Acts 17:11 part 2

Hello everyone. This is part two of "Acts 17:11." For all who did not read part one, this is a brief overview. Wer62(Ed) replied with a mini-book to my topic "Am I Anti-Mormon?". I replied to part of it in "Acts 17:11-Part 1." In part two, I am only going to cover two parts of his reply. If anyone has a question on the rest that I did not reply to, feel free to write me with any questions.

My first part is to cover the issues of the prophets getting things wrong and the prophet Jonah. Ed said,

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 misinterpreting it. 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?

Jonah had knowledge and misinterpreted it. God gave Jonah a message, and Jonah did not want to tell the people because he knew God would spare the people, and Jonah wanted them destroyed. Let's look at some of what the book of Jonah teaches.

Jonah 1:1 Now the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,

Jonah 1:2 Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.

Jonah 3:1 And the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the second time, saying,

Jonah 3:2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.

Jonah 3:3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.

Looks to me as if Jonah said just what the Lord told Him.

Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Jonah 3:5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

Jonah 3:6 For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered [him] with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.

Jonah 3:7 And he caused [it] to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:

Jonah 3:8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that [is] in their hands.

Jonah 3:9 Who can tell [if] God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?

Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did [it] not.

Again, from what I read it seems to me that Jonah preached what he was told to, but it is God who showed both grace and mercy. Why is it that the LDS seem to think God also was wrong for showing grace and mercy? I say that because, Ed, you feel Jonah got the message wrong, but in fact, Jonah was mad because he knew God would show grace and mercy.

Jonah 4:1 But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was very angry.

Jonah 4:2 And he prayed unto the LORD, and said, I pray thee, O LORD, [was] not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish: for I knew that thou [art] a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil.


Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?


Notice that Jonah admits that He knew God was going to spare the people, that is why he was mad. Romans also tells us, it is God's kindness that leads us to repentance. If God just killed them all, how would that be kind and loving? Now, let's read the rest of the story.

Jonah 4:3 Therefore now, O LORD, take, I beseech thee, my life from me; for [it is] better for me to die than to live.

Jonah 4:4 Then said the LORD, Doest thou well to be angry?

Jonah 4:5 So Jonah went out of the city, and sat on the east side of the city, and there made him a booth, and sat under it in the shadow, till he might see what would become of the city.

Jonah 4:6 And the LORD God prepared a gourd, and made [it] to come up over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. So Jonah was exceeding glad of the gourd.

Jonah 4:7 But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, and it smote the gourd that it withered.

Jonah 4:8 And it came to pass, when the sun did arise, that God prepared a vehement east wind; and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, that he fainted, and wished in himself to die, and said, [It is] better for me to die than to live.

Jonah 4:9 And God said to Jonah, Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd? And he said, I do well to be angry, [even] unto death.

Jonah 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night:

Jonah 4:11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and [also] much cattle?

We read that Jonah was mad over a plant, but he could care less about the thousands of possible children in Nineveh. How sad that you either don't know your word, or you did not read everything.

Here is something pastor Chuch Smith said on the issue of Jonah.

