section, things like My next sermon, and he says, Now let all who may hear these Doctrines. Brigham Young calls them both Sermons and Doctrine. We read in the preface of the JoD vol 8, the JoD deservedly ranks as one of the standerd works of the church, and every right minded saint will certainly welcome with joy every number as it comes forth from the press as an additional reflector of "the light that shines from Zion's hill". So Ed, are you not one of the "right minded saints"? Now ED, To adress the Issue you brought up about the LDS church discontinuing the JOD because of the errors that were published. Have you never read any of this stuff or given it any thought? I own all my own sources.
The Encyclopedia of Mormonism notes that "in all, the collected Journal of Discourses contains 1,438 speeches given by fifty-five people, including Presidents of the Church, members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, members of the seventy, and sixteen other speakers. Brigham Young gave 390; John Taylor, 162; Orson Pratt, 127; Heber C. Kimball, 113; and George Q. Cannon, 111. Twenty-one people gave a single speech, and the rest gave from 2 to 66 speeches" (2:769).
When Watt first produced the Journal, there seemed to be no question that what was recorded was the actual words and beliefs of men chosen by God to lead his latter-day church. In his introduction to the first issue, Watt proclaimed, "It affords me great pleasure in being able to put in your possession the words of the Apostles and Prophets, as they were spoken in assemblies of the Saints in Zion, the value of which cannot be estimated by man, not so much for any great display of worldly learning and eloquence, as for the purity of doctrine, simplicity of style, and extensive amount of theological truth which they develop."
Often overlooked by many of its LDS critics is the fact that most of the volumes of the Journal were edited and published under the direct auspices of men who were either currently serving as a general authority or would later become one. The names are a veritable who's who list of Mormon leaders and include such men as Franklin Richards, Orson Pratt, George Q. Cannon, Amasa Lyman, Daniel H. Wells, Brigham Young, Jr., Joseph F. Smith, and Albert Carrington. It would be difficult to prove that any of its publishers were appointed without the blessing, or at least the knowledge of, the First Presidency. Can we really believe that such men would print something about the church that was not believed at the time?
When Orson Pratt printed things in The Seer that Brigham Young disagreed with, he was soundly rebuked. We do not find this happening with the publishers of the Journal of Discourses. Even if a Mormon could find things that slipped past the publishers unnoticed, it would be just as ludicrous to assume this would invalidate the entire set of the Journal as it is ludicrous for a Mormon to assume that Young's disagreement with Pratt nullified every issue of The Seer.
Every volume of the Journal comes with a publisher's preface, many of which go out of their way to inform the reader that what they are about to read is esteemed as truth. For example, the preface to volume two was written by Franklin D. Richards. He said,
The Second Volume of the Journal of Discourses needs no recommendation to make it interesting to every Saint who loves to drink of the streams that flow from the fountain of Eternal Truth. It is made up of the choicest fruit that can be called from the tree of knowledge, suited to the tastes of all who can appreciate such delicious food."
Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt served as editor and publisher of volume three. In his preface he says this volume contained the "principles of the Gospel of salvation delivered to this generation through the Apostles and Prophets of the Most High, by the power of the Holy Ghost." He went on to say, "These Discourses as they successively reach us from Zion, show to those who have the spirit of discernment that the Lord's power is increasing among His people, and that He is purifying and bringing them nearer to Him by chastisements, while at the same time He is blessing them with a continual development of the pure principles of eternal life, in proportion as they yield obedience to His requirements.
When George Q. Cannon became a Journal publisher, he was a newly appointed apostle. He would later serve as counselor to Presidents Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and Lorenzo Snow. Few would doubt his loyalty to Mormonism or his understanding of LDS belief. In his preface to volume eight he wrote,
The Journal of Discourses ranks as one of the standard works of the Church, and every right minded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every Number as it comes forth from the press as an additional reflector of 'the light that shines from Zion's hill.
In volume eleven, Mormon Apostle Brigham Young, Jr. said in his preface, The Journal of Discourses is a vehicle for doctrine, counsel, and instruction to all people, but especially to the Saints. It follows, then, then, (sic) that each successive volume is more and more valuable as the Church increases in numbers and importance in the earth, and its doctrines become more abundantly developed and are brought into practical exercise by his peculiar people. No Saint can afford to do without these precious precepts until they are able to exemplify them in their daily lives and conversation.
In volume twelve Albert Carrington made the following remark, Each discourse in this the XIIth volume of the 'Journal' commends itself to thoughtful perusal, being plain, practical, and of much worth to all who desire to keep pace with the progress of truth.
