No “Comedy of Errors”
The game Chinese Whispers (known as Telephone in the US) is a long-time favorite at parties. Someone whispers a phrase or sentence to another, who in turn repeats the words to another, and so on until reaching the last player, who then says the words out loud. The fun of the game is in the outcome — the last person usually repeats a wildly different message than what was uttered by the first player due to errors that were introduced and expanded nearly every time the message was passed on.
I’ve often talked with Mormons who relate the game of Telephone to different translations of the Bible. They assert that the Bible has been translated and retranslated and retranslated until it has become “a comedy of errors,” leaving us with a sadly corrupted text.
Early LDS Apostle Orson Pratt also believed the Bible has been debased. He wrote,
“Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?” (Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, No. 3, page 47).
I’ve found that people often confuse the issues of translation and transmission. Most of the English Bible translations we have today use the ancient manuscripts written in the original languages as their source. That is, the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek have been translated directly into English; they have not, as some Mormons assert, been translated into English from (for example) a Latin translation of the original languages.
Revisions to translations (e.g., the American Standard Version and the New American Standard Version) primarily result from two things: 1) the discovery of new ancient biblical manuscripts; and 2) changes in the English language over time. Yet even these revisions go back to the ancient manuscripts for accuracy. There is no game of Telephone here.
On the issue of transmission, it is true that the biblical manuscripts were copied and recopied as they were distributed across the then-known world, and during this process textual variants (errors) appeared. Nevertheless, because of the substantial number of ancient manuscripts and fragments that exist today, there is little question about the original biblical text. Respected Bible scholar F.F. Bruce explained,
“Fortunately, if the great number of MSS [manuscripts] increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small” (The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, page 14).
Christian theologian Wayne Grudem expanded the same idea:
“It may first be stated that for over 99 percent of the words of the Bible, we know what the original manuscript said. Even for many of the verses where there are textual variants (that is, different words in different ancient copies of the same verse), the correct decision is often quite clear, and there are really very few places where the textual variant is both difficult to evaluate and significant in determining the meaning. In the small percentage of cases where there is significant uncertainty about what the original text said, the general sense of the sentence is usually quite clear from the context. (One does not have to be a Hebrew or Greek scholar to know where these variants are, because all modern English translations indicate them in marginal notes with words such as “some ancient manuscripts read… ” or “other ancient authorities add… ”)
“This is not to say that the study of textual variants is unimportant, but it is to say that the study of textual variants has not left us in confusion about what the original manuscripts said. It has rather brought us extremely close to the content of those original manuscripts. For most practical purposes, then, the current published scholarly texts of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament are the same as the original manuscripts. Thus, when we say that the original manuscripts were inerrant, we are also implying that over 99 percent of the words in our present manuscripts are also inerrant, for they are exact copies of the originals. Furthermore, we know where the uncertain readings are (for where there are no textual variants we have no reason to expect faulty copying of the original). Thus, our present manuscripts are for most purposes the same as the original manuscripts, and the doctrine of inerrancy therefore directly concerns our present manuscripts as well” (Systematic Theology, page 96).
Regarding the historical transmission of the Bible, just as in the translation of the Bible, there is nothing that warrants the assertion that it is like a game of Telephone, or a comedy of errors.
Bill McKeever once wrote,
“To argue that the existence of various versions of the Bible is reason enough to mistrust all of them is just a smokescreen. Mormons mistrust the Bible because it is the book that refutes their doctrines” (Answering Mormons Questions, page 44).
And that is the real issue.
–
For more information on Scriptural transmission see:
Is the Bible Reliable?
Is Today’s Bible the Real Bible?
———————-
Comments within the parameters of 1 Peter 3:15 are invited.
———————-
Comments (95)
“[The Masoretes wrote] with the greatest imaginable reverence, and devised a complicated system of safeguards against scribal slips. They counted, for example, the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs in each book; they pointed out the middle letter of the Pentateuch and the middle letter of the whole Hebrew Bible, and made even more detailed calculations than these.”
I knew I’d read something like that before. I hope every one will go read the two links Sharon provided, to get the more detailed info. Especially OJ, for whom this issue comes up a lot.
This is just another game, a slogan they learn down at the wards with little to substantiate their claims. It of course makes life easier when you can repeat these catchy little phrases, makes you sound smart to the rest of the Mormon faithful and you really don’t have to do any thinking. It all goes under the Mormon heading of “Christianity is all messed-up, the original was lost and there was a need for a restoration.”
When Christians talk about inspiration of the Scriptures we are talking about the process that God used to convey His message. The Apostle Paul called it spiritual “breathing.” The Greek word theopneustos literally means “God-breathed”. So when we talk about inspiration we are referring only to the initial “breathing” of God upon the authors of Scripture. It’s the original text of Scripture, revealed by God and faithfully recorded by His servants, that the Church claims infallibility.
Now there are literally thousands of copies and fragments of the manuscripts preserved with only minor transmissional mistakes made by scribes. The accuracy of the Bible copies increases rather than decreases. Today there is a relatively small percentage (less than 1/2 of 1 percent in the NT of questionable material. Finally, no transmissional error has ever affected a single doctrine of the Word of God which touches the means of our salvation, the evangelization of the world, our own spiritual maturity, or the Church’s ultimate conquest of evil.
(attribution: “Essential Christianity: A Handbook of Basic Christian Doctrines” by Dr. Walter Martin)
transmissional errors aside, the translation can be misleading. Even within our own language words and turns of phrase have mutated and sometimes changed their meaning over a relatively short time period. So while some may argue that the gist may be preserved, it is naive to think that it is not the translation that one should be skeptical of….but rather be aware of the “translator”. Just looking closely at modern translations can often reveal the “gist” unique to each….a signature of sorts.
falcon
lather…..rinse……repeat
I read part of a book that was scholarly and yet for the layman, written by a Biblical scholar who has studied the Bible extensively and yet does not come to the same conclusion as those of the Jesus Seminar and other skeptics. It seems to me that the skeptical scholarship amounts to wild speculation about errors and problems with the Bible as well as unsubstantiated speculation about the “historical Jesus.” That is one of the basic conclusions I can to from reading of “Fabricating Jesus.” Scholars throw up this smoke screen about errors in the Bible, when most of the errors they tabulate come down to misplaced punctuation or a letter misplaced etc. If the Bible is inspired by God, would He not have the power to preserve it’s message through the ages? When we read scripture or hear it preached, we can hear the very voice of Jesus speaking to us telling us everything necessary for salvation. The Bible is sufficient as a foundation for who God is and how we are to relate to Him. God has made Himself known to man through the holy scriptures, and any doctrine or idea that does not line up with the Bible must be thrown out based on the testimony God has given through His Holy Spirit inspired scripture.
subgenius,
Your comment that “translation can be misleading” is one reason that many denominations require pastors to study and show a familiarity with Greek and Hebrew, the languages that make up most of what was “immediately inspired by God” in the bible.
Many things can be lost in translation if one does not know the common vernacular. For example the word hippopotamus literally translated is river horse. Now if one was well versed in ancient Greek, but not having seen or heard of a hippopotamus before, use the literal translation and describe a large, hairless horse that resides by a river and likes to frolic in it. Totally different image to what we know it to be.
But why stop there. In Finnish they older generation usually say that they wish they were in anothers’ pants. This means that they wish they were in anothers’ shoes in the English translation, but if someone did not know this it would really make an interesting story about an employee and their boss if literally translated over.
But then there is also the problem with the words translate and interpret. Many people think they mean the same thing. They are similar in meaning, but different in application. I only found this out on my mission as I learned another language. Because scripture is not for private interpretation, one needs to interpret it the proper way, which is through the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:20-21). This is how God wants it interpreted so one gets His meaning and not a person’s meaning. This can also be what is meant by the Bible being translated incorrectly – that it is actually interpreted incorrectly.
Since we do know there are some parts of the current Bible that have been added post-original MS, and we do not have the originals, then we cannot be 100% sure how many errors there are within the Bible. I do agree that we are getting a better translation with all the new older MSS being found, but until we have the very originals we do not know if there are or how many errors are in the translation. And with all the different interpretations, we know that there is only one true interpretation – just which is it? (I’ll give you a hint – it starts with The Church of Jesus Christ…)
Ralph,
Can a fallen and sinful humanity be 100% sure about anything without God? Scholars tell is we can be 98-99% sure. I find the glee that Mormons have when they attack the Bible instructive.
Ralph, your discussion broke down in the middle for me.
The way you know what the Bible is talking about is to carefully compare it to the rest of the Bible. Studying the original languages, having terrific teachers who have done the learning and know the scholarship, all of this helps to appropriately interpret the Bible.
The Holy Spirit is, above all, ready to help you pull more and more meaning out of the text everytime you read it, as reading the Bible is where you really hear from God.
But the way you say it sounds so Mormon, as to suggest that such things as proclaiming that what Ezekiel meant by “two sticks” was the Bible and the Book of Mormon, for heaven’s sake. That is not at all what he meant. Typical LDS think that there are secrets hidden in certain places in the Bible, and only the elite (i.e. priesthood holders and up) in the elite church know how to find them!
That last part you said, and i’m serious, made me a little sick
Believing scripture is an infallible guide to our relationship with God is such an awesome foundation for faith. Having examined and read of the evidence for the Bible has brought me to the conclusion that God did indeed preserve His Word – His testimony and revelation of who He is. Scripture has been preserved through the ages and points us to the God who has made Himself known through His prophets but now in these last days has spoken to us by His Son (Hebrews 1:1 – 2). Scripture reveals that Jesus fulfills and supplants the prophets. I do not worship the Bible, I worship a God powerful enough to sustain His testimony of His nature and His message of salvation. I am persuaded not only by God’s Holy Spirit of the truth of scripture, but also by the historical evidence attesting that it is indeed a historical book (and not a fabrication without outside testimony of the world it presents). Also, I see the spiritual world it presents and that it corresponds with reality. I am a sinner – we all are – no matter how hard we may try to perfect ourselves. Human sinfulness never disappoints me in it’s universal reality. The Bible accurately describes the condition of man. Children are born sinners, no one needs to teach any child to sin – they come by it naturally (as any parent can tell you). My helplessness to save myself and beauty of free grace given by the death of Christ on the cross transcends all natural understanding and is revealed by God. It is so amazing. We know that God became man and gave Himself for us because of the Bible. The Bible makes sense with the world around us, and it transcends the world around us – revealing God in a way we could never know otherwise.
A couple of things that Mormons must do to sustain their faith in the Joseph Smith’s fable. One is that they have to claim that the Bible is chuck-full of transmission errors and therefore doesn’t accurately reflect God’s revealed Word. Unfortunately for the Mormon cause their claim is not true. But Mormons must keep repeating that falsehood just like they have to keep repeating that the Nicean creed doesn’t reflect the Christian faith as handed down by the Church fathers. I would guess that the Bible must be the most studied book of all time and its accuracy is beyond question. Now whether or not the Bible is “true” is a whole different question. But accurate, yes.
I think we’ve all been treated to what passes as Biblical scholarship within Mormonism. We’re dealing with folks (Mormons)who have virtually no structured approach to interpreting Scripture. Mormons are very creative as to how they understand what the Bible is saying. They violate every basic rule of acceptable Biblical interpretation. But when a religion is based on how you feel about something, the result is bound to be a free-for-all of exotic and creative meaning.
Mormonism exists mainly because Mormons repeat what they’ve been taught rather than taking a hard look at the facts. But it makes them feel good.
Whn one looks at the commandment “thou shalt not steal”…the Hebrew and greek origin of the word is really a reference to kidnap…a far cry to what our modern “translation” is.
Which, on the subject of “commandments”…the 10 commandments present an interesting discussion for “translation”. The Hebrew and Greek origin of the “decalogue” is actually the “ten terms” not commandments…now putting aside the ritual or ethical decalogue discussion, these “10″ are translated differently among some denominations.
I realize the Ev disposed of the “10″ in Matthew 19 and 22, even though JC is clearly referencing the OT. But my point is that this assumption that 1% may be lost in translation is misleading.