I. "SO THE MEN OF NINEVEH BELIEVED GOD." THIS CERTAINLY MUST BE A MIRACLE OF GRACE.
A. Look at the minister.
1. He hated his calling.
a. The whole first part of the story deals with how he sought to escape from the call of God.
b. He was determined not to go.
c. To get as far away from the call of God as possible.
d. He asked to be thrown into the sea. He felt that it was better to drown than to go to Nineveh.
e. He sat and sulked in the belly of the whale enduring unthinkable misery for three days and nights before he caved in and called on God.
2. He hated the people he was called to minister to.
a. He wanted God to destroy them.
b. Nineveh was the capital of Assyria and the Assyrians were known for their cruelty.
c. There are pictures of the Assyrians leading their captives with hooks through their noses, and their bodies mutilated.
d. The Assyrians were a rising power in the ancient world and and were a threat to the nation of Israel, and finally did conquer Israel and led them away into captivity.
e. As far as Jonah was concerned, nothing would suit him better than to see Nineveh destroyed.
f. The very reason he tried to escape the call of God was the fear that his ministry might be successful. He was afraid that they would repent and God would not destroy them.
B. Look at his message.
1. It was monotonous, "Forty days and comes destruction."
2. No fancy illustrations to draw the people's attention.
3. No suggestion of hope.
4. No call to repentance.
5. No promise of God's mercy.
6. Just "Forty days and comes destruction."
II. THE PEOPLE BELIEVED GOD AND REPENTED FROM THE KING ON DOWN.
A. What a miracle of God's sovereign grace.
B. Next time you are prone to think that your success has come from your charming, winsome ways, think again.
C. Next time people respond to the invitation you give them to accept Christ and it resulted from your brilliant rhetoric, think again.
D. Please do not misunderstand me, I am not suggesting that you be boorish and rude, just don't think more highly of yourself than you ought.
E. What a classic illustration of the truth that Jonah discovered while in the belly of the whale, "Salvation is of the Lord."
1. This is comparable to the salvation of the dying thief hanging next to Jesus on the cross.
a. Two men equally close to death.
b. Two men equally close to salvation.
c. One is saved, one is lost.
d. How did he know that Jesus was a king?
e. How did he know that He was coming into His kingdom?
f. Even the disciples at this point did not understand this.
2. This is as remarkable as the conversion of Saul of Tarsus.
F. What a classic illustration of the statement of God to Isaiah, "My ways are not your ways saith the Lord, My ways are beyond your finding out."
1. If we were going to plan and strategize on how to reach Nineveh, imagine all the planning and devising.
2. We must get a large stadium, and spend thousands of dollars in advertising.
3. We must gather a great team of highly qualified men, and send them ahead to train follow up leadership.
4. A city of this size would take a budget of over a million dollars before we could even consider a campaign there.
5. If someone should suggest that we send just one man to walk the streets yelling, "You are going to be destroyed in 40 days," we would be thought crazy by the planning committee.
G. What was the basis of their repentance? "Who can tell?"
1. No real promise.

2. No absolute hope.
3. Who knows?
III. NO WONDER JESUS SAID IN MAT 12:41, THE MEN OF NINEVEH SHALL RISE IN JUDGMENT WITH THIS GENERATION, AND SHALL CONDEMN IT: BECAUSE THEY REPENTED AT THE PREACHING OF JONAH; AND, BEHOLD, A GREATER THAN JONAH [IS] HERE.
A. The men of Nineveh heard only one message and that of judgment.
B. They had only one bitter messenger who hated them.
1. Yet they repented in sackcloth and ashes.
C. What an interesting character Jonah is, he did not want to follow the call of God to minister because he was afraid that he would be successful.

Now the other part of what Wer62 (Ed) said.

For the LDS, what is official doctrine? Can it be said to be LDS doctrine if any LDS person believes it? If some LDS missionary believes that the Earth is flat, then, is that doctrine? Of course not! Official doctrine is doctrine that is contained within the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. All other sources are not official doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Almost every religious group has procedures for distinguishing what they consider to be doctrine and so it is with the LDS Church. Those procedures are remarkably close to many of the protestant counterparts. The procedure for doctrine is clearly outlined in the Fifteenth Semiannual General Conference of the LDS church on Oct 10, 1880. George Q. Cannon addressed the conference.

I hold in my hand the book of Doctrine and Covenants, and also the book, The Pearl of Great Price, which contains revelations of God. In Kirtland, the Doctrine and Covenants in its original form, as first printed , was submitted to the officers of the Church and the members of the Church to vote upon. As there have been additions made to it by publishing of revelations which were not contained in the original printing, it has been deemed to submit these books with their contents to the conference, to see whether the conference will vote to accept the books and their content as from God, and binding upon us as a people and as a Church.