Ed you have even argued that the sermons were inaccurately recorded. However, the Encyclopedia of Mormonism notes that in all, "twelve people reported sermons for the Journal of Discourses." These included David W. Evans, an associate editor of the Deseret News. Evans succeeded Watt as the main reporter for the JD from 1867 to 1876. Another included George F. Gibbs, a man who held the position of secretary to the First Presidency of the Church for 56 years. Even one of Brigham Young's daughters, Julia, is credited with recording one of her father's sermons (2:769, 770).
And page 55 of the LDS Church manual Gospel Principles states that the inspired words of the living prophet are supposed to be accepted as scripture by Latter-day Saints.
If the Journal of Discourses are really not reliable, why did Mormon Apostle John Widtsoe use them as a primary source for his 1925 book entitled Discourses of Brigham Young? In his preface, Widtsoe makes no effort to hide the fact that the Journal played a significant role in his book. In the preface he wrote:
This book was made possible because Brigham Young secured stenographic reports of his addresses. As he traveled among the people, reporters accompanied him. All that he said was recorded. Practically all of these discourses (from December 16, 1851 to August 19, 1877) were published in the Journal of Discourses, which was widely distributed. The public utterances of few great historical figures have been so faithfully and fully preserved. Clearly, this mass of material, covering nearly thirty years of incessant public speaking could not be presented with any hope of serving the general reader, save in the form of selections of essential doctrines" (p. vi).
Lets not forget, they also re-published the Discourses of Brigham young Again sometime in the mid 50's.
If LDS want to say, I lie, or mis-quote their prophets and Presidents, why is it not one LDS has left a reply stating where I did this.
Then Ed said
Wer62 Replies: I have listened to your rants over time. I have seen the errors in your arguments. You may not have misquoted the JOD but you certainly cut sentences short changing the context and twisting quotes as it relates to the entire article to make it sound better to your argument. That is not misquoting, Right? To purposely twist context knowing full well the meaning intended is a lie. The question remains do you know what you are spreading is a lie? No one will ever know that but you and the Lord.
Rick replys, Ed first you said I misquote and Twist scripture, Now you say I may have not? Is it you have no evidence so you retract your statment? Then you say, I cut my quotes short to mis quote people. I say, Read over ALL my blog topics, I provide much more than partial quotes, I give extra just to prove I am not doing what you claim. Add to that, I said I will scan any papers to prove I am not mis quoting. And many LDS have either been at my house and read the actual book, or LDS reading On line have the books and have read them, their fore they know I am not cutting things short. So Sorry Ed, you are incorrect. Rick B
18 comments:
As to the issue of what religious denomination I belong to, I am simply a follower of Jesus Christ. Show me where there are denominations taught in the Bible? They are made by man because we are sinners and have many disagreements. Sadly, the LDS are the same way. Just look at their own denominations, the LDS, FLDS, RLDS , and others. So don't let them tell you otherwise.
Rickb You are contridicting you're self...If you are simply a follower of christ, Then why bother with all this? If we ourselves are simply follower's of christ as well. You ask to show you where in the bible it states about denomination's..Show me first where it states that LDS is wrong or that your's is right? iF WE BOTH SIMPLY JUST BELIEVE IN CHRIST.
Anonymous Said, "Show me first where it states that LDS is wrong or that your's is right? iF WE BOTH SIMPLY JUST BELIEVE IN CHRIST."
Reply: Rick has been trying to show you in the Bible where the LDS beliefs are not completely compatible with the Bible. He has listed numerous verses from the Bible to support this.
I will post a topic on or before monday about what I believe and I also will cover the issues of denominations.
As to this:Quote:Show me first where it states that LDS is wrong or that your's is right?End quote
Better yet, why dont you use the Bible only, and support mormonism from the BIble only. Exampls, Many Gods, Mn can BE God, Pre-existance, God was once a man who progressed to God hood. Lucifer and Jesus are brothers. You are not allowed to use anything other than the BIble, CAn you do it?
HOnestly I bet you either wont bother, and never reply, or reply to other stuff and ignore this question. Rick b
Rick b
Rick, using ONLY the Bible to defend the restoration of the Gospel in this dispensation would be like trying to use ONLY the Old Testament to defend New Testament Christianity in that dispensation. It just doesnt work like that.
As in so many other areas you seem to lack even the most basic and fundamental understanding of the restoration of Christs Church and the Lords pattern of operation throughout time. No suprise that you are confused and frustrated.
One thing that might help you make better progress here Rick would be to make more of an effort to engage your readers comments more thoroughly. You seem to be quick to hurl your initial accusations but slow and weak to be able to really engage and follow through with them in a way that contains much substance. After an initial volley you often just tell people to stick around while you post a whole other post on the topic or refer them to another message board rather than grappling specifically with what they have already said in a way that could result in real dialogue.