Though many Christian faiths prefer the Hebrew origin for translation, that is not always the case. Even the Masoretes influenced their “compiled-standardized-translation by necessarily adding vowels….this addition of vowels required certain “interpretations” to be made.
So, in fact many of the current Christian texts have actually been “cherry-picked” from the Masoretes, the Vulgate, the Septuagint etc. This raises the probability of the Chinese Telephone scenario to, imho, higher than 1%.
However, no surprise that the current translators would promote the idea that “their” translation is 99% accurate.
I would correct the notion that the “originals” are still around…it is common knowledge that the Greek “autographs” are long gone.
There is a huge difference in Dynamic, Literal, and Idiomatic translations.
just for fun google the “Turker’s Gospel”
Joseph Smith and Mormonism asserted that many plain and precious things were removed from the scriptures. From all historical evidence, this is just a flat out lie. Muslims assert the same thing – the Bible has been distorted and the Muslim history is the accurate one, not the Bible. But in both cases, Mormon and Muslim, their religious texts have no foundation whatsoever. The Book of Mormon literally floats in thin air – nothing supporting it historically at all. Similarly, the story that Islam puts forth of an alternative history of not only Christ like the Mormons, but also of the entire Bible. Neither religious book has any historical basis other than the assertions of their founders – Joseph Smith and Mohammad. So Christian scripture is criticized for minor textual errors which in essence prove that there are errors to be detected. With all the copies and manuscripts available, you would think some of these plain and precious things Mormons assert were removed would begin to be apparent from divergent copies of scripture going back through history – not so. No historical test of the Book of Mormon text is possible because there is nothing to test it against. It is a work of religious fiction. It comes down to the word of Joseph Smith. Is there any other evidence pointing to the truthfulness of Joseph Smith’s testimony or prophecies??
As I look at the two contrasting works, The Bible, and the BOM; I would take evidence – both Archaeological and Spiritual of the Bible – Over a fable that doesn’t have a shred of archaeological evidence (Assuming Mormons are going to report the BOM authenticity with “personal testimony” as spiritual evidence)that has been peer reviewed by someone outside the Mormon Walls.
What other choice did Joe Smith have? He was trying to peddle his book as an authentic work of God; people were not buying it. Isn’t this just another marketing tactic.
Take for instance the current marketing of Apple vs. Microsoft. Some 90% of computers have windows installed on them. So what does Apple do? They have no choice, as they see it, to attack Microsoft. Apple works very hard at creating doubt about the bigger brand.
JS faced a similar problem. So he had to create doubt in people regarding the Bible. JS discredits the Bibles reliability, thus creating an environment that causes followers to become even more dependent on JS as the “Official” authority of proper translations.
I would take the Bible with all of it’s mis translations over a fictitious story with Zero credibility from the work itself and the proprietor JS.
The thing that I find really disgusting with Mormons is that the things we discuss here regarding say the accuracy of the Biblical text or the creeds reflecting first century Christian dogma are knowable. The historical evidence is available for anyone who wants to take the time and make the effort to understand. The problem is that when a religion like Mormonism, which is built on false claims, has to deal honestly and accurately with these matters, the false premises of Mormonism fall a part.
Truth in Mormonism is a massaged reality based on mental impressions and transient feelings. Truth in Mormonism is layered much like plywood: the outer surface is attractive, but, like the inner layers, is incapable of sustaining much weight. The Mormon concept of truth has little to do with what is historically verifiable. It’s based on what is expedient for the Mormon church.
The Mormon church routinely changes its own history and its own scriptures to fit what ever new reality the (church) is peddling. Quite frankly, a member of Joseph Smith’s 1831 church with that version of the BoM would be certainly aghast at a current church which teaches that God has a physical body and once lived on another earth; that man can himself progress to godhood; or that temple worship, eternal marriage, and genealogical research are essential for “exaltation” or eternal life. These things are all apart of current SLC LDS belief but as we all know they don’t appear any where in the BoM and certainly not the Bible.
Other sects of Mormonism have jettisoned these aberrant and false notions and have chosen a route that’s more compatible with early Mormonism and certainly closer to the Biblical reality. Mormons are taught to stay away from anything that isn’t consistent with what is currently fed to them by the church hierarchy. A Mormons quest for truth must stop with whatever currently strikes the fancy of the church’s false prophet.
The blind leading the blind would be an apt description.
One of the most valuable lessons I’ve learned in my time here on MC, is how Mormons view the “truth” and process information. In the culture that is Mormonism, there is a particular way the members process information. The Christian trying to communicate biblical truth to a Mormon must never forget that the Mormon culture often extends beneath the level of formal, written doctrine. That is, there’s a big difference between the Mormon system of thought as taught and the way in which it is believed and practiced. It’s hard to get at Mormon “truth”.
The key to Mormon truth is found in how they view the Mormon god. The Mormon god who made this earth was once a mortal human. Armed with the doctrine of eternal progression; their god is changing, becoming more perfect each day, implies that this god was less than perfect each day in the past. So if one accepts the untenable premise that such a being exists, then one must also accept the logical implication that Mormon truth, like it’s creator, is constantly changing and ultimately of human origin.
As historical, orthodox Christians we focus on truth as absolute and unchanging precisely because God is absolute and unchanging-Hebrews 13:8.
falcon,
I was just thinking something similar.
My thought was that it is useless to talk about faith/grace vs. works until and unless someone knows who we are actually talking about when we talk about God or Jesus.
Unless a person actually believes that God is the end-all-be-all of everything everywhere, the only one there is, all-powerful, omniscient, omnipresent, etc. and that Jesus has been forever a part of the three parts that make up one God, how can they understand the rest of God’s truth?
falcon
you as an “orthodox?” Christians…really?
Ev may focus on absolute and unchanging, because otherwise their fountainhead Paul begins to reveal himself as less-than-perfect.
On a side note about your Mormon God diatribe.
We are made in His image…once We walked together with Him, He has hands and a face, We are commanded to return to Him, to be Holy like Him, to eventually receive eternal life thus making us “like” Him (actually the verse reads like “us”).
Additionally, in the book of Life, names are able to added and deleted…which means that God has yet to “determine” a person’s fate…this is very revealing about a notion of progression, free-will, and “pre-determination”. Which is the core of the dynamic God of Mormonism versus the static God of the boilerplate Ev (or worse, the watered-down culturally biased Pauline who loves their chinese telephone).
It seems that our friend subgenius believes he has found the right button to push to stir the hornets nest with his “Pauline” comments. Your assertions were refuted on another thread Sub. I’m not biting.
Ralph wrote
The words that were written are the interpreted prophecy (teaching) of the Holy Spirit written by men as they were moved by Him to write absolute truth. Because they were written in human language we are to translate and interpret verses within their grammatical historical context. We do not need to have some special authority to say, “Hmmmm, what does the Holy Spirit tell me this verse really means, ‘cuz I’m not very comfortable with what the text actually says.”
This was the basis of the reformation teaching of Sola Scriptura. When men like Martin Luther and Tyndale actually read the original text they quickly realized that that “official church doctrine” was not supported by scripture. To this day the Roman church teaches the doctrines of tradition and inteprets scipture accordingly, just like Joseph Smith’s Salt Lake sect does.
Recently I heard a good explanation of different responses people have to the preaching of the cross and the death of Christ granting the forgiveness of sins & eternal life. The 3 basic different responses were described as: One, they realize their need for forgiveness and turn with joy to Jesus completed work on the cross. Two, they have their own agenda or spiritual system which is threatened by the gospel and they fight against the preaching of salvation by grace through faith attempting to destroy the Christian faith and it’s message because it contradicts what they believe or teach. Three, they say “so what, I don’t care” and go on with their lives. Joseph Smith I would categorize as number 2. He rejected the gospel and went so far as to put a “Christian minister” in the temple ceremony to ridicule the message of forgiveness. The good news of salvation by grace through faith contradicted the message of works, temples, etc. that he believed and preached. Here on Mormon Coffee, the Mormons tend to fall into category 2 – attacking the message of the gospel and the book with the message, tearing the scriptures down with subgenius even asserting that Paul’s writings are apostate and that Paul apparently fell away – I guess making the Bible a work of heresy according to sub? The message of the Bible does not align with Joseph Smith, so Mormons attack the Bible. I choose to hold fast to the gospel which God has revealed in the scriptures, and instead toss out Joseph Smith and his heretical teaching and unsubstantiated BOM.
Ralph said,”We know that there is only one true
interpretation- just which is it?” He then goes
on to say that the Mormon Church’s interpretation
of the Bible is the correct one etc.
The following is a short list of the Mormon
Church’s “true interpretations”:
- Apostle Mark Peterson used Deut.32:7-9 to teach
pre-existence.He used Deut 7 to teach against
inter-racial marriages.
- LDS general authorities once used verses in
Psalms 45; Matt.25, and John chapter 2, to
teach that Jesus was a polygamist.
- Brigham Young interpreted old Testament verses
that spoke of Jehovah in human terms, to teach
that God the Father was an exalted man.
- Brigham Young re-interpreted the Biblical
account of man’s creation.He pubically taught
Adam was created from the dust of another earth.
- Add to these the fact of the First Presidency
issueing a directive to Bishops,Stake and
Branch presidents that a cetain intimate act
between husband and wife was not allowed(if you
expected to pass your Temple recommend inter-
view). The offical letter stated, ” The First
Presidency has INTERPRETED oral sex as constit-
uting an unnatural, impure,or unholy practice.”
This was in 1982.[Jehovah's Witnesses were told
this EXACT SAME THING by their prophet! They've
since had "new light" on this! }
With this type of "true interpretations" what
must we think of the following: "...If you want
to know what the word of God is, go to the
Council of the Twelve or the First Presidency.
They are the foundation of the Church; they
will keep you on the right track so that you
will not need to worry."[Teachings of the
Living Prophets, Apostle Mark.Peterson,p.30 ]
I believe the vast majority of rank and file
LDS hold the Bible in high esteem,believe it
to be God’s Word, and look to it for spirit-
ual truth.These sincere people we can sit down
with and examine their leaders’ interpretations.
Quite frankly, in the Mormon system the Bible and the BoM aren’t really all that crucial. You see they have a living prophet who gets direct messages from the Mormon god who reveals all updated knowledge as he (Mormon god) becomes progressively more perfect. So the stuff revealed to Joseph Smith and his unlawful successor Brigham Young; like Blood Atonement, Adam-God, sexual relations with Mary by the Mormon god, polygamy, blacks in the priesthood, the intro. to the BoM, temple rituals, on and on get changed with more knowledge and light provided to the Mormon prophet.
Why would anyone need an ancient book rife with errors (in the Mormon view).
The Bible is in the “kind of nice to have” category (for Mormons) especially with Mormon creative interpretation. And the revelation gig is really a good deal because it doesn’t require much from the rank and file Mormon. Once the Mormon prophet speaks, the thinking is done.
Mormonism is kind of like multilevel marketing because they have an “up line” and new products (revelation) to market and new people to recruit and build the organization. In fact in BY’s day, some Mormon men were getting people (men as well as women) “sealed” to them for that very purpose. That was just for a little while and was halted when BY got an update from the Mormon god I guess.
subgenius,
Where did you get the information that about the Hebrew word in Exodus 20:13 interpreted “steal” actual means “kidnap”? Did you check this out before you made this comment? Did you look at the 31 other times this word is used in the Bible to see if that even makes since?
I pulled a couple of books off the shelf and I am unable to see where this definition is warranted in this context. “ganab (gā∙nǎḇ)” is rendered “kidnap” in Gen 40:15 in many modern translations but to claim that this is the only proper use of the word is far from the truth.
You should also understand that the disagreement about the 10 commandments generally focuses on how to divide them (1,2, or 3 divisions), and how to count them not how to translate them.
I meant Exodus 20:15
liv4jc
the Ev never bites on anything….just nibbles here and there.
For example, the idea of “one” to the Ev is a stae of sameness, or not-different. This is seen in the trinty arguments when a verse like John 10:30 is invoked. Failure to see “one” as a unity in purpose, mind, and heart while being seperate is the common Ev roadblock, its unable to be comprehended…except through verse John 14:28.
