Mormon Church on China: Caesar is Lord

x-jesus-versus-caesarThe LDS Church has issued a Q&A regarding China:

Can my friends be taught and baptized in China?
Not at present. Please contact the Church’s CAU Director for guidelines and further information.

Are there any activities that I should pay attention to avoid?
Please do not distribute any Church literature or other religious materials; please do not seek to attend Church meetings with foreign Church members…

This is consistent with earlier sentiments I have heard expressed by Mormons: That the LDS Church “respects the law” so much that it won’t preach its message where it is illegal to do so.

But what does Jesus say?

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 18:18-20)

And what did Peter say?

“And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them, saying, “We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” (Acts 5:27-32)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

170 Responses to Mormon Church on China: Caesar is Lord

  1. Ralph says:

    Jaxi and Oceancoast,

    Sorry but the family of Lehi weren’t Jews. The brass plates showed their genealogy from Israel to be through Joseph and his son Manasseh. So they cannot be identified as Jews even though they came from Jerusalem in the time the Jews were the major tribe of Israel identified.

    But Jaxi, as Oceancoast said, in the BoM when Jesus visited the Nephites after His resurrection He told them He was going to visit others of the tribes of Israel which did not live in Jerusalem or in the known Nephite/Lamanite world.

    Grindael,

    The Y-chromosome isn’t the only way to tell parentage. They use the whole genome for that and the way the chromosomes show various sections under certain conditions. From this they can tell if someone is a blood relative, parent or sibling or in no way related very readily. If all they used was (or if they mainly relied on) the Y-chromosome then this could not be done as females do not have it. In the test to be performed here all they need are people proven to be related to JS and someone related to Josephine through a sibling (ie grand-niece/nephew) and then someone related to Sylvia’s first husband so they have genetic information from JS, mother and other husband, then compare the staining or even do a PCR-sequencing test which is more sensitive (but more expensive) on certain segments that have been shown to be familial. If they really wanted to and are able to they can exhume the bodies and get some genetic material that way if they have been kept under reasonable conditions. And no, this is not from watching CSI, I have experience in a biological lab with genetics and know a little about the technology out there, but I am mainly a biochemist.

  2. grindael says:

    Ralph,

    You are preaching to the choir here. All I said was that every avenue has not been explored. But if Jo had all those wives and had no children, that to my mind is rather sinister, since many of the women testified in court, and gave affidavits and deathbed confessions that he indeed did have sexual relations with them. Sarah Pratt said Jo used an abortion doctor. It also throws out the window the ONLY reason to approve polygamy (via the BOM) to raise up SEED. Also, I only LINKED to the info … I didn’t WRITE IT.

    Yes, Jesus said in the BOM that he was going to visit the “other Tribes” which Jo said were on a piece of land circling around the earth. I wonder how that went?

  3. jaxi says:

    Ralph said, “Sorry but the family of Lehi weren’t Jews. The brass plates showed their genealogy from Israel to be through Joseph and his son Manasseh. So they cannot be identified as Jews even though they came from Jerusalem in the time the Jews were the major tribe of Israel identified.”

    Yes, that’s right. When I said Jews I meant tribe of Isreal. I wasn’t thinking through my terminology. I was trying to make the point that the characters in the Book of Mormon aren’t Gentiles. The point being made to me was that the Book of Mormon demonstrates Gods love for ALL people. I was simply saying I do not think that story makes the point. Tribes of Isreal are not ALL people. Now I believe God loves all people. I believe that can shown with the Bible and the actions of the apostles. I do not think we need the Book of Mormon to show us that God loves all people.

