This may seem like a silly question, but can anyone tell me what comprises “the Gospel” according to Mormonism?
I ask because I recently came across a video on You Tube titled “Sharing the Gospel with Elder Hartman Rector Jr., A Missionary Tool.” In this video Mr. Rector, emeritus General Authority of the LDS Church, talks about Doctrine & Covenants 33:7-10 wherein readers are told that the field is white and ready to harvest, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mr. Rector explains that Latter-day Saints are “their access in” to the kingdom of heaven for people not yet members of the Church. Mormons must “open their mouths” to reap the harvest. “[I]t doesn’t make any difference [what you say],” Mr. Rector instructs, “as long as you talk about the Church.”
From there Mr. Rector provides some ideas of what Latter-day Saints might say when they open their mouths. He says to ask questions: “By the way, do you like to read? If I would send you a book that contains the actual account of the visit of the Lord Jesus Christ to America, would you read it?” Ostensibly, 97.5 percent of the people who are asked this question say yes.
Mr. Rector suggests another technique that involves the use of a coin imprinted with the images of the prophet Moroni on one side and Joseph Smith on the other. Again, Latter-day Saints are to ask if the person they’re talking with would be willing to receive and read the Book of Mormon (though Mr. Rector does not say to call the book by its title). Using this approach, 90 percent agree to receive the Book of Mormon and willingly provide their names and addresses to a complete stranger.
Latter-day Saints are told to write in the book before they send it, “Something simple like…If you will read this book and apply the promise on page 529 it will change your life, as it has changed mine.”
Okay, well it could be that the person who posted this video attached a poorly chosen title to it, yet at least to that Mormon’s understanding, Mr. Rector is explaining how to share the Gospel. In the entire 6 minutes and 55 seconds that the video runs, the death, burial and resurrection of Christ is never mentioned. The Atonement of Christ is never mentioned. Man’s need of a Savior is never mentioned. In fact, Jesus Christ Himself is only mentioned in relation to being a main character in the Book of Mormon. Exactly what “Gospel” are these people sharing? Not the Gospel Paul preached, at least not directly.
The “Gospel” is “The central message of the Christian church to the world, centered on God’s provision of salvation for the world in Jesus Christ” (Donald K. McKim, Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms).
A “Gospel” without Christ at its center is foreign to me. What is this Mormon “Gospel” that Latter-day Saints are told to share without even talking about salvation and what Christ has done for us?
Olsen-
you wrote
“Would you endorse the same approach with the Bible? Read the scientific and rational arguments of those who do not believe in the Bible and then pray to God to know if it is true? Can you see a problem?”
Did you forget that the Bible came first? The criteria for accepting the NT is that it lines up with the OT, (although many Evangelicals gloss over this idea). In turn the criteria for the BoM and Mormon doctrine in general for being true is whether or not it lines up with the Bible. We always have to base our comparison on that which was revealed to us first. What came first? The Torah (aka the first 5 books of the Bible which were given to Moses). The LDS doctrine contradicts the Torah and the Prophets(OT) and the Apostolic writings(NT), therefore it is not true! There is no point in praying over a book that contradicts God’s Word. It would be like praying whether or not I should murder or steal. You don’t do this because “it is written” not to(a quote we see many times in the Bible).
“…they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” Acts 17:11
Janet,
You seem to have a lot to say in defense or the LDS gospel. You even said once that you agree with what Jesus said, but then went on to add to what he said by saying we need to be baptized to be saved and we need to keep the commandments (Laws). Thats adding to what he said.
Then you tell us were wrong in what we believe, yet no matter how much we show you from what your prophets have said, you always say we are spinning it, or we dont understand or what ever.
But if someone from the LDS church quotes from the same book or source we use, Example, JoD, you seem to agree with it. Like Adam God is either false or not enough (Revelation) To fully believe it. Yet the King Follet Discouse is taught as truth and gospel doctrine, Like the fact their are millions of Gods and we can become one.
You say you believe and know the Bible, But when confronted with what it says you ignore that, but then go on to quote from it at later points.
If you know it so well you should be better at clearing up the confusion. So yes you lie, you might not flat out lie like, You said on thing and then later go onto say something totally different. Example, You say, I believe we are save d by works and grace, then later say, I never said that.
Your lying by what you leave out, or add to what you say. I went over this a million times with an atheist who was posting here.
She would say, God is mean,and hateful and cruel. Yet even if she does not believe the Bible or in God, I would point out how God showed grace by sparing people, or giving them hundreds of years to repent. She would go back to her ranting about God being hateful and cruel and ignore the fact that God showed love and grace in many ways.
I told her that makes her a liar for only giving one side when she was clearly shown both sides. You do the same thing, That is why I call you a liar and untrustworthy. Rick b
Olsen wrote:
“Could a person accept God before Christ’s earthly ministry without accepting the Law of Moses with it’s guidelines? No. Christ fulfilled that law, but that does not mean he did away with ordinances and authority. You disagree, but my logic is perfectly legitimate.”