People put a lot of work into replying to your claims. Not being able to engage them in a fruitful way long term gives one the impression that there is not a whole lot of substance here that you could even back up and that no real dialogue with you is really even possible.
Whatever it is you feel you are doing here on this blog it has very little to do with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the way we see things.
Anonymous, You said; Quote People put a lot of work into replying to your claims. Not being able to engage them in a fruitful way long term gives one the impression that there is not a whole lot of substance here that you could even back up and that no real dialogue with you is really even possible. End Quote.
I really have to disagree here with you, THe reason why is thiS. Only ONE LDS so far tried going back and forth, that was wer62. WE have a bit of history off this board through priivate Emails. OUt side of him, the vast majority of LDS have only called names or talked trash, they have not even tried to reply. Should I list you examples?
A few people have even said I lied or am harsh, THen when I spefically asked for where, THey left have never posted again and gave no evidence. I really think you are blind in this area.
Then as to not being able to support your views from the Bible alone. You cant even support your views I asked for from the BOM. PLease review my topic called the, Bruce Mc Challange. I give a list of ten core mormon Doctrines not found in either book.
PLus the fact that JS recived a different Gospel from an angel, fully follows Gal 1:8. So the LDS theolgy you support comes from things like the JoD. REad the king follet discourse, YEt WER62 states JoD is invalid. Or You go by what your prophets teach, BUt if I said the LOrd spoke top me about something, I called it doctrine, but could not support it from the BIble, people would say I am crazy.
I have had many friends, sadly they share thought about my blog to me, but wont post, Anyway, they feel I am doing a good Job, and I feel as they do, the LDS do not like what I am doing or saying. THey seem to do as I said, call names and run away, Yet many also try and discourge me, I believe in hopes to get me to go away because they loved darkness more than light and dont want their evil deeds expoused.
I was talking to a pastor I never meet, about my blog, he never knew it existed, He told me, sometimes it is simply not good enough to just rock the boat. Sometimes you need to tip it over. So I guess instead of LDS trying to discourage me, it would be better to just not come here, as I will contiune to post.
Add to that, LDS keep saying stuff like, what about this or what about that, we want to know where you stand on certain issues. Have you not read over the entire blog? Somethings I have already adressed. BUt will adress again. Also I feel as do my friends, from all the personnal attacks on my blog and sent to my private email, I must be doing something right. I have friends with blog on various groups, like JW's or mormons or islam, ETC. they dont recive any or very little trash talking compared to me. That to me alones speaks volumes.
People normally dont get mad and call names unless something is hitting close to home. A saying goes, If you throw a stone into a pak of Dogs, the one that yelps the loudest got hit. NOt implying you a dog, But for the amout of hate I recive from a so-called LOving moral group, I must be hitting home. Rick b
Well I dont agree that We are in Christ. I dont believe you are, As I said before, I believe Mormonism teaches a false Gospel.
Anyway, I Still maintain that LDS cannot seem to answer my questions. We can and will disagree, but look over my topics, The few LDS that reply are nothing more than name calling. A few have replyed. Add to that, But like I sdaid, I was accused of both being Harsh and twisting Scripture.
I asked, show me where and how on both accounts, No reply as of yet. So in your honest feedback version, how do you understand that. Does it mean they can only accuse and supply no evidence? Or They simply dont want to? Rick B
I think that it would be helpful for the LDS people that come to this board to spend some real time reading what has been posted throughout. I do agree that Rick is blunt in his postings, but blunt is not always wrong. There are numerous examples in the Bible that show Jesus Christ being blunt. One example....He directly addressed the false teachings of the Pharisees. They clearly didn't like what he was saying or doing and insisted on Jesus being killed.
One problem with this debate is that Christians view the Bible as God's word, whereas LDS members believe that they needed to add to it.
Anonymous wrote: Rick, using ONLY the Bible to defend the restoration of the Gospel in this dispensation would be like trying to use ONLY the Old Testament to defend New Testament Christianity in that dispensation.
Reply: I don't agree with this assessment. I don't believe that the BoM could be valid unless it supports fully the Bible. Therefore, the Bible in it's entirety should be enough to discuss the core faith or does the BoM contradict the Bible?
Does the BoM contradict the Bible?
Are there any other denominations that have created their own addition to the Bible?
Why would God wait 1800+ years to send a profit to create the BoM? What happens to all of those believers that got it "wrong" for 1800 years?
Just a few questions. I hope you don't mind.
Wer62 Opening Statement: Rick, just wanted to drop a note letting you know I will not be back for some time. My dad is in the hospital and only has about a 30% chance of making it. If he does pull through he will need a lot of rehab. This will be eating up a good portion of my time in the near future as I do not reside to give up on him even with such a low chance of making it. That stated since I read the comments I do have some things to say, just know I will not be commenting for some time. I will maintain the blog in my favorites list. I hope you will add mine. I will be posting on my blog as my outlet while this is going on. I have to write something somewhere.