    grindeal is also accurate. when you study the polygamy and polyandry it was clearly not being used for raising up seed. The men practicing were building up their future kingdoms. The more people sealed to them, the more priesthood authority they had. Temple sealings were done very different back then. It wasn’t about genealogy, it was about creating a new heavenly family. Men were adopting sons to them that were their same age. They sealed a black woman to Joseph’s Smith as a servant. The women sealed to Joseph Smith were going to be his eternal wives, but not eternally married to their other husbands. LDS women may have been married to more than one husband but I don’t believe they were married to more than one husband for the eternities. that’s why when Brigham Young took Zina to wife, even though she was sealed to Joseph Smith and married to Henry, she married him for only time. I could be wrong about this, but I think even Richard Bushman said that it was likely that even the polyandrous marriages were consummated. I’ll have to go find the book and look it up. I honestly don’t care for this polygamy stuff. Anyone who reads the history of it can see that all the reasons Mormons use to justify it are nonsense. It was completely messed up. LDS are so fond of spiritual witnesses. I’d like to hear a poll on how many LDS women get burning bosoms when the think about polygamy. I wonder how many members would leave if the practice got started again. How can an eternal principle from God make so many people feel so sick to their stomach? I don’t want to hear about how Im not spiritual enough to understand either. If polygamy is a truth from God, than the LDS God truly hates women. Ask any women escaping polygamy. They leave honestly thinking they are going to hell and that they are going to something better. A family member of mine has family journals about polygamy and the depression it brought to the women. It talked about how they wanted to esecape but they were afraid of Brigham Young and apostates getting killed. No one should defend this awful practice.

  4. Rick B says:

    The LDS on this site that Claim the Bible does not show God loves the entire world, and thats one evidence for the BoM are Blind and need to read the entire Bible again.

    Go back to Adam and Eve, At that time their was only the Human race, no Jew or Gentile. Then After Adam and Eve Fell, God gave the prophecy That Jesus would come and save the Human Race. The Human race includes everyone.

    Then when People try and claim the Blacks are a “Race” Of People, or The Jews are a “Race” or People, or for that matter any group out there claiming to be a race of people are clueless. Their and has only ever been one “Race” of people, that is the Human Race. With in the Human race we have different groups of people that have different traits, skin color, language, Etc.

    But if we did an autopsy on White people, black people, Jews, French, Etc, we are all the same. So that alone shows God loved as He said, The Entire world.

    But then we have God taking a false god worshiping Pagan and made him the father of the Jewish nation. So then after that, we have Jews and the God of our fathers, saving both Jews and Gentiles. Look at Moses and the Egyptians. God saved many of the Egyptians who entered the house with the Jews after Moses said put the Blood on the door posts. Some Jews did not go in and died, and some lived, same with the Egyptians. Then we have the Genealogy of Jesus, we have both Jew and gentile in that list. We see God saving and forgiving Gentiles in the Old Testament. Read Jonah, read about Rahab the Harlot. God went after and loved and saved and died for Both.

    So LDS who claim other wise are either Ignorant of what the Bible says, or are willfully leading people astray knowing the truth and rejecting it.

  5. grindael says:

    Jaxi,

    Here is D. Michael Quinn’s

    EVIDENCE FOR THE SEXUAL SIDE OF JOSEPH SMITH’S POLYGAMY“,

    Reconsidering Joseph Smith’s Marital Practices
    Mormon History Association’s Annual Conference
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    29 June 2012

    This is an expanded 10,000 word, 199 footnote essay that he gave in 2012.

    If Mormons don’t believe this, they won’t ever believe anything evidential.

    Enjoy!

  6. shematwater says:

    Brewed

    You deal with far too much for the scope of the discussion that I am currently willing to engage in. Suffice it to say that the priesthood and the temple are given to bring men to God. Without them it would be impossible to enter his presence at all.
    Now, I understand your point, and I see what you claim to be the truth, but I do not agree that it is the truth.
    Take, for example, the veil. I am assuming that you are not, nor have you ever been a member, and thus have no firsthand knowledge of the temple ceremonies. If you had you would know that all people who go through the ceremony pass through the veil and into the symbolic presence of God in the Celestial room (the equivalent of the Holy of Holies). The using of the veil to separate God from the Israelites was another that that was added at the time of Moses, due to the unbelief of the people. God originally sought to show himself to them, but when they feared and turned away God declared they would not have that privilege, and thus the veil was placed and no one was allowed to pass through it. However, after the atonement, when all those added things were done away with, this restriction on passing through the veil was also done way with, allowing all men to come back into his presence.