While the Ev would accuse the Mornon of being polythristic i would correctly state that yes, many possible gods, but only worship a single God, Our Heavenly Father.
gundeck
you speak of Lev 19:11, but i refer to exodus. think hermeneutics, or “context”. also consider that not stealing is commanded elsewhere (ie. Lev 19:11). Also the 2 previous commandments where capital offenses (context) which would support kidnappin/slavery over theft of property (again context)
The traditional Jewish view of this commandment is against kidnaping/slavery (see Rashi), and supported by Albrecht Alt.
Also this same argument is similar across the denominations that debate thou shalt not “kill” vs “murder”.
Again the chinese telephone is a very real scenario that can be applied to more than 1%.
sub,
please answer this question:
isn’t it Jehovah/Jesus who gave the 10 commandments, one of which is
NO God before ME?
setfree
just to be facetious, yes one of which is to have no gods before Me (gods-plural). Some have also translated this as “No gods in hostility to Me”.
However, the important thing to remember here is that this complete comandment is where God establiches a covenant – He deliberately makes the statement preceeding this verse about His authority and how it was He that set the Hebrew free frm Egypt. More importantly, God does NOT establish monotheism, He does not say He is the Only God.
Actually it is at this time that the Ev should familiarize themself with the term
Monolatrism
Many have supported evidence that earl Israel was, in fact, monolatrist. The first commandment is one of many points of evidence.
The modern Ev has mostly disregarded the first 2 verses of the 1st commandment and basically made the 3rd verse the commandment. But a strong argument can be, and has been made that this first commandment actually hints more towards the existence of many gods than not.
Additionally the ancient Hebrew did not subscribe to the many “metaphorical” interpretations of this commandment as we see occur amongst the modern Pauline.
So, again History and a critical look at this issue of “Chinese telephone” is actually a real influence on the scripture, an influence that reinforces the actual apostasy Mormons refer to and one that Evs often perpetuate.
By the way which 10 do you consider? Exodus 10? Exodus 34? Deuteronomy 5?….and which translation?..
Well it’s good to see the creative Bible interpretation is alive and well in the cult known as Mormonism. That’s how these folks make their bones. What’s that old rock song with the lyrics that go something like, “bend me shape me anyway you want me”. That pretty much reflects the ignorant and in many cases down right deceitful spins the cults give to the Word of God.
Truth is definitely a stranger to Mormonism since it’s founded on a basis of larceny. Joseph Smith concealed his youthful occultic pursuits as a peepstone-gazer and treasure-digger. After introducing the doctrine of polygamy, he practiced it while denying that he was doing so. Joe was excellent at “progressive” truth as we can see from his ever changing stories of his first vision. By the time he got done the six inch bass he caught was three feet long and weighed thirty pounds.
Polygamy was of course “renounced” later but in typical Mormon deceitful fashion Joseph F. Smith continued on with it under cover (pun intended) and even solemnized such unions. Truth gets a little fuzzy sometimes without creative understanding.
And dare we forget how inspired and hearing from the Mormon god the prophets of the church were when they got hoodwinked by Mark Hofmann. The LDS leadership were involved in a deliberate cover-up as they stonewalled the investigation of the scam forged-documents debacle which these false prophets purchased.
But none of this matters you see because the LDS church is “true”. Now we must ask, “Define true”. There is Mormon “true” and the “true” the rest of the world functions under.
So if we Christians weren’t so dedicated to a real definition of “truth”, we could do some creative Mormon hocus pocus and come up with “creative truth”. I’ve interacted enough with Mormons out here that I can shift into Mormon “think” at a drop of a hat. The problem is, like most Christians, integrity means something to me.
falcon
nice attempt to substitute style for substance, with some practice you might actually convince yourself.
So what is “true”? Typically Pauline response, unable to actually take words and phrases for their meaning..always has to be something else, always has to be a conspiracy or a hiiden meaning or a behind-the-scenes….oh yes, and of course al of this must always be tied back to Joseph Smith and stigma of polygamy! The only one i ever see on this board obsessed with JS is falcon.
Unfortunately your diatribes speak to a different integrity, perhaps you should answer questions, not just say you have and toss insults, suppositions, and accusation, but hey i am sure that is just your “translation” of what the Gospel means. Maybe the misunderstanding is in phonetics…i mean, to you, Gospel probably sounds a lot like gossip.
In an article titled “Mormonism and The Question of Truth” by Latayne C. Scott (Christian Research Journal, Summer 92) the author (a former temple recommend holder)offers the following:
“The Mormon concept of, and approach to the subject of truth is RADICALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE BIBLE (my caps)in at least nine ways. A Mormon sees truth as (1)constantly changing,(2)as going, in culture and practice, far beyond written doctrine,(3)as determined by subjective feelings, and(4)as often divorced from its history. (5)The Mormon approach to truth is compromised by a heritage of deception as practiced by leaders from founder Joseph Smith to today’s Elder Paul Dunn. In addition, (6)truth to a Mormon is “layered” in the way that it is presented to prospective converts. and (7) the Church itself routinely edits both its own history and doctrine to make it seem consistent and palatable. In practice, therefore, (8)truth often yields to what the Church views as expedient. In the final analysis. (9)the Mormon concept of truth depends upon the character of its god, who as defined by LDS doctrine is constantly changing and himself ultimately human in nature.”
So when we Christians attempt to engage Mormons in a discussion of the Bible, we have to be mindful of the mind-set and thought processes of those caught in the tangle of deception known as Mormonism. In-a-word, as Christians we’re dealing with a whole different approach to truth and the culture of Christianity seeks to illuminate while that of Mormonism seeks to obfuscate, shade and hide what is true. It’s almost a type of mental pathology were reality becomes like “Alice in Wonderland”. Our frustration level can be dialed back significantly when we realize we’re dealing with folks whose mental processes and “understanding” come from a much different tradition and culture.
A good example of how Mormonism handles the “truth” can be found in the story of Elder Paul H. Dunn of the First quorum of the Seventy. The Elder Dunn, it was discovered had lied for years about having played baseball for the St. Louis Cardinals and being the only uninjured survivor of his thousand man combat group in WWII. Dunn was a most sought-after inspirational speaker for the LDS church. Elder Dunn was also a best-selling author of books and tapes. His stories served as inspiration for generations of LDS. He included dramatic, eyewitness accounts of his “career” as a professional athlete, miraculous rescues and of course divine protection (in his stories).
The problem was, of course, that none of it was completely true. Dunn admitted the fabrications and combinations of events and said that doing so was necessary to “illustrate points that would create interest.” This tendency to exaggerate and fabricate and sometime to outright lie is an inherited quality from the predecessors in Mormonism.
It’s instructive to observe how the LDS church deals with folks whose facts include “awkward or embarrassing detail”. BYU teacher Lynn Packer publicly revealed the discrepancies in Dunn’s stories. Dunn was given “emeritus” status due to “factors of age and health.” And then Dunn went traveling and speaking around the nation with young men on a baseball tour. His books and tapes continued to be available in the church-owned Deseret Book chain.
What happened to Packer who exposed the truth? He was warned not to publish his findings about Dunn’s stories. He published anyway and was terminated from his BYU teaching position. The reason; for violating church and university policies that prohibit public criticism of church leaders, even if the criticism is true.
That is the price one pays for maintaining integrity in an organization that’s primary goal is to keep the faithful living in a perpetual fairy tale state of mind.
(attribution to Latayne C. Scott)
I’m back. For all here, I found out the true meaning of hell: being in a hospital for 3 days after a major surgery.
I was thoroughly convinced (by my smithian brothers) that the Bible was of little value when compared to the ‘most correct book on earth’ the BOM while I was a member of their cult. I can almost see the Chinese whispers going on in my mind as smith ‘translated’ the plates, (most of the time without the plates being there).
His method was to look in a hat using a stone, and then call out a sentence to the scribe – have them repeat it, confirm (by warm fuzzy) that it was correct, and then have the scribe write it down. (this is true lather, rinse, repeat) With this method, one would assume there would be no margin of errors, but it came to pass that there is error after error in smiths book. And the scribe did not even repeat it to someone else, just wrote it down AS TOLD BY SMITH.
With no gold plates to compare it with, (no reformed Egyptian language except a piece of paper with “caractors” on it,) we are to use the same criteria that smith used, and accept the BOM by praying about it.
Well, if smith’s scribes could not even get it right, how are we to believe that it is the ‘most correct book on earth’? We have no basis of anything for comparison. Unlike the Bible, where events, locations, and archeology have been verified time after time, we come up with a big ZERO for the BOM.
My love affair with the Bible started when I read it after being freed from the bonds of smithism. It is altogether unique and holy. It is God’s ultimate truth, and gives us the answer to every question about life. Mostly though, if you read the Bible in spirit and truth you come up with one very crucial deduction.
The BOM (and smiths “revelations”) are not, and were not EVER needed. The Bible wins every time, the BOM is not even a contender.
If Mormons are going to attack the Holy Scriptures of the Bible one must ask – WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE??? I want to see ancient manuscripts that show Joseph Smith was correct with all his additions to the Bible in the Joseph Smith version.
All evidence points the other direction – the BOM is false, Joseph Smith’s additions to the Bible are false, and the Bible is true. It seems that for Mormons the assertion that many things have been removed from the Bible and that scripture is corrupted is enough. No evidence needed. “Joseph Smith said it and I follow him without questions.”
Falcon – I don’t think that all Mormons are confused about the nature of truth. I think your observations in the past that they must bend and twist in order to hold on to a belief system which is threatened by the preaching of the cross and forgiveness by grace through faith is more often the motivation. Mormons try to figure the .005% way this system could be true and ignore the 99% accuracy of the Bible in order to hold on to what they’ve committed themselves to (and their own perceived goodness). Staying where they are is easier than change. EVERYONE experiences that at some point when it comes to repenting of sin in our lives.
When I read through the Bible when my life was in utter crisis mode the message of the scriptures became real to me. God’s message of forgiveness shines through all the decay in this world and in my life.
grindael,
Good to have you back. I’ve been concerned, wondering if you came out of your surgery OK. I hate going under. Whenever I’ve had a procedure done I tell them to give me the least amount of the joy juice they have in the tube.
mobaby,
I don’t know if I follow your rationale. Of course, there isn’t going to be 100% of any group that will think in a prescribed way. I was thinking primarily about a form of thinking that I observe on a daily basis on MC. I find myself often coming away after reading such comments scratching my head and asking “What?” Frankly, I had the same experience dealing with the Amish.
Also, I base my comments on what I’ve read from those who have spent considerable time in the Mormon culture. They report some very distinctive forms of thinking. One such form is when Mormons add two plus two, come up with five and comment “therefore the church is true”. Also the observations of Walter Martin author of the Kingdom of the Cults play a part in my comments. Perhaps some of the exMormons here can comment further.
Some exMormons I’ve read talk about the process of “cognitive dissonance” or what Mormons have to do in order to make, what is obvious false and doesn’t fit, true and fit (the Mormon narrative). Another term could be “disconnect”. The basic premise of Mormonism is that the Mormon church is true. So everything has to fit into that premise. So when encountering information that runs contrary to the Mormon narrative, a Mormon must either deny the evidence or make it fit. That’s a distinctive form of thinking and way of making what is false, true.
We could say the same thing about Jehovah Witnesses. Andy Watson has spent considerable time in that world in the past several months and has some very interesting observations of that cult. One example is how the JWs reconcile that the Watchtower is true and God’s oracle on earth with the fact that they’ve made several “prophecies” that are documented and false.
Sub ~ “unable to actually take words and phrases for their meaning..always has to be something else” I couldn’t agree more, this is exactly why Mormons cannot and will not except the Bible, they have to add more to it and or change it.
“The only one i ever see on this board obsessed with JS is falcon.” You should try going to a LDS ward on Sunday, attend all three hours, it’s all about JS – hardly ever hear anything about Jesus.