The LDS “laws and ordinances” are not the same laws and ordinances revealed to Moses. They are a different set of laws that contradict God’s laws which were given to Abraham, Moses etc… Those in the OT were not saved by adherence to a set of laws, they were saved by faith just as we are today. Your logic is not logical. Christ fulfilled in the sense that we are not under condemnation of the laws. He did not change the laws!
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Matthew 5:17-18
Did I somehow miss heaven and earth passing away? Until it does the LDS church, and any other church for that matter, has no authority to change God’s laws!
Ralph,
You said I would not believe you because I “do not wish to believe what you believe.” This is not the reason at all. I am convinced by the true eternal God who never changes – the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who created all things and holds all things together. I am convinced by Scripture of salvation by grace – meaning I will dwell forever with God the Father due to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross for my sins. It’s not that I WISH to not believe Mormonism, I am convinced it is false and the Book of Mormon is not a real history of anything but is rather a false deceiving story which leads people astray – and all the evidence both external and internal line up with this belief. Mormons try to control those they recruit as to how they are to determine what is true – by persuading people that prayer is the only valid way to know if Mormonism is true. I reject that test and feel it would actually be WRONG to ask God about a book He has plainly shown me is false. That’s why when I did pray I asked God to show me if I was wrong or if what I had read and heard was false. It was at that time that I found out more and more about Mormonism – especially shocking to me was the idea that God was once a man. And then I found out about Kolob. A friend of mine even asked a mutual friend (who was Mormon and may still be) when we were admiring the stars one night if she thought we could see Kolob from there. She giggled nervously (even as a faithful Mormon she knew how the entire Kolob thing sounded- preposterous). Even as a new Christian I realized that the things the LDS Church is teaching do not line up with Scripture and the God revealed in Scripture. I asked the Mormon missionaries about things after our friend could not answer – and they had no answers, but kept going back to praying about the BOM. Mormons basically place all trust in one thing – an emotional feeling confirming the BOM/LDS Church/Joseph Smith. This is the gospel of Mormonism.
Janet said “Grindael seems like a lost soul,” and “Falcon that never deviate from…”
grindael has never posted anything that would lead me to conclude he is a “lost soul.”
To the contrary, his posts demonstrate an earnestness and conviction that are admirable. grindael’s, Falcon’s and other posters ire is not aimed at Mormons, but quite simply at a church they recognize as demonstrably false. Their repeated choices to post here over the years, show a tremendous moral fiber.
I agree whole-heartedly, bfwjr. Those that comment out here are not against Mormons, they are against Mormonism-the church, for leading Mormons away from Jesus.
None of us wins anything by caring that Mormons find Jesus. What we have found in Him, personally, is so wonderful that it ups and flows out of our cups, and we want to share Him. That is our reason for fighting against “the Church”, and FOR Mormons.
rvales,
Using the same criteria you used to determine that the Bible is true, you should also conclude that the BOM is true. The very same truths and principles you describe are outlined and taught there in perfect detail. Have you read the BOM? Help me out here.
liv4jc,
Explain to me why you do not believe the ancient religion of the Pharoahs. The same standards used to “prove” that the Bible events happened in real places can also be shown to prove the same things about ancient Egypt. Why not accept their religion?
You say “All you have is a testimony based upon your tradition.”
I would say the exact opposite is true- my testimony is based on personal revelation and the EVs are claiming here that their testimonies of the Bible are based on physical proofs. I know which I would rather live by and claim on the day of judgement.
Messianic,
Have you read the BOM? In what ways does it “contradict” the Bible? You realize that what you related is an opinion, and there are millions of people who have studied the BOM and are of the opinion that it does not contradict the Bible. Have you made a serious study of the BOM, or just relied upon the opinions of others?
Have you applied the verse from Acts to the BOM?
Here is the gospel according to the BOM:
“Christ shall come among the children of men, to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and he shall atone for the sins of the world; for the Lord God hath spoken it. For it is expedient that an atonement should be made; for according to the great plan of the Eternal God there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish; yea, all are hardened; yea, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish except it be through the atonement which it is expedient should be made. For it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, either of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice….And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal. And thus he shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name; this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance.” Alma 34
He same plain explanation could be quoted from a hundred different places in the BOM.
Messianic- I think we are not connecting on my point about the Law of Moses. I never claimed that the LDS ordinances are the same as the Law of Moses. My point was that Christ’s atonement didn’t necessarily remove all ordinances from existence. It fulfilled those associated with the Law of Moses. But just because that Law has been fulfilled does not mean there are no more ordinances. In other words, not all ordinances fall under the Law of Moses. Make sense?
Is baptism an ordinance? Was it practiced in the ancient church? Why did they baptize members if all ordinances had been done away at the time of the atonement?
Don’t you think it’s weird that the Book of Mormon gospel is not the same as the Mormon gospel?
http://blog.mrm.org/2010/01/the-official-fulness-of-the-gospel/
Olsen-
you wrote:
“Have you applied the verse from Acts to the BOM?”