    Now, speaking of the Bible, I don’t think there is a huge problem of Mistranslation. The biggest problem is that much that was had was lost. The Bible itself references nearly twenty books of scripture that we do not have. I believe it is in these missing scriptures that we will eventually find all the truths that Israel once had and lost.

    Oh, and you are right. Both of us can’t be right. My point is that the Bible itself is not sufficient to prove either of us right by itself. However, it is very possible for the Bible to be true and all that we teach to also be true, as long as what you teach is false.

    Jaxi

    There were two parts to that story, and you are ignoring the second. It is not just that God loved all people, but that he had direct dealings with them. He did not leave huge segments of the world in darkness until a few chosen Israelites were able to to get the word to them centuries later. This global interaction of God is not seen in the Bible, which is why scholars try to claim that Jehovah was merely a tribal God of the Jews and not the only God until the rise of Christianity.

    Rick

    You also seem to ignore the evidence of direct dealings with all people that the Book of Mormon testifies to, and yet the Bible does not. You give a nice list of times in which none Israelites received the gospel from an Isrealite missionary, but you still give no example of God having any direct dealings with anyone who was not from the Middle East. In fact, most every non-LDS Christian I have talked to adamantly denies that God ever appear to anyone not from the Biblical lands, or that the gospel was had by anyone but the nation of Israel in the Middle East until the Christians spread out from that area.
    Reading only the Bible it appears that, although God loved all people, He did not love them enough to establish His true church and gospel among them. Now, before the flood there appear to have been only one group of people, and thus is hardly evidence of anything. After the flood God’s dealings with men quickly appear to become restricted to Abraham and his household.

  7. MistakenTestimony says:

    Shem,

    You said, “Now, speaking of the Bible, I don’t think there is a huge problem of Mistranslation. The biggest problem is that much that was had was lost.”

    Are you willing to wager your eternal existence on that wishful thinking? You are of course presupposing that every work that is mentioned in the Bible that is not in the Bible is supposed to be in the Bible. That is like reading a contemporary volume of books that reference other contemporary books and then claiming, “Aha! See, this book can’t be correct because these other referenced books are not in this volume!” Do you truly believe that in an additional letter by Paul to the Corinthians that was not included in the Bible he is going to expound on the practices of the then-modern unsubstantiated temples while he does not even skirt that topic in any of his Scriptural letters? Or maybe you believe that that topic would be addressed in a non-Scriptural book that was contemporary to one of the Old Testament writers while all the books of the Bible old and new only speak of the one Temple in Jerusalem and the non-Mormon (aka Jewish) practices therein? Wishful thinking and baseless conjecture indeed. I’m sorry, it is not baseless because you have faith which gives you a spiritual testimony of “knowledge” so that if anything makes you feel uncomfortable then you can “know” that thing is untrue. So it is not baseless, it is based on your emotional response to a scenario. Everyone else has a testimony that is in fact deception except for you, but your testimony absolutely cannot be deception because…?

    You also said, “However, it is very possible for the Bible to be true and all that we teach to also be true, as long as what you teach is false.”

    The only hermeneutical framework that the LDS church has for the KJV is gross isogesis. This is evident for anyone who has studied the Bible and has also studied the ways that the LDS church twist and cherry pick verses to establish their unbiblical doctrines. I for one would not wager my eternal existence on the foundation you just laid because the medicine you are offering is actually killing the patient you are trying to save.

  8. jaxi says:

    Shem,

    <"This global interaction of God is not seen in the Bible, which is why scholars try to claim that Jehovah was merely a tribal God of the Jews and not the only God until the rise of Christianity."

    This so-called "global interaction" is still the LDS Christ visiting an supposed Israelite tribe.

    Anyways, this claim that God is merely a tribal God is a good point if you don't understand the scriptures. Is the criticism that the Jews weren't heavy evangelists? The Jews were preserving their faith and recording the teachings of the prophets. They were awaiting a Messiah that they knew would come through the descendents of Abraham and through the line of David. Jews didn't have salvation before Christ. They could not live the law perfectly and so they were not saved. Salvation did not come until Christ fulfilled His work. The good news wasn't on the earth until after the Resurrection. Salvation did not come to man until that time. And once salvation had become available to all mankind, then did the Apostles start bringing the Word to the whole earth. But the good news had to first be brought to the Jews, they were ones that had preserved the faith, and had kept the scriptures that testified of Christ.