Rick Stated: I really have to disagree here with you, THe reason why is thiS. Only ONE LDS so far tried going back and forth, that was wer62. WE have a bit of history off this board through priivate Emails. OUt side of him, the vast majority of LDS have only called names or talked trash, they have not even tried to reply.
Wer62 Replies:
Thank you for the credit. I appriciate it. Even though we have not been able to see eye to eye at least you know I am trying. Thanks for taking notice.
Rick States:
YEt WER62 states JoD is invalid.
Wer62 Replies:
I think you should go back and read what I wrote. I said the JoD is not Scripture... It was published by people other than the LDS church and I said that there was good things in it just like the apographa which is also not considered scripture. This is a prime example of twisting context. I never however stated it was "invalid", just your interpretation of it.
I mean no offense Rick, but this is the kind of logic that I was speaking of when I said, no you didn't misquote it but you sure twist things to suit your argument.
Anyway, enough on that. I wish you and your wife health and happiness.
Wer62 (Ed)
Hello Wer62, Is you dad an LDS member? As to me saying you said the JoD is invaled, Most people I assume now invaled means no good or cant use it Etc, And some but not all LDS state it cannot be used. But they then turn around and use it when it suits their needs. Best example I use is the King follet discourse.
Mormons take that AS SCRIPTURE. Rick b
Wer62, I don't know you. Just what you have posted here. However, I do know what it feels like to have an ailing parent. I am sorry to hear that your father is not doing well.
I'd like to respond to a few comments here.
Anonymous said...Rick, using ONLY the Bible to defend the restoration of the Gospel in this dispensation would be like trying to use ONLY the Old Testament to defend New Testament Christianity in that dispensation. It just doesnt work like that....
Obviously I am new to this discusion so maybe I am missing something, but what's wrong with the gospel that it needs to be restored?
Further, the NT is just the revelation of the fullfillment of God's plan as laid out in the OT.
1Ki 8:46-51
This passage from the OT establishes a pattern of man being sinful and how to resolve that sin with God. First,46 "(for [there is] no man that sinneth not,)," is pretty clear to me and a founding principle for the NT teachings.
verse 47 tells us that "if" they remember their wrong and repent, ie humble themselves before the Lord and going to him for mercy and grace, and 48 "If" they return to the lord with all their heart and soul and pray, then 49-50 God upholds their cause and forgive.
Pro 16:6 In mercy and truth Atonement is provided for iniquity;
And by the fear of the LORD one departs from evil.
True humility is having an accurate understanding of oneself, ie. truth of oneself. If we view ourselves honestly then we know that we have all sinned and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar and thus has sinned. In that truth we have to then understand that it is only by God's mercy that we aren't wiped from the planet and sent to Hell. Also in that truth we should realize we aren't God and if we were things would be a whole lot worse, so the logical out come is proper fear of the Lord, ie. awe and reverance for his power, position, love, grace, mercy and the like.
So NT gospel, boiled down some, is everyone is a sinner and there is nothing that we can do to fix that, however God has a provision to atone for our transgressions so that we can once again have a relationship with him. I see it all over the OT, and it is never a matter of works, only a matter of accepting God's provision.
So, yes infact you can prove it, all you miss is the actual story of it's completion, you still have a loving, gracious God, who wants to have a relationship with you.
Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he [was] not; for God took him.
The only person in Gen 5 whose geneology is complete but isn't stated as dieing, all because he walked with God.
There are numerous examples but I think you should get the picture.
Now as far as the whole contention thing. Certainly there are people out there that can discuss highly differing opinions about things with out argueing, they are people who are completly unwilling to make a stand for their veiw or are so obsessed with not having people get mad at them that they wont confront someone who is in the wrong. They would simply rather watch you walk into on coming traffic then to risk offending you and having you not like them.
Jesus himself taught that his message was one of division, people will hate as they have hated him, you will be persecuted like the prophets of old, brother will be turned against brother. Contention is a natural byproduct any time your opinion differs from someone elses, get over it.
Free will is quite literaly the right to be wrong, but wrong is still wrong despite your right.
Greetings Justasking,
Id be glad to address your questions for you.
Just Asking’s comment: ------------------ Does the BoM contradict the Bible? ------------------
No. As LDS we understand the Bible and the Book of Mormon to be complementary with each other and in harmony with each other.
Justasking’s comment: ------------------ Are there any other denominations that have created their own addition to the Bible?