Falcon, you are hitting on a touch subject of cognitive dissonance. Take this statement for example, “The personal experiences of the group members are subordinated to the “Truth” held by the group-apparently contrary experiences must be denied or re-interpreted to fit the doctrine of the group” (Lifton) When LDS members disagree, or find issue with a specific doctrine, it is common to here someone say Study and pray about it. That is until the holy ghost witnesses to you the Truth; which will be in line with Mormonism.
In addition,
“Consequently, past historical events are retrospectively altered, wholly rewritten, or ignored, to make them consistent with the doctrinal logic.” (Lifton) enough said!
Interestingly these words were not written about Mormonism, they were wrote about the depth of cult-ish behavior. So why does the LDS, JW, Moonies, all use the same approaches to their integration of people into their organizations? I bet if you where to ask any TBM, Moonie, or JW, if their organization is a cult, they would say no it is not. But then why do each one of these organizations implement all eight of Lifton’s examples? (Only One example was disused in this post)
Lastly, Lifton Says, (Milieu control) “When non-members are labeled as ignorant, unspiritual, satanic, etc., group members conclude that outsiders have nothing worthwhile to teach them” Mormon Apologists definition?
Grindael,
Good to see you’re up and feeling well.My wife
and I will be praying that you heal up fully.
Falcon,
What you mentioned about “cognitive dissonance”,
and “disconnect”, seems to be a thread that runs
through groups that have a unhealthy submission
to a Prophet that alone speaks for God to mankind.
You mentioned Jehovah’s Witnesses.[my wife is a
ex-JW] They,re authoratative claims are similar
to LDS.They’ve changed doctrines so many times,
each time it is called “adjustments” or the term,
“new light”. and a scripture is always used to
justify the change! Their favorite is Prov.4:18.
Jehovah’s prophet, the Gov. Body of JW’s, is
never questioned over these changes, many of which
contradict the former “truth”.Yet this prophet
uses the word,”reliable” to advertise it’s record
of Bible teachings etc.How do sincere people fall
for this? The answer is that once a person has
been indoctrinated to believe that he or she needs
a Prophet to guide them, that God uses this
prophet alone to speak to mankind today, that to
please God they must submit to His prophet, then
anything they receive from this prophet is bene-
ficial to them.The Watchtower Society is Jehovah’s
Organization: ” He does not impart His holy spirit
and an understanding and appreciation of His Word
apart from His visible organization.” [W.T.mag.
7-1-1965, p.391 ].
Also, the Watchtower Society of JW’s is God’s
“channel of communication”. So we see this claim:
“Unless we are in touch with this channel of
communication that God is using,we will not
progress along the road to life, no matter how
much Bible reading we do.” [W.T.mag.12-1-1981,p27]
So Falcon and others keep proclaiming JESUS as
living Lord, our mediator, our Savior and our
Prophet.
subgenius,
My reference was to Exodus 20:15.
There are a couple of problems, first you are quoting 11th century AD Rabbinic tradition and even then there was disagreement, for instance there was belief that this also referred to theft of non material objects such as knowledge. Second, the word “ganab (gā∙nǎḇ)” lacks a specific object in Exodus 20:15 so to limit it to a particular type of theft is not called for by the text (remember context). Third, when you see a total lack of any penalties covered in Exodus 20 there is nothing in the context of this passage to cause legal penalties to be determinative of the meaning.
Fourth and most important is the language used in the New Testament for this passage. In Matt 19:18 the Greek word “kleptō” is used when Jesus says “Thou shalt not steal”. Christ should be our best commentator on revelation, not an 11th century Rabi. This is also the same word used in the Septuagint/LXX Exodus 20:15. There is a perfectly good Greek word for kidnap “plagion” we do not see this word used in the Septuagint/LXX version of Exodus 20:15 or the New Testament.
Oh Boy!, the original point of this thread was about the ‘integrity’ of different and varied translations of the Bible. All the comments i have seen from LDS seem to be contrary to the article above – that is to say the Mormon position is that the Holy Scriptures are as valid as their translation. Which was assumed by the article to be an across the board 99% accurate.
This extent of this accuracy has been refuted, but this does not detract from the scriptures…just some translations. Many of my own posts were not LDS originated, they are common scholarly points, mainly pop-Christian and Jewish.
No Mormon post seem to be “critical” of the scriptures, yet that is the way the Ev wants to detour the discussion. Typical Pauline tactic, false accusations followed by the inevitable “Joseph Smith” blather.
this notion of 100% for translation, prophecy, etc…is way off the mark for this debate.
But i would be willing to entertain the relative success rates of prophets.
falcon
lather…rinse…repeat
Falcon,
I generally agree with your assessment. I think I may be just describing the same phenomena in a different way. I think that Mormon’s don’t necessarily have a different definition of truth, rather they contort their thinking so as to find some possibility of truth and latch on to that together with their personal internal subjective testimony. The same with the JWs – they redefine the prophecies so that they are “true” in some sense after the fact. (However, cognitive dissonance is not uncommon though and can be seen in Christians as well – myself included sometimes.) But when something can be seen plainly to be untrue, generally I think Mormons and JW try to find some way it could possibly be true. Thus, when the Bible contradicts, they discount the Bible and apply strict standards for truth, while at the same time having no standards (other than personal subjective testimony) for the BOM. One common tool to keep from engaging the truth is to squelch all dissent as can be seen from the sad story you retold of the lying Mormon leader and his inspirational stories. My point is they may not have different definitions for truth, it is just that they selectively apply those standards. I remember on the i love mormons blog where the writer posted an article dealing with a letter Joseph Smith allegedly wrote on who should lead after him (with Strang I think being the one who supposedly received this letter). The Mormons were all over it and all the ways it could be shown to be false. Then the author stepped in and said “what kind of tests for truth are you applying here?” I thought it was a great way to illustrate that Mormons understand how to “test all things” they just refuse to do it with Joseph Smith and the BOM. To do so would threaten their beliefs. Also, to open up to the possibility of salvation/eternal life by grace through faith threatens their beliefs and must be destroyed.
without invoking any birds of prey, here is how some Ev would “correctly translate” John 14:28, because surely the way it is written now is disagreeable.
“You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to Myself, for Myself is greater than I. ”
gundeck
so good to see that you agree, you even point out the controversy of my references.
But the context of capital offenses for “theft” is fairly clear. The Septuagint has already been mentioned by me above, proves nothing (klepto may not have been in autograph and Hebrew is in conflict)…the point is there are points of contention and influence due to “translation”, and these points are greater than 1%, so glad you agree.
All, especially those who question the transmission of the biblical text and its translation, I would like to suggest an inexpensive resource related to this thread.
New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip W. Comfort. The introduction explains the basics of textual criticism, common forms of copying errors, methods used for determining the preferred reading, and gives a critique of the major manuscript families. The compilation explains the various major textual variants, includes their effect on all major Bible translations, and shows major translation differences. For about $35.00 this is a resource that is well worth the investment. If that is out of your budget the Netbible (the New English Translation online) has much of the same information, although condensed, and it is FREE.
What I find interesting about most Bibles, and the work mentioned above, is the honesty with which the variants are dealt with. There is no hiding of the truth about known variants and their impact on the meaning of different translations. It is all laid out for the reader to see and make their own conclusions. Do we see this with LDS church texts? I’m not as well versed in LDS church documents as many here, but my guess is: NO.
Kevin,
I agree that some smithians will say “go and pray about it” but the first response is usually are you keeping the word of wisdom, (or some other rule in the cult). Any question of authority is usually answered with some kind of attack on the person doing the questioning. (Then they go behind the persons back and start contacting relatives to see if the person has been talking to anyone else, who they have spoken to/read, etc.) Stop the “infection.”
This is the normal course of business for any cult because the leader is god to his people and how dare you question him?
That is the major reason for the smithians stand on the Bible, to denigrate it as being ‘just barely’ from God, enough to point you in the right direction, and if you listen to their “take” on the scriptures, and add their revelations to it, you will be all right. The JW’s were not subtle in this, they retranslated the Bible to suit their needs. I think I still have a copy of the “green dragon” around here somewhere…
David Koresh was a modern day expert at this. Only HE had the answers to the 7 seals of Revelation, and only through his teachings could you be saved. That is why it keeps coming back to smith and always will.
smith actually taught at one time that God the Father was a spirit, the son had a body and the HG was the mind of God. In 1843, he then lied saying he had always taught the plurality of gods.
It is classic cult all the way, even though the smithians have tried to water it down and make it pretty over the years.
All you get from smithians about bible personages is a sense that they were somehow inferior – (Poor Paul is still being persecuted). smith even claimed to have met him saying he had a whiney voice.
Their rejection of the Bible only makes me cherish it more, and the fantastic way it has come down into our hands. God is great, no doubt about it.
It seems that this discussion is void of the understanding of dogma, doctrine, and opinion. Some things are absolutely necessary to believe in order to be called a Christian; some things are necessary to believe in order to belong to a certain denomination; and, some things just don’t matter with regard to salvation. That’s the big thing being being forgotten in this matter. What is necessary for salvation? And, does the Bible contain all the knowlege necessary to understand and accept the salvation offered by Jesus Christ? Do the teachings of JS add anything that is absolutely necessary for man to be saved in the kingdom of Heaven? The understanding of God’s character is necessary to the discussion, because a claim that the Bible does not contain all necessary truth for salvation runs into the problem of portraying God as unable to protect His Word from humanity, as if humanity has the power to render the Spirit-breathed biblical text unauthoritative because of “precious truths” that have been taken away. Such a premise is preposterous. But, that’s how Mormonism operates: on fallacious premises. Then, the next tactic is to appeal to the personal revelation of the Holy Spirit that contradicts what He has already revealed in and through the biblical text. The Mormon cannot even fathom that he/she just might be following a false spirit, which can be detected with an appeal to the Bible. The Bible may not be perfect, but the salvation message rings clear and strong despite the fact that God has chosen to use a broken humanity to convey His will for us.
Blessings…
liv4jc,
Thanks for the resources.
There are no documents to lay out for the BOM. There is no historical evidence supporting it – no textual fragments, no ancient scrolls, no engravings with portions, nothing. ZIP, ZERO, NADA. Unless you count the portions lifted from the King James Bible…
For the Book of Abraham, some LDS may lay out the real meaning of the Facsimiles and try to get the true meaning behind the Egyptian scrolls that can be proven to be the source for the BA, but if a Mormon were to write a scholarly work laying this all out, my guess would be they would not be Mormon for long as it would not be faith promoting.
subgenius,
Please don’t put words in my mouth by rudely claiming I agree with you when you know I do not. You claim that “the Hebrew and greek origin of the word is really a reference to kidnap” and I believe this is false.
Let me give you a little personal advice, I know that some people think this is cute little trick and a way to score points but it is generally the first sign of a lost argument. I have refrained from making personal attacks and making dings at your less than convincing argument and have taken the time to respond in a forthright manner. Please return the favor.
I don’t see the Hebrew in conflict, I see you taking an interpretation and margin notes (masorah) and trying to canonize them.
There is no reference to any capitol punishment in Exodus 20. There is not a single human imposed penalty in Ex 20, the only penalty you see in in Ex 20:5, the “visiting the iniquity” and this is God not man dispensing justice. It is eisegesis to read punishment into the context, it simply is not present. Without the supposed connection to capitol crimes your kidnapping position falls apart.
On top of punishment being missing from Ex 20:15 an object is also missing to make this command more restrictive. When a prohibition against kidnapping is clear as we see in Deut 24:7 the command against stealing has a particular and closely defined object.
This is not so much a transmission or translation issue as it is an interpretation issue. You really are conflating a medieval rabbinic tradition with biblical translation. The text in the Hebrew (גָּנַב (gā∙nǎḇ)) is clear, the text in the Septugint/LXX (kleptō [klepto /klep·to/]) is clear, the text in the New Testament (kleptō (kleptō)) is clear.