  9. shematwater says:

    MistakenTestimony

    Personally, I don’t really care what you think. Mockery is not a great way to present yourself.

    Now, I am perfectly willing to take Paul’s suggestion that we read his “epistle from Laodicea.” You can claim all you want that this epistle was not supposed to be counted as scripture, but when the Bible states that it is to be read I will take its word over yours.
    Your example of a volume of books referencing other does not portray what I said. I never said that these missing books prove that what we have is false. I said that in having them we are likely to gain more information than what the Bible currently contains. This is perfectly true of any work that cites other works. That is the entire purpose of notations and bibliographies; to allow the person reading the work to attain more information by going to those documents cited.
    So, for me to say that these lost books likely hold information not currently had is not wishful thinking, but a logical deduction based on common practice and notations in the Bible itself.

    Now, I do not wager my eternal salvation on these missing books, and thus again you misrepresent my intentions. I have the truth, contained in all the scriptures that God has, at this time, revealed to man. I do not think these missing books contain anything that I do not have available to me. However, I do believe they contain the same doctrines that have been revealed in these days, and thus will eventually prove to all the world that this is the truth. However, this will likely not be for a long time, and thus will likely come to late for many people.

  10. MistakenTestimony says:

    Shem,

    You said, “I do not think these missing books contain anything that I do not have available to me. However, I do believe they contain the same doctrines that have been revealed in these days, and thus will eventually prove to all the world that this is the truth.” Two words: baseless conjecture.

  11. shematwater says:

    Mistaken Testimony

    Not baseless. It is based on a knowledge of the truth. I know you reject that truth, but that is not my problem. It is yours, as it will only prevent you from attaining the full rewards that God so desires to give you. It breaks His heart to see you turned from His gospel and embracing a false faith. But he will not force you to accept Him or the truth of His gospel.

    The simple fact is that the truths of the gospel were revealed to Adam, who passed them down through his children. They were revealed again to Enoch, and were preserved in Noah and his Family. Later they were revealed to Abraham, then Moses; each man teaching those of his time and thus passing the truth down through the generations. Christ again restored this truth to the Jews, and much later Joseph Smith had it revealed to him. Each time the gospel was revealed it was the same as it was before. All the truth that was given at one time was given at another. Thus, all the truth we have now was known to Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the early Christians.

  12. Old man says:

    Shem said
    “The simple fact is that the truths of the gospel were revealed to Adam, who passed them down through his children. They were revealed again to Enoch, and were preserved in Noah and his Family. Later they were revealed to Abraham, then Moses; each man teaching those of his time and thus passing the truth down through the generations. Christ again restored this truth to the Jews, and much later Joseph Smith had it revealed to him. Each time the gospel was revealed it was the same as it was before. All the truth that was given at one time was given at another. Thus, all the truth we have now was known to Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the early Christians.”

    You claim that the ‘truths of the gospel’ were passed on through the generations until finally being revealed to Joseph Smith. As ‘The Gospel’ is the message of redemption preached by Christ I don’t understand how it could have been passed on from Adam via Enoch Noah & Moses etc to the time of Christ.
    From the time of Moses to the coming of Christ the Jews lived by the Levitical law not by a gospel that hadn’t yet been revealed. Christ didn’t restore anything, He fulfilled the requirements of that law i.e. He paid the price of sin, according to the law, by His death. He gave to us a ‘New Covenant’ not a restored gospel, & it was that by which we lived by until the time of Joseph Smith when, according to you, it was once again restored; presumably back to ‘the Gospel which didn’t yet exist’ the one you claim was known by Adam.
    What a strange theological web you weave; far from giving me confidence in the LDS or even in God, what you say leaves my head spinning. Could you tell me how you came by all this information because I can’t seem to find it in my Bible? Hasn’t the LDS always claimed that the gospel is a process of continuous revelation right through to the present day? That being the case it really doesn’t make much sense to say, “Each time the gospel was revealed it was the same as it was before.”