------------------
Actually, God adding additional Scripture incrementally in stages throughout time to what he has previously already given us is the very clear pattern of the way God has chosen to deal and interact with man over time. The Bible itself did not spring forth all at once- rather it evolved progressively over time according to this very pattern. As LDS we believe that God still chooses to work in this manner. This is the very clear Biblical pattern.
The landscape and history of Christianity is quite vast and diverse. In regards to “Canon” different forms of Christianity have different views on the matter. For example Catholic Christians, by far the largest and single most influential group of Christians throughout history, accept as part of their Canon 12 books of Scripture that are not found within the Protestant Bible. Greek Orthodox Christians reject some books found in the Protestant Bible and hold to a Canon of Scripture that is different from both Catholic Christians as well as Protestant Christians. So we have within Christianity at least three MAJOR forms of Christianity that hold to differing Canons of Scripture.
Besides these three major traditions there are also some smaller groups of Christians that hold to a different Canon than these three major traditions do. All of these groups of Christians claim to be interpreting the Bible correctly.
Within these traditions themselves believers have not always agreed to and held to the same Canon consistently over time. For example some of the early Church fathers rejected books in their day that are currently found within what we know as the Protestant Bible today.
What a rich and varied tapestry of diversity the Christian experience has been!
Justasking’s comment: ------------------ Why would God wait 1800+ years to send a profit to create the BoM? ------------------
God did not wait 1800+ years to call a prophet to create the Book of Mormon.
The Book of Mormon is an ancient record written by many Prophets fulfilling the Lords work during a time period ranging from approximately 600 B.C. to about 421 A.D. The Book of Mormon contains 239 chapters and 15 books of Scripture written over a period of about 1021 years and chronicles Gods dealings with some of His children in what we now refer to as Mesoamerica. Joseph Smith was called by God as were prophets of old, to usher in this last and final dispensation. The dispensation of the “fullness of times” as it is called and prophesied about by prophets of old.
Joseph Smith did not “create” the Book of Mormon. He translated it into English. God in His infinite wisdom and foreknowledge has seen fit to bring forth the Book of Mormon to us in our time in conjunction with the Restoration of the Gospel as part of His preparatory work preceding His Second coming. The Book of Mormon in conjunction with the Bible brings together Gods work in both the east and west in a most beautiful and relevant way.
You might consider checking out www.mormon.org for more information or the official LDS Church website at www.lds.org.
Justasking’s comment: ------------------ What happens to all of those believers that got it "wrong" for 1800 years? ------------------
One way of thinking about this that might be helpful would be to ask yourself what would happen to all those believers that lived say during the 300 years between the Prophet Malachi and when God called new Prophets to usher in the new dispensation we see in the New Testament.
In one sense we would not say that those with honest hearts sincerely seeking to do Gods will were “wrong” so to speak just because they didn’t have the New Testament but that they were just doing the best they could with what light and knowledge they had received so far.
In another sense we could say that those who had hard hearts and clung to the “traditions of man” that had drifted from truth were in fact “wrong” in another sense. We see this well illustrated with some of the Jews of that day. Though very familiar with the Scriptures they had hard hearts and were spiritually blind. Without the capacity to listen to the Spirit these people were unable to accept Gods new revelation and new prophets of the day. Speaking of these people as a group and in regard to what they collectively taught they could be accurately referred to as “wrong”.
I am very sure that to the degree that God’s individual children follow the light and knowledge that God had thus far revealed to them God is very pleased with them. So it has been in every dispensation throughout time since the days of Adam and so it continues today.
God has seen fit to add to our knowledge of Him and His plan incrementally in stages. New Prophets in new dispensations bring forth new Scripture from which we increasingly gain more knowledge and understanding of Him and His plan.
I am painting with a rather broad brush here but I hope that helps some.
To LDS Christians the restoration of the Gospel in this last and final dispensation is a most beautiful and wonderful thing and has blessed my life in ways that I can never fully express here.
In Christ,
-Tad
First I want to thank inhimdependent_lds(Tad) for taking the time to reply and to do so in such a kind and respectful manner.
I hope you don't mind me calling you Tad. (inhimdependent_lds just takes a long time to type)
JustAsking wrote: Why would God wait 1800+ years to send a prophet to create the BoM?
Tad said: The Book of Mormon is an ancient record written by many Prophets fulfilling the Lords work during a time period ranging from approximately 600 B.C. to about 421 A.D.
Questions:
1. Why don't we hear about ancient documents being found throughout time that support this claim? I have tried looking on the internet and don't find evidence of the ancient documents being found.
2. Why did they only surface in the 1800's when Joseph Smith found them?
3. Why did Jesus not reference these prophets since they were writing during his time on earth? I am assuming that you are not referring to prophets that were in the Bible, but other ones right?