Being from a religion that has excluded itself from historic Christianity I am sure you don’t care but we also see the same language used by Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, and other early Church fathers.
jackg
you make a good argument, very good indeed. However the Ev can not have it both ways. The Ev insists on throwing the baby out with the bath water on the BoM, yet when the Ev doctrine is simply “examined” – foul is cried, issues are distracted, facts distorted and the ever reliable “its beside the point” is excalimed.
i would be interested in your take on the many “breathed texts” which have been knowingly omitted from the Bible. Every issue i address is supported by either the OT or NT and those are all i reference here. This is because the modern day Pauline has severed the direct line to God. They personally have “cut-off” all communication. Yet they can not explain why there is so much said after verse John 19:30
But hey these are the same Paulines that insist upon God being schizophrenic in spite of John 14:28.
You see the Ev can never reconcile that they worship either, at least, 2 gods (Our Heavenly Father and Jesus), or that they may be misguided by claiming that Jesus has more clout than God…so, they insist that both of them are the same (actually they enjoy the bargain of 3 for 1), even though the text of the Bible clearly defines them as two seperate beings several ways and in several places….again even by JC’s own words in John 14:28. Its is simple “greater” is grammatically a comparative term, which occurs between 2 seperate ‘things’. Merely one of a plethora of examples which goes against the Pauline marching orders meant to buttress their own “translation”.
liv4jc
at last honesty from the Ev front….when it comes to matters of Mormonism most Ev actually are just “guessing”
gundeck
if it is respect you seek then it will be asked of you. First note that i did not say anything about “punishment”. My point, which is actually a Hebrew point, is that the 2 commandments preceeding the “steal” commandment are in-an-of-themselves capital offenses (“offenses” in case you missed it). So the point is that why would there be two blatant capital offenses mentioned then followed by a minor offense in context? which sounds more relevant to the Hebrew people at the time? People who were in bondage in Egypt…are they worried about personal property or are they more concerned with the notion of slavery?
seriously, you respond with arrogance, claiming the weakness of an argument when you present none of your own,,,you are here trying to argue semantics and the subject is better than that.
I sugeest you heed your own “personal” advice, i seem to have no use for your smug suggestions.
The Bible is not perfect. That’s the result of God working through a broken humanity. The Bible, however, is inerrant with regard to what is called “heilsgeschichte,” or “salvation history.” If a man or woman wants to know how to be saved, the Bible is not lacking in providing this information. That’s the crux of the matter, because JS claims that the Bible does not contain everything necessary for salvation. But, then, we will only get into a debate regarding the Mormon definition of “salvation” and the definition offered by Christians as revealed in the Bible.
It’s common for the authority of the Bible to be challenged by any group who wants to excuse their teachings or behaviors. It is inherent for us (sin nature) to seek autonomy and to establish rules for ourselves. The Bible teachings go against this mindset and is, therefore, attacked as imperfect and unable to guide us. This is usually where one’s “personal experience” is used as the measuring stick to dictate our thinking and beliefs. I used to buy into the propaganda that espoused a low view of God’s Word and a low view of God Himself. But, when I took off the filter of the LDS 8th AOF I was able to see what God was revealing to me through His inerrant Word.
As for the Trinity, I will be the first to admit that it is difficult for me to wrap my brain around it, just as it is to wrap my brain around the Creation story. I am limited where God is unlimited, so how can I expect to understand the mystery that does surround God (which is the result of a high view of God)in the things I must accept by faith? I don’t know how the Trinity works, but I have faith in God who reveals Himself in three persons. C.S. Lewis said: “In God’s dimension, so to speak, you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that…” (Mere Christianity,162). And I can’t…but I believe!
Blessings…
This is all pretty simple, acutally. The Bible is true, the BoM is not. The Bible leads us to eternal life, the BoM leads no where expect to separation from God for eternity. Christians scholars have poured over the Bible for centuries in pursuit of the most accurate rendering of God’s Word. While we claim inerrancy for the original autographs, we fully acknowledge any errors in transmission that occur in copies. We know that any errors in transmission are miniscule and don’t effect in any way the basic doctrines of the Christian faith.
Christians work hard to get it right, to make sure the Scriptures we follow are the best available in regards to copies of the original.
Part 1
The only communication that has been “cut-off” is by the Mormons who have decided to entrust their souls into the story of a 14 year-old farm boys misguided adventures in the woods of upstate in New York and have given themselves over to a false spirit which deceives and blinds them. By not accepting what God has already said to be truth (John 17:17) in His holy Scriptures, the Bible, they have subjected themselves in allowing a “strong delusion” to be given them by believing a lie (2 Thes 2:10-11).
How does that happen? Doing an unbiblical thing like praying over and over about a book to find out if it’s true and waiting for a warm feeling to overtake them as confirmation. James 1:5 does not support this. Proverbs 28:26, Jeremiah 17:9 and Proverbs 14:12 should be their guide instead of Moroni 10:3-5. If Mormons would engage in serious Bible study, then they could be taken seriously by the outside world. This is not possible because their leaders have no training in the ancient languages and won’t go outside of BYU to learn anything related to the Bible.
The First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve know a lot about banking, finance, science, law, medicine, business and flying commercial jets (Uchtdorf), but know nothing about textual criticism, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew, translation, etc. If they did, then they would have the guts to ditch the KJV which they slam and use their title of “seer and translator” and put out their own Bible after reading the ancient languages of the Bible and thus giving the supposed “most correct book on earth” (the LDS Bible) that would go along with the claimed BoM (not hardly correct).
The JW’s had the guts to do it and they have taken a hit since 1950. The LDS Church couldn’t bear the fallout that would take place and the world would forever ignore them, as they should more than they do, as a masquerade of historical, orthodox Christianity.
Part 2
With that said, let’s now rid ourselves of Mormon claims of “schizophrenia” and kindergarten scholastics and approach the Bible with sound exegesis of the Scriptures. It doesn’t take advanced schooling at a Christian seminary to understand the context of John 19:30.
I have plenty of reasons why God is still communicating to His people today and it has nothing to do with John 19:30. I will cite John 16:13. The real Holy Spirit of the Bible speaks to me. The communication with the Almighty is wide open. Once again, Mormons should do some Scripture study outside of the LDS “firesides” and quit repeating what has been told to them by BYU professors who have no LDS Church authority.
John 19:30 is talking about the COMPLETED redemptive work of Christ – not God now being silenced. This coincides with Hebrews 9:12, 28 where Christ died ONCE for the sins of man. What is the context of John 19:30 and the scene: Christ on the cross and it’s crucifixion time. He is taking our place for our sin debt (substitutionary atonement). Our Mormon friends need to a better job of finding verses to present the goofy canard of thinking that we have somehow silenced Almighty God. Nothing could be further than the truth! Am I about to tell an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent Being that He now has to be quiet and not talk? I’m not that crazy or bold!
I would like to ask our Mormon friends what the new revelation was that came forth at last conference just two weeks ago? What does the Mormon god have to say to the world that is in such chaos? What…nothing? When was the last section of the D&C? The Mormon god couldn’t shut his mouth when Smith was playing prophet. Somehow after Smith got filled full of lead at Carthage Jail the Mormon god drew silent. Mormons have “modern revelation”. Okay, I wait every 6 months for that modern revelation when I read the Conference Reports and every week when I read the LDS Church News that comes in my mailbox – nothing.
Part 3
The Mormons are in good company when they throw John 14:28. With whom you might ask? The people that they despise very much – the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If Mormons only knew how much their beliefs and religious structure followed that of the Watchtower they would be shocked – maybe. The commonality is amazing the more I involve myself in the study and research of the Watchtower and speak with them weekly. Much of the language is the same especially the phrase “the truth”.
Is the Apostle John schizophrenic here in John 14:28? Has John “lost his marbles”? Is what he said in John 14:28 contradictory to what he said elsewhere under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost? Not in the least! For Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses that don’t seriously study the Bible and use sound study principles and exegesis to that, then yes, they will “fall off the wagon” into the land of the confusion and heresy. Arius taught that Jesus was not equal to the Father and was a created being and that the Father was better in nature. He was a heretic for that belief. Mormonism and the Watchtower are nothing more than glorified, modern forms of Arius’ teachings today.
Was the Father “greater” than Jesus? Yes, but not like the Mormons think. The word “greater” in the Greek is the word MEIZON which always refers to POSITION. The Father was in a greater position than Jesus at that time in OFFICE – not NATURE. Jesus claimed equality with God in essence and nature (John 5:18; 10:30). The Father was in a greater position because the Son had “took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men” (Phil 2:6). He was still God by nature because He was in “the form of God” (Phil 2:6. Christ didn’t have to rob what was already His – equality with God. Jesus humbled himself to die like a man. He had taken on the nature of man in addition to his continued nature of God. Jesus didn’t empty himself out of His deity. Jesus is fully man and fully God and will be forever.
Part 4
Jesus was made lower than the angels for the suffering of death (Hebrews 2:9). The question is now, was Jesus Christ BETTER than the angels? That is the key word when properly thinking about John 14:28. Was the Father in a GREATER position than the Son when the Son took on the nature of man to suffer a humiliating death on the cross? Yes! However, the Father was not BETTER than the Son. How can that be?
Look at Hebrews 1:4. The word BETTER in the Greek is the word KREITTON. This always refers to NATURE. Jesus was made lower in POSITION than the angels for the suffering of death (Hebrews 2:9), but Jesus was BETTER than the angels in nature (Hebrews 1:4) because Jesus made the angels (Col 1:16). The Father was not BETTER than the Son because they were and are one in nature. If the Father was BETTER than the Son, He would not have told the angels to worship the Son in Hebrews 1:6 nor would the Father call the Son “God” in Hebrews 1:8.
For example, I am a deacon at my church. If I were to say that the pastor is greater than I am, then that would be a correct statement because in position and by office he is greater because he is the pastor and I am just a deacon. However, if one were to ask the pastor, “Are you better than Andy Watson?”, then the pastor would say, “Absolutely not!” The reason is that in nature and essence the two of us are equal – sin nature and man completely. President Obama is greater than all Americans because he is the President of the U.S. in office. However, he is not better than any American because he is still a man and nothing more in nature like all of mankind in the sight of Almighty God.
Thanks for reading. It’s good to be with you again.
nobleberean@cox.net
grindael wrote
Its good to see you back.
Thanks Andy,
The reason the SLC Mormon church’s prophet is quiet is because he can’t match Joseph Smith for pure audacity. First of all Smith was a two-bit con man but he was a great snake oil salesman. That is, he was of very low character but had the ability to open his mouth and get some people to believe what he said. It all started to come unraveled in Nauvoo and he ended up getting himself shot.
The Mormon prophets are running on empty with nothing to offer but a well oiled cult that draws enough money from the 30% of the membership that actually practices the religion. As long as they can keep them dumb and happy, believing the myth, they can go right on with their ego trip.
I googled “stereotypical Mormon thinking” and came across this; it’s worth the read.
http://www.exmormon.org/whylft44.htm
Someone brought up the quote saying that we LDS believe that many plain and precious truths have been left out of the Bible. Besides translation/interpretation errors there is also the process of selection of the Bible contents. From what I understand the Bible canon (mainly NT) started taking its current form in the 200’s AD or slightly earlier. We have many references in the Bible to books and epistles that we cannot find within the current canon. Nor can we find outside the canon because they have been lost. But there were 12 Apostles in Jesus’ time and just after. Yet we only have a ‘gospel’ from 3 of them. Then we have many letters from Paul but only a couple from 2 or 3 of the other Apostles. I would hazard a guess that each Apostle wrote at least one letter and their testimony (gospel) of Jesus and His life. But where are all of these missing books and epistles as well as writings from the other Apostles? If they had more than what is in the current canon, who chose what went in the Bible? What was their criteria for what went in and what was omitted?
What would anyone here do if we found 12 epistles from the 12 Apostles that were verifiable and original MSS that taught about baptism for the dead and how it is essential for the salvation of our ancestors? And if they went on to mention about an endowment ceremony? And that this is what they were taught by Jesus (except Paul and Matthias)? Would you all believe in those practices and do them or would you be skeptical? the Bible says nothing for or against baptism for the dead so don’t say that you would compare it to the Bible with those verses. It in no way means that the LDS church is true, just that we were correct in one thing. Yes – big hypothetical but is a possibility.