    The simple truth is this, the gospel you speak of never did exist; it was an invention of Joseph Smith & his cronies & the continuous revelation that the LDS claim is merely additions made by a succession of false prophets, each adding their own opinions or claiming ‘revelation’ for the sake of political expediency e.g. the 1978 revelation concerning black people & the priesthood.

  13. shematwater says:

    Old Man

    If God is unchanging, the same yesterday, today, and forever, than how is it that you can believe that he operated through one method before his mortal life, and yet through another method after? Honestly, your claim that the Gospel was not known before Christ is what makes no sense, as it teaches a changing God.

    Besides this, the New Testament declares that the gospel was had before the time of Christ.
    Speaking of Israel at the time of Moses Paul declares “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” (Hebrews 4: 2)
    The same gospel that Christ preached to the Jews was preached to ancient Israel, but because of unbelief it did not profit them. For this reason they were given the Law of Moses, which was a lesser law appended to the gospel, tailored to the lesser belief of Israel at that time.

    And no, the gospel is not “the message of redemption preached by Christ.” It is the message of redemption preached about Christ. All those who knew and believed in Christ, from Adam to the present day, who looked either forward or back to that culminating event at the meridian of time, had the gospel. Anyone, no matter what age they lived in, who had the truth of Christ and sought his grace for salvation, had the gospel. To say anything different is what makes no sense.

  14. Old man says:

    Shem

    Here we go again, the usual LDS word games. You like to play them as it diverts attention away from your lack of answers. I’ll simply respond to your claims.

    You said
    “If God is unchanging, the same yesterday, today, and forever, than how is it that you can believe that he operated through one method before his mortal life, and yet through another method after? Honestly, your claim that the Gospel was not known before Christ is what makes no sense, as it teaches a changing God.”

    What you say about God operating through one method & then changing to another method makes absolutely no sense & I refuse to engage in such meaningless garbage As for teaching a changing God, is that some kind of joke? How many times has the LDS god changed his mind? I would wager that even you will have lost count.

    You said
    “Besides this, the New Testament declares that the gospel was had before the time of Christ. Speaking of Israel at the time of Moses Paul declares “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” (Hebrews 4: 2)
    The same gospel that Christ preached to the Jews was preached to ancient Israel, but because of unbelief it did not profit them. For this reason they were given the Law of Moses, which was a lesser law appended to the gospel, tailored to the lesser belief of Israel at that time.”

    The New Testament does NOT declare that “the gospel was had before the time of Christ” Why are you using Hebrews 4:2 as a proof text? You take an isolated verse out of context, also known as ‘cherry picking’ from Hebrews 4:2 & use it to prove the Gospel was preached to the Israelites? Paul isn’t talking about the gospel being preached to the Israelites at the time of Moses, Chapters 3 & 4 of Hebrews are concerned with ‘entering Gods rest’ For the Israelites that meant entering the promised land, something that did not happen with that generation because they had no faith. Paul is comparing their situation at the time of Moses to the situation they now find themselves in when faced with the Gospel of Christ.

    You said
    “And no, the gospel is not “the message of redemption preached by Christ.” It is the message of redemption preached about Christ. All those who knew and believed in Christ, from Adam to the present day, who looked either forward or back to that culminating event at the meridian of time, had the gospel. Anyone, no matter what age they lived in, who had the truth of Christ and sought his grace for salvation, had the gospel. To say anything different is what makes no sense.”

    Yes of course the Gospel is about Christ but it was Christ who preached the Gospel, It was Christ who said “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened….” Matthew 11:28 It was Christ who said “I am the way, the Truth & the Life” John 14:6 It was Christ who said “…that whoever believes in Him shall not perish…” John 3:16 How could the apostles have preached the Gospel to anyone if Christ hadn’t first given it to them?
    And after all that you have the nerve to tell me that saying anything different to you makes no sense?

  15. shematwater says:

    Old Man

    And you say you never insult anyone. What garbage.