Last Question from a different section that you wrote: what do you mean by "restoration of the Gospel"?
Very best site. Keep working. Will return in the near future.
»
Justasking,
Of course you can call me Tad- that is my name. : ) What is your name?
Justasking’s comments: ---------------------- 1. Why don't we hear about ancient documents being found throughout time that support this claim? I have tried looking on the internet and don't find evidence of the ancient documents being found. ----------------------
Here are some things to consider when asking this question.
The Book of Mormon is largely an abridgement of other records. In this sense it is a one of a kind original transcript and we would not expect to find multiple exact copies of it. Mormon, in the Book of Mormon took a vast amount of other records and abridged them into a more condensed edition. This is why it is called the “Book of Mormon” even though it was written by many prophets over a long period of time. Other exact copies of the plates from which Joseph Smith translated the book are not something we would expect to find. The Book of Mormon was uniquely guided and led by the hand of the Lord for a unique purpose part of which is to come forth in this last dispensation. Please understand that I am speaking here in a somewhat simplified fashion. The issue involved are a bit more complex. You might checkout this link for a brief overview of the compilation of the Book of Mormon for a better understanding of its construction;
www.scriptures.lds.org/bm/explntn
While we would not expect to find exact copies of the plates Joseph Smith had access too one could ask the question why don’t we find some of the source materials from which the Book of Mormon was abridged.
First, there is a tremendous difference between Old World archaeology and New World archaeology. The two can not be compared. Old World archaeology is light years ahead of New World archeology.
Old World archaeology began as early as the 15th century and Biblical archaeology can be traced back to at least the mid 1800s, if not earlier. In contrast, Mesoamerican antiquities were virtually unknown to most of the world until John L. Stephens made his infamous journey to Mesoamerica in the mid 1800s.
The amount of time, money, energy and resources that have been put into New World archaeology are a tiny drop in the bucket compared to what has been thus far invested into Old World archaeology.
Not only have more energy and finances been devoted to Biblical archaeology for a longer period of time, but also the environmental conditions between Biblical sites and possible Book of Mormon New World sites are dramatically different.
Unlike the humid jungles of Mesoamerica, the dry and arid desert lands of the Bible are ideally suited for the preservation of artifacts. For example the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in a dry desert cave pretty much as they had been left there centuries before. This is the sort of find we could never even hope to have survived in the sultry Mesoamerica environment. The conditions in this region may be one reason why some people sometimes chose to engrave records on metal plate when longevity was a concern.
I personally believe we simply live in a time when these things have not come forward yet.
Those are some of the things that come to mind off of the top of my head when I first read your question. If you are interested in any further detail or elaboration your question might be better addressed to a scholar or historian of which I am neither.
I think it should be made very clear here that i am not a scholar or a scientist. I do not have the kind of skills and qualifications needed to back up the Book of Mormon or the Bible from a scholarly point of view in a way that it would do either justice. These sorts of issues play very little if any part in my Christian walk- though i do sometimes find it interesting. I am just a simple man with a simple faith in Jesus Christ.
If your looking for internet resources on the subject I would suggest you check out the “Foundation for Research in Mormon Studies” or what is more commonly referred to as “F.A.R.M.S.” website at www.farms.byu.edu for more information if you are interested in the more scholarly issues surrounding the Book of Mormon and its origins.
You might also try the “Center for the Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts” or C.P.A.R.T. as it is more commonly referred to at www.cpart.byu.edu
LDS scholars have taken a keen interest in the study a various ancient texts and their origins. For example BYU and FARMS scholars are the worlds leading authorities on The Dead Sea Scrolls research and have pioneered work in related fields. They have also pioneered work relating to other ancient texts and I would expect them to be at the forefront of this type of research for a long time to come.
Justasking’s comments: ---------------------- 2. Why did they only surface in the 1800's when Joseph Smith found them? ----------------------
It is important to understand that the Book of Mormon did not just “surface” or appear randomly. Joseph Smith did not just happen to “find” it haphazardly or by chance.
Rather, the Book of Mormon had been set apart by God and uniquely prepared to come forth in this last day and age in precisely the exact time and manner that it has.
It is basic and common knowledge to anyone familiar with the Book of Mormon that Moroni, the last of the Nephite prophet-historians, sealed the sacred record and hid it up unto the Lord, to be brought forth in the latter days, as predicted by the voice of God through his ancient prophets.
There has been nothing arbitrary about it at all. It is part of Gods specific plan that it has appeared here in this last dispensation- the dispensation of the fullness or times.