One thing that really concerns me about the Mormon approach to the Bible and Historic Christianity is its cultivation of cynicism.
I don’t have a problem with criticism where it is warranted and substantiated. Also, my reading of the Bible encourages a questioning mind that “wrestles” with God (see Gen 32:22-31, or compare Mary’s reaction to her “divine” visitor with Eve’s in Gen 3:1-6 and Luke 1:26-38 – which woman actually questioned the messenger?).
However, what Mormonism promotes is something else; it basically poo-poos everything outside the Mormon “church” so that followers are isolated and ushered into total dependency on the church.
This wouldn’t be so bad, except the Mormon “church” is constantly reinventing itself. All the while it claims to know the “truth”, but today’s truth is very different from the truth of tomorrow or yesterday. Not even their holy scriptures (BoM, in particular) are immune from revision.
I suspect that adult Mormons who have been around a while know this. So, how do they live with it?
I wonder if they rationalize it by saying that as the One True Church (theirs) cannot sustain any consistency or integrity or coherent expressions of faith, neither can any religion or scripture (which are all inferior to theirs).
As they believe that their “church” is the only one that God is involved with, they must conclude that God likes confusing the heck out of his flock, and He hates explaining Himself in coherent terms.
So, they may as well stay where they are.
This mind-set, if true, is immeasurably damaging to a person’s understanding of the Christian Gospel.
The Christian Gospel says that God was incarnate in Christ so that we could know Him (John 1:18). The Bible records how this happened.
The Mormon “gospel” says that you can’t know anything at all, because you can’t trust anything outside the Mormon Church and what happens inside is kept secret anyway, even between believers. Cynical acquiescence prevails!
Oops, I messed up with the bold text thing. Sorry.
Does the truth ever change?
No – Hebrews 13:8.
Ralph,
Why do you assume that the job of the 12 Apostles was to write letters?
Why do you assume that Paul preached a different Gospel than Jesus?
Your “church” might operate that way, with different “prophets” advancing different “opinions”, but you should not tar the Church of Jesus Christ of the First Century Christians with the same brush.
We have what they taught – it has been preserved in the Bible. We don’t have your fantastical, speculative “other” writings.
So what if (for sake of argument) the Bible is incomplete. When you say its the Word of God (8AOF), you should be careful to make sure that what you teach aligns with it, before exploring the realm of the unknown.
Why do you continue to ignore what you can see, in order to sustain your faith in what you can’t see?
The “what if strategy” is pointless because, simply, it is not what happened. The Bible is what happened. Grow up and deal with it. Christians believe that God made it happen that way for a reason. Find out what that reason was.
The LDS argument is nothing more than a ruse to introduce doubt in the Christian mind, so that the “Mormon solution” can be tossed out like a life-line. However, this life-line is less of a buoyancy aid, and more of a ball and chain.
One thing that should be emphasized here, and I believe Andy may have touched on it, no where in the Bible are we told to pray about it to see if it’s true. That’s because as the Word of God it is true. The Bible doesn’t need our endorsement to confirm its truth. God revealed His truth through the writers of what came to be known as the Bible. It’s a collection of 66 separate books that attests to God’s revelation in Jesus Christ. Jesus is the revealed Word. It’s through Him that our salvation is assured.
Can Mormonism be found in the Bible? No! In fact Mormons have had to invent conspiracy theories to account for that one glaring fact. And on what do Mormons place their hopes? On Joseph Smith’s claimed visitations from all sorts of spirit beings. That’s it! Was Smith telling the truth? Well take a look at his life story and see if it’s consistent with someone who was a truth teller.
While Christian’s seek the truth regarding their faith, Mormons seek to hide the truth about Smith and the history of his church. When faith is based on visions someone has claimed to have and when those visions run contrary to God’s revealed Word, there’s trouble brewing. So Mormons have to put their faith in Joseph Smith a guy who’s life story reveals that he wouldn’t know the truth if it bit him.
Knowing Jesus leads to eternal life. What does it mean to “know” Him? It means having a proper understanding of who He is and what He did for us through His death on the Cross. Knowing a counterfeit Jesus will not result in eternal life.
Ralph,
How about this scenario – the missing books of the Bible teach about men living on the moon, (that has to be why there are so many sightings, right?) and smith and young taught it too, – they just hide themselves from everyone. Hey, I bet you could get all of those folks to pray about it and they would get right on board with it.
Or this, that the early Christians used the Temple of Athena to do baptisms for the dead, and the endowment but unfortunately they all had to kill themselves to atone for sins they committed that couln’t be forgiven by Jesus Christ. How do you know that these are not what is in those ‘missing books’? Your argument is amusing.
How do we Christians know? Same as we know that smiths heretical and blasphemous teachings are not there. Because I believe that God protected his word. mormons have a great problem with the Bible. They see the glass HALF-EMPTY, while we CHRISTIANS see it HALF-FULL. Smiple as that.
The only schizophrenic I see and have ever seen is smith. He teaches God is a Spirit and Jesus has a body and the HG is the mind of god and then a few years later when he could not keep it in his pants & needed a convenient god-doctrine to marry all those young girls (adultry is SO inconvenient!) (how Koresh-like) invents the plurality of gods doctrine and the endowment to legitimize his lecherous behaviour.
If John were here, he would tell us to do what He told our early brethern to do with the Gnostics (which smithians LOVE to use to parallel smith’s teachings – shades of the devil appearing as an angel of light!) – REJECT THEM UTTERLY!
But hey, if you want to wait on the roof for the moon-people – I bet you’ll have a lot of company.
subgenius,
A capitol “offenses” requires an appropriate punishment, there is nothing in Exodus 20 that merits a distinction by a perceived notion of the seriousness of a crime. I don’t see anything to make us believe that theft is only a “minor offense”. To steal from the tabernacle was a capitol offense as were other forms of theft. Neither bearing false witness or coveting are “capitol offenses” both follow Ex 20:15. No matter how you break it down it is eisegesis to try to classify theft out of Ex 20.
As I understand it you claim “the Hebrew and greek origin of the word is really a reference to kidnap”. To support this you offer medieval rabbinic masorah and tradition. I pointed out that the Hebrew or Greek words in Ex 20:15 could refer to kidnapping as in Deut 24:7 but that without a particular object there is no reason to make such a limited interpretation. We also have New Testament witness, other rabbinic interpretation, and early Christian writing on the subject that all go against limiting Ex 20:15 to kidnapping.
Your question “People who were in bondage in Egypt…are they worried about personal property or are they more concerned with the notion of slavery?” is interesting but misses the linguistic point, there is no object in Exodus 20:15 to define a type of theft. There is an object in Deut 24:7 but this limits and clarifies kidnapping to “brethren of the children of Israel”. We also have substantial Old Testament writing regulating how national Israel was to treat slaves (Ex 20:10; 21:2-11, 20-21, 26-27, 32; 22:1-3; 23:12; Lev 19:20-22; 25:39-55; Deut 5:14; 15:12-18; 21:10-14; 23:15-16; 24:7). Of particular interest to your argument is Deut 21:10-14.
You accuse me of semantics and I plead guilty, we need to study the meaning of the words of the Bible in their context. You are also correct that I think your argument is weak, but this is only because you overstated your case and have conflated interpretation, transmission, and translation.
So where did our pal Joey get his “truth”. Well he said he had visitations by spirit beings, all sort of them, a virtual plethora of spirits revealed themselves to him. We know Joe the occultist was into second sight vision which basically means you see something in your imagination on the one hand or you use some sort of medium to attempt to peer into the spirit world. Joe used his magic rock to catch a glimpse of the unseen. He was real famous, during his treasure hunting days, for finding excuses for why the treasure couldn’t be found. Someone spoke out of turn or the circle was the wrong size. When he started his religious scam he could always blame others for not having enough faith.
Joe’s influences were many, one being a guy name Swedenborg. Joe picked up the “truth” about the Celestial Kingdom from him. Check out a guy by the name of Jacob Cochran, a Joe contemporary who was into some interesting relationship ideas. Of course we know that Joe obtained much revealed “truth” from the Free Masons.
So he mixed in a little Bible and a little revivalism with all of the other borrowed ideas and with a lot of moxie proclaimed a new religion. And as our Mormon friends know, you can’t seek to “understand” Joseph Smith, you have to “feel” Joseph Smith. A fine formula for determining the truth.
Andy
your, no matter its eloquence, speaks to the point of this debate. It seems that you “translated” my post in the manner that most Ev do – to how it may suit you. You see I placed a call in Israel and it was answered in Bejiing. (you presume to “know” the Mormon view of “greater” in the verse but I find that irrelevant to the context this verse was being used. Then as we return to the argument of semantics I discover your reliance on the Greek, presumably from Alexander’s library?
The point was how the Ev mistakenly views the Godhead.
Again, here is a loss in translation and is may have only spanned one day let alone what happens over centuries. Look into Hebrew Hermeneutics so that things won’t always be “all greek to” you.
Grindael, Falcon, Andy, Martin, liv4jc, setfree – I love you guys – you say the things I think all the time. I wonder when someone is going to answer Grindael’s question. God is a Spirit, oops need to change that, now he has a body as tangible as man, flesh and blood, then someone read the Bible I guess and now say he has a “glorified body.” You cannot change the nature of God.
I asked Ralphie, two questions and he pulled the ole trump card on me, stating he had a witness of the Holy Ghost, that I believed the words of Satan. The 2 questions (1) Is Heavenly Father the God of this World? and (2) Why do you believe the words of Satan over the word of God Gen 3: 1-5? For the benefit of any Mormons who care to check, Jesus described Satan clearly, John 8: 44, “Ye are of your father the devil and 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.” When Jesus was tempted by Satan, he did not debate Satan….He quoted the Word of God, saying “It is written three times.”
But the LDS believe the “father of lies” and think is a good thing.
I have my own trump cards to play from my membership in the Mormon Church. My sister named her first son, no kidding, Moroni. Top that one Ralphie or my friend Sub. Also I have a relative that obeyed the dictates of the Prophet – BY – himself. To steal a line from Al Gore: “An Inconvenient Truth about the Mormon Church is the Mountain Meadows Massacre. John Clark was a participant and he is a part of my family tree.
Disgusting as it is, it’s a fact. I will admit the Prophet Joseph Smith did tell truth once. He said he was the Author and Proprietor of the original Book of Mormon.
Grindael: I hope you are feeling better soon, Take care guys, Larry
To piggy-back a little on what Larry said, I’ve asked myself why Mormons defend the BoM with great vigor boardering on fanaticism and at the same time attack the Bible or are somewhat dismissive of it? Well what spiritual entity does that serve? It certainly doesn’t serve the God of the Bible. And isn’t it curious that the Bible has to be declared in error in order to make Mormonism work.
In fact Joseph Smith invented his own god (after initially acknowledging God), his own scripture, his own jesus and spirit and finally his own plan of salvation. At the same time he treated himself to the sexual favors of married women and at least one adolescent girl and in the process invented his own “marriage”.
This guy, Smith, gave himself over early in life to the occult and found no need for God after a time making himself a future god. I’ve always said that with an internet connection and fifteen minutes any rational person can debunk Mormonism. In fact just hearing the story and most folks will conclude that this is a delusion beyond ordinary reason.
And what do Mormons cling to? They had a feeling and that means that god spoke to them as to the truth of the BoM…..which is kind of interesting since this tome contradicts current Mormon teaching on the nature of God and original Mormon doctrine.
Is it really that difficult to figure this scam out?
falcon -
Unfortunately like any other cult, those in power (especially those that have had power handed down through generations) have convinced themselves that they have the truth and fanatically believe the lies they have had handed down to them.
The smithian church has now taken on a life of its own, and I truly believe that they are 100% convinced that it is the truth and that the ends justify the means and that they must perpetuate the cult by any means.
On some level they think rationally, but the original smithians were brianwashed so long ago they are stuck in the same loop and won’t give it up. There is too much to lose now – all that tradition and history.