    Let me see if dumming things down will make them clearer to you. If the gospel was not had before the time of Christ than how were people to be saved from their sins? If there was one method of salvation before Christ (your Levitical Law), and then a second method after Christ (the Gospel), then you have a changing God. I really can’t put this in any simpler terms, so if you still can’t understand it I am sorry.
    As to God changing His mind, that has actually never happened to the extent that you are claiming. He has never altered the means for us to gain salvation. His doctrine has remained the same throughout all time. He has dealt with His children in the same way as he always has. He has, on occasion, changed his mind as to where he wants his saints to gather, or on what kind of punishment to send against a wicked nation. But these things are not significant.
    The means of salvation is.

    “Why are you using Hebrews 4:2 as a proof text?”

    Because it says the gospel was preached to them. It states that very directly, with no ambiguity in the statement or in the context. What you say is true. But it is through the gospel that we enter God’s Rest, which is why it was preached to them as well as us, but since they lacked faith it was unprofitable and they did not enter into God’s rest.
    Honestly, you ignoring the statement that the gospel was preached to them seems more to damage your credibility than my using it does mine. I took nothing out of context, but you have ignored a direct statement.

    Oh, and Galatians 3: 8 states “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.”
    So it is not just in Hebrews that we are told the gospel was preached before Christ. Maybe you would be so kind as to explain why Paul says the gospel was preached to Abraham and at the time of Moses if he didn’t really mean that this was the gospel.

    “And after all that you have the nerve to tell me that saying anything different to you makes no sense?”

    Actually I never said this. I said this particular thing is senseless. You trying to make my comment universal to anything I disagree with is only once again showing your hypocrisy, as you have frequently complained that we misrepresent your words.

    As to Christ teaching the gospel, did I ever once deny this? I actually, very directly, stated that “Christ again restored this truth to the Jews” Thus I have no problem with admitting that Christ taught the gospel. But that does not change the fact that other also taught the gospel, many years before Christ ever lived in mortality. I am not denying he taught it; I am denying your assertion that the gospel is defined as what he taught, and does not include what others taught.

  16. Old man says:

    Shem said
    “Let me see if dumming things down will make them clearer to you. If the gospel was not had before the time of Christ than how were people to be saved from their sins If there was one method of salvation before Christ (your Levitical Law), and then a second method after Christ (the Gospel), then you have a changing God. I really can’t put this in any simpler terms, so if you still can’t understand it I am sorry.”

    I have yet to see a response from you that doesn’t include an insult of one kind or another. Are you so learned that you know all there is to know about Christian belief?
    However that may be, I have a few things to say.
    Abraham did NOT know the Gospel of Christ & neither did Moses. Abraham was told “All Nations will be blessed through you” but he was not told of the Gospel of Christ. Moses was told “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth.. . and he shall speak to them all that I command him.” But he was not given the Gospel of Christ.
    The prophets & Patriarchs knew that a Saviour would come but they did NOT have the Gospel of Christ, that could not come until Christ Himself came.

    “As to God changing His mind, that has actually never happened to the extent that you are claiming.”
    In typical LDS fashion you turn what I said on its head, you totally distort my words. I never at any time said that God changed his mind, I accused the LDS god of changing his mind & that’s something very different. Would you like to see a list of the things your god has changed his mind about?

    Again you use Hebrews 4:2 as proof text, I have already explained to you what that text means but as you don’t seem to understand I’ll use the words of a man more learned than I
    “For unto us was the Gospel preached – Και γαρ εσμεν ευηγγελισμενοι· For we also have received good tidings as well as they. They had a gracious promise of entering into an earthly rest; we have a gracious promise of entering into a heavenly rest. God gave them every requisite advantage; he has done the same to us. Moses and the elders spoke the word of God plainly and forcibly to them: Christ and his apostles have done the same to us.”

    In other words they had the law, they had the tabernacle, they had Moses preaching to them but because they had no faith they could not enter the earthly rest promised to them by God.

    Why do you say “your levitical law”? First it’s not my law & secondly I didn’t say that it was a ‘method of salvation’ The levitical law includes the law of atonement or the sacrificial law, & that my friend is what the Hebrews practised to COVER their sins.