Justasking’s comments: ---------------------- 3. Why did Jesus not reference these prophets since they were writing during his time on earth? I am assuming that you are not referring to prophets that were in the Bible, but other ones right? ----------------------
Correct. With the exception of the Prophet Isaiah and the prophet Malachi whose writings are quoted in the Book of Mormon we are speaking about prophets that are not mentioned by name in the Bible and for the most part lived in what we loosely refer to as the Americas.
You might check out John 10:16 when Jesus says:
“And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” –John 10:16
Here Jesus tells of His “other sheep” which are “not of this fold”. As LDS we understand this to be a reference to Christ’s other sheep in the Americas. Notice how Jesus says that they will “hear His voice”. This is a reference to His future visit to these other sheep. Jesus’ comment that there shall be one fold and one shepherd is a reference to the end time unification of these two folds of which the Book of Mormon plays a major role.
I personally believe that Jesus elaborated on His work on other continents at various parts of His mortal life in more depth and in more ways than we see recorded in the Bible- but that is just my opinion. As you probably already know the Bible contains only a very small portion of all that Jesus said and did during His mortal life and ministry. I believe that Jesus taught and elaborated on the mysteries of the Kingdom to His disciples in more full and greatly expanded ways than the Bible hardly touches on. I am very sure that Jesus shared many things with His disciples that we do not see referenced in the Bible.
Today, through the restoration of the gospel we have so much more insight and understanding of the Lords plan and His supernal work throughout the globe! This is truly a glorious age!
Justasking’s comments: ---------------------- what do you mean by "restoration of the Gospel"? ----------------------
As LDS we believe that there was what we call an “apostasy” of the New Testament Church soon after Gods divinely authorized Prophets and Apostles were all killed off and passed from the scene. With the loss of Gods divinely authorized Prophets and Apostles several other elements to Christ’s Church that make up what we loosely refer to as the “fullness of the gospel” were also lost. Some of these elements were- Priesthood authority, apostolic authority and apostolic succession, keys and authority to perform ordinances, the capacity for God to speak directly through living oracles that provide us with new additional Scripture, counsel, guidance and more.
The role of the formal organization of Christ Church is often somewhat unfamiliar and foreign to most Protestants. Our Catholic Christian brothers and sisters more immediately grasp the significance and role the formal organization plays in Christ’s Church. In conversations with Catholics on this very subject they are quick to engage on the topic as it is very familiar with their experience and understanding of things- but are slow to pick up on and engage on other elements that Protestants are more familiar with. Protestants often feel like any formal organization or structure of Christ’s Church to be unnecessary or unimportant and is often very foreign to their understanding of things.
It is no surprise that Protestants would feel this way because the very roots of the Protestant tradition are founded upon rejecting the formal authority of the Church. As i am sure you already know Protestantism began by rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church that had been in place for all those first several centuries of Christianities existence. The word Protestant actually encapsulates this idea- “Protest”-ant.
In order to explain what we mean by “Restoration of the Gospel” we need to understand what we mean by the “Apostasy”.
The Apostasy is a huge topic- and there is a lot that could and probably should be said about it. I will not do it justice here- but here is a mini illustration for our short term purposes.
In the New Testament when God called New Prophets and Apostles he organized his Church here on the earth. This organization that Christ set up contained a variety of elements that enabled it to function as a whole. Some of these elements were- revelation, ordinance work, priesthood authority, apostolic succession, new scriptures…. and more. All of these elements worked together as one holistically. All these elements combined together to create what we would “casually” refer to as the “fullness” of the gospel.
Having this “fullness” of the gospel was like having a perfect mirror, clean and unbroken. In this mirror we could see perfectly who God is, who we are, why we are here, where we are going, and how to get there. This was the perfect fullness of the New Testament Church.
When the Apostles and Prophets were eventually all killed off- this perfect “mirror” was shattered. There was no one left on the earth to receive Gods revelation- there was no one left on the earth to administer Gods ordinances, or guide and direct the Church through revelation. This “fullness” and the organization of the Church began to crumble.
The “mirror” was broken into many many pieces. It was shattered. When this mirror was broken it was not as if all the pieces just disappeared or went away- they didn’t. Each of these many pieces contained much good and a lot of truth. Within each of these pieces could still be seen some truth and a partial picture. These pieces did not vanish or go away- rather everyone grabbed a piece of the mirror and did the best they could with it. Many very good and godly people took as many pieces as they could and did as much good as they could with it over time- they followed Christ the best they were able to. But without the “fullness” of the gospel- without priesthood authority, apostolic succession or the guidance of new revelation from God each of these groups with their piece of the mirror could simply not see or understand as much as one could with the whole mirror. Nor could they hold all their doctrines together with the absence of this “fullness”. Each of these pieces of the mirror have existed and persisted over time- and each of the many groups of people struggling to understand God and his plan have done the best that they could to understand the pieces properly and follow God as best they could based on how they understood Him through their own piece of the mirror.