Subsequent changes of content in the standard works of the Church have been presented similarly to the membership in General Conference to receive a sustaining vote. Examples can be found in LDS history that clearly shows how this works. Wilford Woodruff, as President of the Church committed the Latter Day Saints to discontinue the practice of plural marriage; his official declaration was submitted to the Sixtieth Semiannual General Conference on 6 October 1890, which by unanimous vote accepted it “as authoritative and binding.” (See Official Declaration 1) It was the “vote” that made it official doctrine even if that vote is not unanimous or even a majority. Another example would be Spencer W. Kimball when he declared that henceforth all worthy male members should receive the priesthood on September 30th 1978. – (See Official Declaration 2)

While it may be true that members of the LDS Church including Presidents and Quorum of the Twelve have written books concerning a vast number of subjects. They have expressed their own opinions concerning doctrine. Does the opinion of a prophet make it prophecy or doctrine? I would have to say no. Again, Doctrine is only doctrine insomuch as it is contained in the appropriate scripture and sustained by the body of the Church.

Critics will often times insist that the Latter Day Saints must defend as doctrine everything that Brigham Young or Joseph Smith or any other General Authority ever said. The concept of doctrine cannot simply be stretched this far. This is no different for example the Catholics believe in Papal Infallibility when the Pope is acting in circumstances defined by the Catholic Church. Joseph Smith himself stated “A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such”. The critics often times insist that a prophet speaks prophetically at all times.

Child of God, do you get it yet? Are Mormons Christians has nothing to do with doctrinal differences or what someone said that is quoted in the JOD. Your quotes are so far of base that the only way it can be described is "Misrepresentation" as I have outlined above.

In short, the question I see at hand is this: How can we tell when a Mormons speaks doctrine/scripture or his mere opinion? What it boils down to is this: there are many things people like BY taught or said that I feel are Doctrine and LDS don't. I really believe it comes down to this, if LDS agree with what was said, then it is doctrine, otherwise it is mere opinion. Look at the Adam-God Doctrine for example. BY is very clear on that teaching, he states it is DOCTRINE, and that the prophets of old taught this. Then he goes on to say that if you take that teaching lightly, YOU WILL BE DAMNED. How can any honest LDS claim it was his mere opinion when he said it was doctrine?

Then LDS claim the King Follet Discourse is JS greatest sermon ever given, and much of what was taught is as scripture today. Then if you read in the 4 standerd works, God clearly contradicts Himself through all of them. That clearly denies

1Cor. 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Then, if you read FOURTEEN FUNDAMENTALS IN FOLLOWING THE PROPHET,
Ezra Taft Benson both teaches and backs up his teaching with scripture from both the 4 standerd works and the JoD. I find it funny that some LDS claim the JoD is not scripture, but Ezra Taft Benson uses it to support his view. Oh, the irony! Anyway, let's see what he said.

In conclusion, let us summarize this grand key, these "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet," for our salvation hangs on them.

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say "Thus saith the Lord" to give us scripture.

Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.

Notice that Ezra Taft Benson most clearly states: Our salvation hangs on this stuff So is this his mere opinion? If so, we have a serious problem. Why? He said our salvation hangs upon this, and that does not sound like mere opinion to me. Also, he clearly supports his views from the 4 standerd works. So if a prophet knows less than the average LDS member, how can I trust the church? He said that the Prophet speaks for the Lord in everything. BY was clear about the Adam God Doctrine being just that, doctrine. Also, if the Prophet cannot lead the Church astray, then I should be able to both trust Ezra and BY. Add to that, if the Prophet does not need to say, "Thus saith the Lord," then how can we tell if it is of God or mere opinion? Again, I feel that if LDS agree with it, it is scripture, otherwise it is not.

Now Wer62 (Ed) said,

Wilford Woodruff, as President of the Church committed the Latter Day Saints to discontinue the practice of plural marriage; his official declaration was submitted to the Sixtieth Semiannual General Conference on 6 October 1890, which by unanimous vote accepted it “as authoritative and binding.” (See Official Declaration 1) It was the “vote” that made it official doctrine even if that vote is not unanimous or even a majority.

Since when can mere mortal humans vote upon what God said to decide if it is scripture, after God stated it was scripture? Read D and C 132, God is clear, this was/is an everlasting covenant. God stated such, but due to pressure from the states and goverment, all of a sudden, LDS recive a "NEW" revelation and things change. Please look up my topic of the 14 fundamentals to read all of the scripture Ezra Taft Benson uses to support his views. Rick b