    “Oh, and Galatians 3: 8 states “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.”
    So it is not just in Hebrews that we are told the gospel was preached before Christ. Maybe you would be so kind as to explain why Paul says the gospel was preached to Abraham and at the time of Moses if he didn’t really mean that this was the gospel.”

    To what was Paul referring when he spoke of the ‘gospel being announced to Abraham, well, it tells you in the very same verse “All Nations will be blessed through you” Read Galatians 3:8 again, in fact why not read chapter 2 as well. That’s the problem with cherry picking your verses; you fail to see the context. I’ll quote from someone more learned than you or I once more.

    Paul asserts (Gal.3:8)that the gospel was announced in advance to Abraham, the gospel of blessing for Gentiles. Paul sees Abraham’s faith as a response to this gospel of blessing for the Gentiles. The context of Genesis 15:6 indicates that the content of Abraham’s faith was God’s promise of an innumerable offspring. One clear night God challenged Abraham to count the stars. Then God gave Abraham his promise: “So shall your offspring be” (Gen 15:5). When Abraham heard God’s promise, he believed. His faith was a response to God’s promise.
    The content of the Galatians’ faith is essentially the same. Their faith is believing what they heard (vv. 2, 5). What they heard was the gospel of blessing for Gentiles through the cross of Christ.

    As for the rest of what you say, well, to be honest with you I can’t even be bothered to reply. I’m tired of your word games, I’m tired of the way you try to turn things people say around to give yourself some kind of argumentative advantage. You rarely give an honest answer to any question preferring instead to mock. You may feel that you have exceptional debating skills but I would call it intellectual dishonesty. That seems to be a fairly common trait among LDS apologists & I suspect that many others in here feel exactly as I do.

  17. Old man says:

    Shem said

    “For others reading

    Old Man has now preached a God who alters the method of salvation. Before Christ people could save themselves in offering animal sacrifices on alters at proscribed times and seasons. As he says “the law of atonement or the sacrificial law, & that my friend is what the Hebrews practised to COVER their sins.”

    Are you for real? You enter into a long monologue accusing me of every underhand trick in the book & come out with such an obvious distortion of what I said that I truly am dumbfounded.

    Give me some quotes from my post showing that I said these things. Show me where I said that God alters ‘the method of salvation’ show me where I said ‘Before Christ people could save themselves’ show me why I’m wrong in saying that the sacrificial law was used by the Hebrews to cover their sins. Notice I said COVER I never once even hinted that it referred to salvation.

    “I have never turned anyone’s words around, but have discussed them in open and honest dialogue. If you can’t handle someone actually being honest about the LDS faith then maybe you should leave, because I am not; despite your twisted words and unfounded accusations.”

    I see nothing in your post, nothing at all that answers the things I said, it’s a post full of accusations but not a single honest response to the points I made. The only response is the one I quoted at the start in which you totally distorted everything I said. I really do hope that ‘others reading’ will check back on the last couple of posts as your comments above are so patently untrue that they will see right though your little game.
    Let others read what I said about Hebrews & Galatians, let them read what I said about the sacrificial law. If they, after doing this, agree with what you said about me & the points I made then I will be the first to apologise.

    [The comment by Shematwater that Old Man responds to here was deleted by the moderators. -Sharon]

  18. grindael says:

    As to God changing His mind, that has actually never happened to the extent that you are claiming. He has never altered the means for us to gain salvation.

    Actually the Mormon God has, he gave the law of consecration, but the “saints” would not obey it. Then he gave the LAW of Tithing as a substitute for it, and Mormon “prophets” claim that this was done because the “saints” don’t have enough faith to live by a “higher law”. This is the same thing that happened to Israel, for which CHRIST was the SACRIFICE to end it. Mormons have gone back to the time BEFORE CHRIST, back to the unsaving LAW. Mormon “prophets” now HINGE SALVATION on obeying the LAW OF TITHING. If you do not obey this FORCED REGULATION, you cannot get your “exaltation”. See my post HERE for more information about this. This is only ONE EXAMPLE, and there are many more that Old Man, RIGHTFULLY has called Shem out on and that Shem’s inadequate response can’t address.