This is why there are so many different Churches and varieties of Christianity today. This is why there have been so many different forms of Christianity in the past. This is why man has so desperately fought and struggled among themselves over time over which is the best and perfect way to understand their particular piece of the mirror. This is why man has so fought and struggled so desperately to understand the same pieces of written Scripture. Each of these groups have a piece of the mirror- but none of these groups has the whole mirror. Each of these groups has some truth- but none of them have full truth. This is the net effect of the apostasy and where it puts us today.
All the individuals in all these groups are generally very good, godly and Christian people in whom God is pleased with as they genuinely seek His Spirit and strive to do His will. These individuals have sought with true diligence to follow him as best they can and have generally speaking had their hearts pointed in the right direction. There is no doubt in my mind that God is pleased with them as individual followers of Christ- but as groups they simply do not have the whole picture because they only have pieces of the mirror.
The Bible itself speaks to this apostasy and much can be pointed out about it in the New Testament itself.
On a side note- It is interesting that Rick B in his post titled “Church Denominations” on this very BLOG has actually gone a long way, though perhaps unknowingly, to actually bolstering the LDS claims with that post. He has laid the ground work for a making a strong case for the reality of an apostasy and the need for a Restoration. I am curious to see if any other LDS choose to reply to it.
At different points in time throughout history man has sometimes attempted to put all of the pieces of the mirror back together as best they can according to the way they best understood things at the moment. We sometimes call these attempts Reformations. Reformations are mans best attempts to return to original New Testament Christianity and to make the mirror whole again.
However, man alone cannot make the mirror whole. Mans Reformations can never do this. Only God can do this. And that is what has happened today in this day and age. Not a “Reformation” but a “Restoration”!- Huge difference!! A Restoration can only happen through God the Father and Jesus Christ himself- through their divine instrumentation and help. Joseph Smith was called as the first prophet in this last dispensation as were prophets of old to usher in the Restoration of the Gospel. Through divine means the mirror has been made whole and complete- never to be destroyed or taken from the earth again. Today through the Restoration of the Gospel we again have living Prophets on the earth! Through the Restoration of the Gospel we have living Apostles on the earth! We have priesthood authority, access to direct revelation from God and all the keys and authority to administer Gods ordinances here on the earth- and much much more. This is a most beautiful and wonderful thing!
Here is a link to the Prophet Joseph Smith’s testimony in his own words about the coming forth of the Book of Mormon:
www.scriptures.lds.org/bm/jsphsmth
To those who are already Christians I would say; Have you already accepted Jesus as the Christ and made Him Lord of your life? Well that is wonderful!!- Now come be part of Jesus Christ’s literal Church here on the earth!
Do you already have a personal relationship with Jesus and have you already been “saved”? Praise God!!- now come be a part of Christ’s literal Church on the earth!
We say to all mankind- Bring whatever good you already have and see if we can’t add to it.
Again, I am painting with a rather broad brush here but your questions have covered a lot of ground.
I hope that helps some.
I now have a couple of questions for you Justasking.
1. Have you ever read the Book of Mormon?
2. Why are there so many elements present in the New Testament Church that are not present in sectarian Christianity today? For example in the New Testament new converts to the Church received the Holy Ghost through the laying on of hands after baptism. This sure seems like a very important element in the Church at the time. Why do we not now see this identical practice throughout sectarian Christianity today? At what point in time did it just stop being practiced and why? Or, if some denominations try and institute a version of it why is it so inconsistent and varied between different groups of believers?
Thank-you for your time and consideration.
In Christ,
-Tad
Hello Just asking.
I dont have time to reply to everything Tad said, As I want to work on other posts. But here is a few thoughts.
First off, I dont know anything about archaeology, But I do have a link provide to a brother who knows more than I do. As to the BoM and why we dont have records of it. The angel took the golden plates back after JS "Translated" them. So of course we could never review them like the dead sea scrolls.
A few things about these Gold plates. Joseph smith said "each plate was six inches wide and eight inches long, and not quite so thick as common tin, that they were filled with engravings in egyptian characters, and that they were bound togther with three rings, forming a volume something near six inches in thickness.
this would put the weight of the gold plates at over 200 pounds and closer to 300. in mormon writings and pictures, they have JS just carrying these plates under one arm and passing them around. I really find bthis hard to believe.
then add to that, from the time JS was told where these plates were till the time he was "allowed" to "find" them, and remove them from the ground was a 4 year period.
Then on the issue of a total apostay, that is a topic I will cover in the weeks to come. Rick b
Your website has a useful information for beginners like me.
»
Post a Comment