But no matter how much good works they do in the world – it all boils down to smith. Was THIS man a prophet? It is the magik bullet theory times a million. What has hurt the smithians, and will continue to do so, it the outside knowledge of the church (how they hate Fawn Brodie & the Tanners!) & tried to shut them down.
Your internet comment is key, because little by little more knowledge gets to a wider base, and as it does, the smithians get more and more desperate in their defense tactics. This will continue until all use the same tools as we do, and check into what the missionaries tell them at the time or soon after that initial visit.
I will tell you with all confidence that the smithian church will fail, as more and more the members are enlightened to the true nature of what they worship & who gave them the parameters of it. You will see no grand world conversion, not on the scale of real christianity (2 billion and growing) and a decline of its base.
Hopefully, the fanatics like those who post here will not take too many innocents down with them.
Thanks to all for the uplifting comments, I am overcome by the goodness of God and what he has done for me in my life. I hope ALL come to know the REAL Jesus and what a blessing HE can be in YOUR life.
This has been stuck in my mind lately, so here it comes.
There is a Mormon song by Janice Kapp Perry, I believe. It goes:
“What do you think you’ve got, a heart of glass, that will shatter right in half any time a shadow of a doubt goes through your mind?
You’ve got to know that some things are sure, and you can search for something more, but still you’ll find, nothing else will stand the test of time…
ALL OF YOUR ANSWERS ARE WAITING WITHIN, if you think back a moment you’ll FEEL it again…
Cast your mind back to the hour you first believed,
you’ll find the witness that you need
when a voice like the wind found your heart and entered in
you FELT the love of God revealed
WHAT GREATER WITNESS DO YOU NEED?”
Ok, I personally sang this song with a group a few times in church etc, and of course, we all thought it was terrific.
But I think the wording says a lot don’t you?
Mormons DO question, and they DO wonder, but they are absolutely taught to believe in that emotion they had that one time, and just look at that again, and TRUST THEMSELVES… the truth is INSIDE THEM
So again, to even get a Mormon to think that the Bible might be true is to try to get one to question the validity of THEMSELVES
It’s so dang sad, all of it.
Guys, God has a truth, and if you are starting to doubt, you just have to start opening your eyes and looking again, cuz He has left ample proof laying around. You don’t have to look back to a feeling you have. When you really find God and His truth, it just keeps getting more and more certain, more and more evidence builds up and confirms it.
Not less and less, so that you get to put yourself up as “being strong” or “faithful” by clinging to the threads of a belief that is going to the wayside
..”yet do it with gentleness and respect”
i am so glad that Larry, grindael, liv4jc, and setfree are the bell-cows for 1 Peter 3:15.
now content with just talking amongst themselves the Ev reveals their true natures and that notonly is there a prejudicial view of LDS but a rather superficial one, much like the depth of understanding of their own “translations”.
On a side note, how many peole name their kid “Paul”? Is this supposed give “street cred” to Larry.
So, if being an ex-mormon makes you an expert about the LDS church then myself being an ex-Ev must also know the “inconvenient truths” about the Ev.
These Ev posts remind of those who can not see the forest for the trees. They are truly like those in Plato’s cave…sitting in the dark yelling at shadows on the wall, screaming and kicking at those of us who bring them into the light….but fear not, as you squint now, soon you will see.
What the Ev does not realize is this notion of the Chimnese telephone is real. The cultural and political influences during the apostasy have “watered-down” what the Ev truly believes is a complete Gospel. When confronted with any conflict or contradiction the Ev turns to offense, changes the subject, or cries out “what it says is not what it means”.
The Ev does have it right on one point…Our Heavenly Father does have a plan.
subgenious
Your panic is showing. ( you had 4 or 5 mis-spellings on that last post) LOL
Gentleness and respect are sure not your forte.
Perhaps too much caffeine? Oh that’s right…
lather, rinse, repeat.
I would ask the Mormons who read this blog to seriously and prayerfully read through the Bible. Think about what you are reading and what the words mean in context – don’t try to see it through a lens or apply an outside template, but let the words speak their meaning to your heart. This is difficult as everyone brings their experiences and things they have been taught with them to the Bible when they read it, but I believe that it is possible. (This is the approach everyone should take when reading the Bible) Then look at Mormon teaching as sincerely ask, how does it line up? Does this fit with the Bible? What if Paul is correct in Romans 3:20 – 25, where does that leave Mormons? Read through the Bible without the lens of outside interpretation from LDS sources. I love the holy scriptures and think that when you read the Bible or hear it preached you can hear the very voice of Jesus speaking to you as God inspired the scriptures and has preserved them as a sufficient source of knowledge of who God is and how we should relate to Him. This blog post really piqued my interest because of how much I esteem God’s revelation in the Holy Bible and the freedom in Christ that it proclaims.
Gundek and Andy Watson – thanks for so clearly and studiously presenting the scriptures – letting scripture interpret scripture. You both have a solid grasp on the Bible – definitely not your average evangelical, you have really studied scripture. Thank you for your contributions here.
mobaby,
We must travel in different circles. Most of the Evangelicals I know are very steadfast in their approach to Biblical interpretation. But then I suppose maybe I tend to gravitate to those who are into the Word. Now I must admit that many, most, a large bunch of mainstream denominational Christians don’t crack the Book open much less get into heavy duty study. But evangelicals by and large are into it.
I had been raised Catholic and when I got good and saved I picked-up a copy of a living Bible paraphrase edition NT called “Reach Out”. It was very popular at the time. Well I started reading it and my first thought was, “Where did all of this good stuff come from?” Bible reading wasn’t really encouraged or emphasized at all when I was growing up. I soon graduated to a New American Standard version that I still use on a daily basis. I’ve had it for 37 years and have had to have it recovered.
I have a Bible here that uses the inductive study approach popularized by Kay Arthur. I would recommend that approach to anyone who really wants to study and expose the Word of God.
Sub/not so. Hey I’ve watched you fire back at everybody – sarcastically. I quote the Word of God every time I post. You take a lot of shots a Paul or the Pauline Christians. Why don’t you answer Grindael’s question? Why don’t you answer my question about taking Satan’s word over the word of God? Please read John 8: 44, or do you have an ax to grind with the Gospel of John? I was talking about laying down a trump card – IT WAS A JOKE,(although what I said was true).
I still like you though – take care, Larry
Ralph,
I am wondering what kind of constructive dialogue
can we have with LDS,such as yourself, if you
believe in theories or speculations that the
Bible is’nt reliable enough to give enough truth
about God and salvation so that man can be saved
to eternal life with God? Allow me to show you
how most LDS reason on this topic,yet I’ll do it
in reverse i.e. with the Book of Mormon:
The 116 pages that Martin Harris lost.Maybe they
contained teachings that are contrary to what you
believe today.How does that sound?
What about lost teachings as recorded in Mosiah 1:8; Alma 9:34,13:31 or Helaman 5:13 ?
Why were they left out of the Book of Mormon?
Perhaps they contain teachings that differ from
what you believe about the Book of Mormon today.
How does that make you feel when I use that
arguement?
It does’nt make for a quality dialogue when this
is done to the Bible when it’s coming from a
church[LDS] that claims the name “Christian”.
I don’t think the issue is the Bible’s trust-
worthiness, rather, it is the interpretation
of the Bible.You mentioned this very thing in
your first post on this thread.You said that
the Mormon Church has the true interpretation
of the Bible.I listed a few examples of these
“true interpretations”.Truth matters, since
wrongly dividing(false interpretations) the
Word brings God’s displeasure.[2Tim.2:15]
grindael
sorry for the typos, i was on my mobile, hopefully the grammatical and/or spelling errors did not confuse any interpretations of my post.
Larry
did not realize you had asked me any questions, so i re-read your post. Here are my answers
1. yes
2. no answer, because i dont
if you check my posts you will see that i too reference the Word of God on my posts. I have also explained why i seldom, if ever, use the BoM when posting – mainly because it is “foolishness” to the Ev. 1 Cor 2:14
Mormons are not “dismissive” of the Bible, just the diluted, fragmented, and sometimes delusional view that some Ev represent from it. Our Heavenly Father has not become (as is said) the “unmoved mover” as many Ev would believe.
The Ev often remind of the joke that is told about the stranded man in rising flood waters who first refuses a car ride out, then refuses the boat ride, then refuses the helicopter ride out. All the while saying that God will deliver him….as his spirit comes before God he cries out “why did you not save me?” and God says back, “Hey, i sent a car, boat, and helicopter”
Falcon,
I live in the South, where Satanists have Bibles on their desks and cite them as support for the evil they are doing!
All joking aside, I go to a Church that really has a mixture of folks – the majority are solidly into God’s word, while some feel kinda okay/comfortable because it has a mainline denominational “Presbyterian” in the name. We are conservative Presbyterians (part of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church) and if anyone truly listens to the sermons, our pastor preaches repentance and the gospel of Christ crucified for our sins. However, I do know a lot of evangelicals who could not do the Biblical exegesis that I have seen done here on Mormon Coffee. Doesn’t mean they are not Christians, it’s just they have not studied the Bible to that depth. I realized some of this when I produced a video (my profession) for Church and interviewed some folks. They have solid faith, but some times not as much depth as you would think, but they do know the grace of God.
Sub-
I have to chuckle at being called delusional by someone who believes that a man would get a commission by God to restore the christian church using a peep stone while looking into a hat.
As to your analogy about the man on the roof, It’s an old joke often re-told. It is still a good joke, and it made me smile.
I have to admire your dexterity on the cell tho. I have a laptop and a netbook and a phone that I only use for calls.
“When confronted with any conflict or contradiction the Ev turns to offense, changes the subject, or cries out “what it says is not what it means””
Actually, I would say the above quote is a good definition of a Mormon Apologist.
(i.e.) Snows couplet
“We know Joe the occultist was into second sight vision which basically means you see something in your imagination on the one hand or you use some sort of medium to attempt to peer into the spirit world”
Joesph Smith, the Mushroom man, the Mushroom man
Ooo Joesph Smith the Mushroom man.
Sing along!
Here is an interesting article I stumbled across a few weak’s ago.
Might just answer your question Falcon.
http://www.mormonelixirs.org/
setfree wrote
setfree,
You’re definitely onto something here. I’ve never been a Mormon, but I couldn’t help notice that whenever I’d get into dialog with my Mormon colleagues, they’d take every “negative” suggestion about their religion, BoM, Joseph Smith etc etc as a personal insult.
My boss took it so personally, he “invited me to look for work elsewhere” (which I did).
I really wonder at this mentality. Especially when I contrast it with the Gospel of Christ. With the latter, the world can heap any accusation it likes at me, and I can respond by saying “its all true, mea culpa”. That’s because my faith is not in myself, it is in Christ, who saves me.
The Mormon, as far as I can tell, has no alternative but to believe in himself. He has to believe that he has made the right decisions, joined the right church, subscribed to the right scriptures, enrolled on the right program, followed the right prophets (who had to be right); because if he hasn’t, there is no-one else he can call on.
No wonder they get prickly when anyone dare suggests that their religion is not quite what it claims to be.
The good news is that there is someone they can call on. His name is Jesus; He’s a real person, who lived in real human history, and His Name is above all other names (Phil 2:5-11), including the Mormon “church” and Joseph Smith. He has the authority and the power to undo the damage that these, er, “characters” have done to His Gospel, His Word and His Holy Name.
Maybe I don’t need to tell you this, but I need to say it anyway.
grindael
‘peep’ stone into hat is too much for you, but a talking bush on fire is perfectly reasonable?
yeah, the technology is amazing, can u imagine having this debate via handwritten letters?
mobaby
i was born and raised i the south as well, i have also seen many misguided Ev with a Bible at their side for thumpin’.
I would be interested in your take on how you view your church’s take on Ephesians 5:8. I was once a presbyterian (reformed) and you gotta love a theology ‘reformed’ by the great attorney Calvin. I always had trouble reconciling the notion that though we would be ‘judged’ and our names could be written or erased from Book of Life, Calvin insisted on “predetermination”. Obviously, i believe God gave us the great gift of Free Agency on those matters. Why not also explain your church’s “doctrine of the elect”.