    Because it says the gospel was preached to them. It states that very directly, with no ambiguity in the statement or in the context. What you say is true. But it is through the gospel that we enter God’s Rest, which is why it was preached to them as well as us, but since they lacked faith it was unprofitable and they did not enter into God’s rest.

    This is wholly not true. If you read on, to Chapter 11, Paul speaks of all those who HAD FAITH, like Abraham and a host of others. He then says,

    These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40 since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect. (Hebrews 11:39)

    This clearly shows how wrong your argument is. They knew they could not be saved UNTIL CHRIST CAME. They lived under the SAME LAW OF SACRIFICE as those Israelites who lived under the Law of Moses. The “Old Covenant” was from the time of Adam until Christ. That is when the “New Covenant” started. We now have Christ and his Spirit, and no longer need “taskmasters” or “prophets” to give us what we can get directly from Jesus by way of the Holy Spirit. His sacrifice opened that door for EVERYONE.

  19. shematwater says:

    Old Man

    [Text snipped by moderators]

    So, let us get right down to the subject at hand. The word Gospel literally means the “Good News” and is used in reference to the Atonement of Christ. It is the doctrine of the atonement, which fulfilled all the promises of God since before the world was (Titus 1: 2). Thus, to have the gospel preached is to have the atonement of Christ, with all its aspects, preached. The question then becomes, when was the atonement first preached to men? Did Abraham know that Christ would come and perform the atonement, thus fulfilling the promises made to him, and though him to the Gentiles. To give any other answer than yes is illogical. This conclusion is supported when we read Paul’s words to the Galatians. “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.” (Galatians 3: 8) Abraham knew that Christ would come to atone for the sins of the world, and was given the promise that Christ would come through his seed.
    Paul also declares that Moses had the gospel. Speaking of Ancient Israel he declares “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” (Hebrews 4: 2) Notice that he makes no distinction between the gospel the saints at that time had received, and the gospel that Israel, at the time of Moses received.
    Now, you want to claim that these two references don’t actually mean that the gospel was known to these ancient prophets. You want to claim that Paul had some other meaning in mind when he used this word. There is no reason to suppose this. The context of these verses actually support this conclusion very nicely.
    However, we can also read in the Old Testament a summary of the Gospel, or the doctrine of the Atonement. It was stated by Isaiah in prophecy. ” The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound” (Isaiah 61: 1). This is the gospel, or the doctrine of the atonement, as seen by an ancient prophet who then testified of the truth of it.

    As to your two methods of Salvation, please clarify. Are you saying that all men, including those who lived before Christ, are saved by his Atonement? If you are than how can you say they did not have the gospel, as that is what the atonement is?

  20. Old man says:

    Shem

    You totally distorted what I said in a previous post & here you are again, yet more distortion & word games. I have tried several times to explain these things to you as has Grindael but your mind is closed so all I will do is make a few additional comments.
    Yes the Gospel of Christ is about the Atonement but to say the Gospel was preached in all it’s aspects thousands of years before Christ is simply not true. For more in depth information on that read Grindaels posts again, he is much better at explaining it than I.
    You quote Isaiah but was Isaiah quoting from the Gospel? No he wasn’t, when Christ began His ministry He quoted from Isaiah so was that the Gospel? No it wasn’t. What you claim to be a ‘summary of the Gospel is nothing of the kind, they are the words a man used in proclaiming that He was the bringer of the good news. Not only do you distort my words but you twist the meaning of scripture for your own ends.
    I have made several attempts to expalin that the ‘gospel’ to which you refer was not the Gospel preached by Christ. The Old testament prophets knew that salvation was a future event, a gospel that was yet to come. The gospel that Abraham received was that all men would be blessed through him, it was a gospel of ‘blessing’ it was not the Gospel that Christ preached concerning the method of salvation.

    “As to your two methods of Salvation, please clarify.”
    If you had chosen to ask a simple question rather than imply or otherwise falsely claim that I believe in two methods of salvation I would have answered you. Don’t expect civilised answers if you cannot ask civilized questions. & please stop trying to ensnare me in the web that you weave.

Leave a Reply