Kevin
the beauty of the internet, is that you can mostly “say” anything, it just does not make it true. the meaning of snow’s couplet has not been diminished. Any re-phrasing has been for “dimming” – It is as the example of Plato’s cave, it is a bright notion that makes many squint. you can’t wear your BluBlockers forever, kevin.
Actually you should research the “probability” of anyone receiving “visions” during that time period in America (though the mushroom article was fascinating and somewhat nostalgic, anyone here been to Grateful Dead concert while in college?).
Kevin,
That was really a good article. It makes a whole lot of sense; I think the author is on to something here. This is especially so because of Smith’s foray into the occult and folk magic of his time.
mobaby,
I’d like to hear more about your video production work. It’s for a very selfish reason. My daughter, who has completed one college degree, is pursuing a second in Digital Video and Media Production. I’d appreciate it if you’d get my e mail from the mods.
As we have progressed through our discussion here, a couple of points keep resonating. One is, why do Mormons have to discount and impugn the Bible in order to legitimize Mormonism? The other points deal with the fact that Joseph Smith’s “restoration” produced a different god, a different scripture and a different plan of salvation. I repeat from an earlier post, “What spiritual entity is served by that?”
Jesus said that He was the truth, the way and the life and that no body could get to the Father except through Him. The Mormons have flipped that and have included Joseph Smith as the one that must pronounce entrance into his Celestial Kingdom. Delusional as he was, Smith sought to make himself out to be a god. He snared others into his fantasy by telling them that they could becomes gods also. Has Satan ever told a bigger lie?
There is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one Church and finally One God. Joseph Smith rejected God and and His salvation for one that was more appealing to him. God has clearly revealed Himself in His Holy Word the Bible. Smith’s delusional antics have separated his followers from the Living God. Would that they would begin to see with spiritual eyes and hear with spiritual ears and be delivered into the Kingdom of the Living God.
sub -
19.And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto WIZARDS THAT PEEP, AND THAT MUTTER: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?
20.To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
21.And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward.
22.And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness. (Isa. 8:19-22)
There is NO comparison between Moses and smith. You are grasping at straws here. I’ll take the story of Moses any time over smiths peeping and looking for Capt. Kidd’s treasure.
Is it that you were converted to smith’s church from Christianity that has you so hard-hearted? There is a great lesson about pharaoh in that story. Moses was never the ego-maniac that smith was. He was not out in the desert looking for buried treasure that he turned into a religion.
Moses saw God. Joseph did not even know who God was. Father a Spirit, Son has flesh, HG mind of god in 1835 and then Father & Son are exalted men & HG a spirit person in 1843.
You have to look at the WHOLE picture my friend. I Am that I AM vs. mormon jesus. There is no comparison.
Sub,
I find it curious that you question Calvin based on his profession. What again was the profession of Joseph Smith? Treasure hunter and gold digger? The gold plates of the Book of Mormon were just one of his gold digging exploits that failed to turn up any actual gold.
God’s election is further evidence that the gospel is not about us, it is about Christ crucified for us. There is Scriptural support for God choosing His people, rather than man choosing God. The entire Bible beginning with Abraham tells the story of God’s chosen people. Jesus said “my sheep know my voice.” It is really comforting that God has done the work of salvation, and even grants us the faith to believe. It’s not about our striving, it’s God’s love and mercy which prevail. If you come from a Reformed background, you must be familiar with the Westminster Confession?
The Scriptures I cite here are from the Confession (with Scriptural support) and reinforce that it is God who draws sinners to Himself and the Holy Spirit that convicts the heart of sin and creates faith in the crucified Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 13:48 …”and as many as were appointed unto eternal life believed”
Romans 8:28 – 39 …”For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son”
Romans 11:7 “What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened…”
Ephesians 1:3 – 14 …”he chose us in him before the foundation of the world,… he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ”
2 Timothy 1:9 – 10 …”not because of our work but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began…”
There are more, but you get the idea. I know this can be controversial, but it shows what a great foundation believers have – God Himself has provided the way and He will complete it. Election is about God’s mercy and grace and our inability to save ourselves.
Have to go – will write more..
grindael
first
Moses did not see God, if anything Moses saw God’s hand, as He shileded Moses from seeing His face or Moses would have surely perished…right?
second
interesting verses…especially since they promote the idea that one should hearken the “words” of a prophet instead of the “dead”.
A bit out of context for this discussion, i mean this verse is alot more “idols” of the day, but it seems that 1 Samuel 28:5-9 is more palatable than Isaiah.
Nevertheless, i agree, follow the “prophets”.
sub –
glad you agree – follow the TRUE prophets.
Samuel had the collateral to back up his claim.
“anyone here been to Grateful Dead concert while in college?”
Does the Grateful Dead claim to be the one true religion of God? There are some crazy cultish people following the Dead, but if you are comfortable associating Early Mormon’s with Deadheads, go for it.
“Actually you should research the “probability” of anyone receiving “visions” during that time period in America ”
What makes you think I have not? Because I didn’t come up with a conclusion that fits into the Mormon ideology of LDS (Or is it LSD) historical events?
Sub, Who said anything about Snow’s couplet being diminished? You said, “When confronted with any conflict or contradiction the Ev turns to offense, changes the subject, or cries out “what it says is not what it means”
I said, that is exactly what Mormon Apologist do as in the example of Snow. There are other examples, that I guess you will not admit too, Snow’s is the most fun to mention.
“As Mormons are, I once was, As I am now, Mormons may become; Free”
The problem with smithism is that those that follow him do not look at the whole picture. Fortunately, there is enough evidence to show that smith was surely NOT a prophet. His changing views on god, his egotism, his foray into necromancy, failed bank schemes, lying, breaking his own commandments, changing revelations to suit his circumstances all show that HE was NOT what he claimed to be.
What smithians love to do, is take episodes from the lives of TRUE and PROVEN prophets, and compare them to smith. There is no comparison. They will nitpick every word, every scripture to support the bogus claims that smith fed the world, or try to belittle you with events from the Bible that have nothing to do (today) with our comprehension of HIM. The New Testament covers this.
The Old Testament led us to Christ. He is the center, not some prophet that jumps up and says I am the mouthpiece of god, I have the way, My teachings supersede all others. It has ended tragically every time.
The other thing smithians try to do apply the same logic to the reformers, or those that pastor or lead churches today. They are unlike smith in one big way. They do not claim to speak AS GOD, as smith did.
Those that came before us preserved the Word, used to lead us to Christ. In it, all things are covered, especially how to have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with Jesus, and instructions on how to live and have the Holy Spirit guide us today into all truth.
Christ set up his kingdom, and what Satan tries to do to tear it down is to weave in man made doctrines to confuse and lead astray those who are weak, or try to overcome them with some kind of twisted logic that this is how God REALLY wants things to be.
As Christians, we see the flaws of our leaders, and again, the smithians try to erroneously apply this to THEIR prophets, who have put upon themselves the burden of what they teach and practice. It is BECAUSE smith (& company) said they speak for GOD that they are scrutinized as they are
sub -
I am thoroughly impressed with your knowledge of the scriptures. I studied the Bible & BOM at BYU in the early 80’s, but left off after thoroughly investigating smith’s claims and finding them bogus. I did not return to a serious study of the Bible until a few years ago, and I am no scholar.
I find myself time and again marveling at how much you and the other mormon & christian posters know about the scriptures, though I do not agree with mormon interpretations any more.
I still disagree about the Civil War, but so do a lot of others (that take your view). It is hard in these forums not to take things personally, and being new to this, I have had to pray and try to come to grips with how mormons react to the postings here. But that is what dialog is all about I guess.
We are all human, set down this path and like you have said in previous posts, all have a story. i think with letters, people had more time to think out what they would say, instant messaging makes things more interesting for sure.
Know this though. I DO look at all the scriptures posted, and try to follow the logic of interpretation as given by those who post. The discussions on Hebrew Words was fascinating. One thing we can agree on: we disagree. I am well aware of my own limitations.
My favorite author is not PAUL though I admire him, I love John and his writings.
“If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.” (1 john 1:8-10)
The Bible is marvelous, and I would say inerrant in especially this way: God has shown us how terribly insufficient and depraved we really are, and even though He used us (humankind) to get His message to us, even though He brought it about through such an unholy and impure channel, and it took him many years and many people to get it done, HE DID DO IT!
No matter what the people in the OT thought they were writing, their thoughts and their lives managed to convey the things we needed to know. We have an Almighty Creator who loves us more than we are capable of love, who has redeemed us by living amongst us and taking all our sin upon Him, and who wants us to enjoy Him and be in His presence.
We keep hearing that people were sinful in the Bible. Well, duh! When have people ever been not sinful?
Compare that to the three to four generations of people who didn’t sin in the BoM? A little less easy to believe. lol
mobaby,
Thank you for your kind words, I have a particular interest in the doctrines of Scripture and revelation. I find that many of the people who are intent on denying the authority of Scripture understand that they must undermine the inspiration of the bible to accomplish this task. In order to do this they feel free to misrepresent both historical doctrines and the sciences of textual criticism, translation, and interpretation of the text.
Andy, I really enjoyed reading your post. I spoke with two Jehovah’s Witness ladies for about 2 hours this morning and made the same point to them about John 14:28. Either John is contradicting himself or we need to take John 14:28 in a different manner than “rank”. I think i remember that you witness to JW’s frequently. Have you read James White’s paper on the use of “ego eimi” in John’s gospel http://vintage.aomin.org/EGO.html ?
I think you will find it useful. Also James white does a great job of explaining the worship of the Lamb in Revelation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKPx1utKTCc which is great info for JW’s.
Sub, your attitude toward the Bible, your misunderstanding of Christianity, and your total lack of clarity on reformed doctrine speaks volumes to your spiritual state as well as the atrocious teaching that went on at your former “reformed” church. There is no possible way that a truly reformed pastor would teach predestination and also teach that our names can be written and then erased in the Book of Life. This is Arminian teaching, not reformed doctrine. One of the tenants of the reformation is the perseverance of the saints.
Ralph, can you please list all of the books spoken of in scripture that we do not possess? What makes you believe that anything contained in them would contradict what has already been canonized? Once again I ask: Is God divided?
In Colossians 4:16 the letter to the Laodiceans is mentioned. Are you aware of the textual variant in Ephesians 1:1? In the earliest manuscripts there is a blank line where “en Epheso” is found in many later manuscripts. Marcion’s canon lists what we call Ephesians as the letter to the Laodiceans, although no manuscripts have been found with “Laodicea” written in the blank many believe that the missing letter to Laodicea is what we call Ephesians. This letter from Paul was meant to be circulated to the churches much like Revelation.
You can read the text critical note at netbible.org
liv4jc -
James White’s paper was awesome. Thanks for the reference.
grindael
I caught Sub’s answer to Larry a while back, and thought it notable:
“(1) Is Heavenly Father the God of this World? and
(2) Why do you believe the words of Satan over the word of God Gen 3: 1-5?”
Sub replied:
“1. yes
2. no answer, because i don’t”
I’m sure, Larry, that you were going somewhere with this…
Sub,
Thanks for your take on Matt.7:13 and what you
feel the “gate” and “path” mean.
As I see it(from reading and conversations with
LDS)rather, the locked door of the LDS Temple
is the gate and that faith in Jesus’ sacrafice
on the cross is just one step, among many,
(temple recommend, etc) that is required to
unlock the gate/door.
The path then for LDS,(again from my perspective)
this that of moral and dietary rules/laws
compliance with must be varified by a selected
man(a sinner) who then signs a permission slip
giving you access to go thru the Temple gate/door.
As a christian, I could not refer to any Temple
or church as, “the gate of heaven” or similiar
phrases. To me Jesus is the Door/Gate (Jn.10:9)
and Jesus is the Path/Way (Jn.14:6).
Anyone can simply walk off the street and enter
the church where I fellowship, no permission slip
needed, that’s important because we’re the same,
you,me, everyone.Jn.3:16.
Sub, I messed up. This reply was supposed to be
under the “Buying Blessings” thread not here.