First of all, you need to realize that the Bereans did not have any of the NT scriptures to analyze, they only had the OT. You cannot compare the BoM to the BoM saying you are searching scripture any more than the Ev. compare the NT to the NT. You have to measure new revelation by comparing it to that which came before it. If Paul had been preaching what many Ev. think he preached the Bereans would not have accepted him.
And secondly yes, I have read enough of the BoM, D&C and Pearl of Great Price to see how they do not line up with the Bible, OT and NT.
I am sorry, but there is no opinion in the fact that Jesus did not destroy His laws it is in the Bible clear as day. How do you reconscile these verses with the fact that the LDs have changed the laws?
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Matthew 5:17-18
Please tell me how the temple ordinances that the LDS do line up with the Temple ordinances in the OT? Just read Leviticus and you will see that they differ greatly.
The LDS have non-Levites claiming a priesthood that was only for Levites and men claiming a priesthood that was only for Jesus Himself.
The LDS have moved the Sabbath, done away with God’s commanded feasts and replaced them with meaningless Pagan holidays and built temples not patterned after ‘The Temple’ to do pagan rituals inherited from pagan god worshipping Masons.
“Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” Matthew 7;20
All I see is Pagan fruit!
cont….
The LDS have made Jesus a separate God from the Father which goes directly against one of the most highly regarded verses in the Torah:
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:” Deut 6:4
If Jesus is not one with God then Christianity is a false religion as it does not align with the Torah!
I could go on and on, but let’s just stop there for now.
How about the Chuckler PROVING this quote:
Chuckle, a friend sent me a picture of a marquee sign outside a Baptist Church.
First Baptist Church
Don’t Pray About The Book Of Mormon. That’s How They Get You!
Janet.
I frankly disbelieve it. Can you provide the picture you were sent, if you send it to Sharon I’m sure she will verify for us that it is real. You should have the picture, right? IF IT’S REAL. Just send to [email protected] BUT I highly doubt you can ….
you wrote:
“Messianic- I think we are not connecting on my point about the Law of Moses. I never claimed that the LDS ordinances are the same as the Law of Moses. My point was that Christ’s atonement didn’t necessarily remove all ordinances from existence. It fulfilled those associated with the Law of Moses. But just because that Law has been fulfilled does not mean there are no more ordinances. In other words, not all ordinances fall under the Law of Moses. Make sense?
Is baptism an ordinance? Was it practiced in the ancient church? Why did they baptize members if all ordinances had been done away at the time of the atonement?”
This is where I differ in opinion with the Ev. on this site. I don’t believe fulfillment means to do away with. Jesus Himself said that He did not come to destroy the law and that not one jot or tittle would be done away with. There is no other law! The ordinances and laws that the LDS follow are pagan ordinances and laws. The ‘law of Moses’ is ‘the law of God’ and it is not done away with. The problem is that the LDS laws are not the same as the law of Moses, that is precisely why they are false laws and ordinances.
Baptism was the Greek word for the Hebrew mikvah which both mean to immerse and were being done throughout Jewish history for various reasons. Think about it, why was there no complaint from the Jews regarding John the Baptist running around immersing people? Because it was a standard practice. And there were many reasons why one would take part in a Mikvah, salvation was never one of them! Just as circumcision does not save anyone, baptism doesn’t save anyone. This was not a new practice, this was simply an action that showed your faith in the God of Abraham. It was always and is still today this faith that saves a person!
I FOUND THESE ON THE WEB FLOATING AROUND. I DO BELIEVE SOMEONE HERE IS USING THE SAME TACTICS THEY CLAIM OTHERS USE. (INVENTING THE TRUTH) I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think so.
Notice, LOCATION UNKNOWN. YEAH, THIS IS A MORMON MYTH. UNTIL I HAVE VERIFICATION THAT THERE IS AN ACTUAL PICTURE OF A SIGN IN FRONT OF A BAPTIST CHURCH, I DON’T BELIEVE IT. BUT SOMEONE HERE SAYS THEY HAVE ONE, SO, IF THIS IS TRUE, LET’S PRODUCE IT.
bfwjr –
Here is the exchange (and Janet’s blowoff)
Janet on March 7th, 2010
15 For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.
Janet
grindael on March 8th, 2010
Janet,
I’m intrigued. Tell me exactly what is PERFECT KNOWLEDGE, as day from night. You seem to know since you have quoted the scripture twice.
This is ‘her’ answer:
Does God ask us to not Judge others, so a perfect knowledge is beyond an opinion or speculation, or gossip. God gives us the ability to know for sure, good from evil. There is no gray area as many would like to think, black or white there is no middle ground.
Pure double speak. Of course chuckler can’t answer it. If it is ‘beyond opinion’ then why does it tell one they can have it in the Book of Mormon? A ‘testimony’ is NOT perfect knowledge. What is it? Another Mormon Myth. (The Second Anointing or calling and election). I find it interesting in his Promised Messiah, McConkie goes on and on about how one must make their calling and election sure and SEE JESUS, but in one of the last speeches of his life he said at the end he was looking forward to meeting the Saviour. All they have are ‘good feelings’ not true face to face revelation as so many of the Mormons have claimed.
But it seems we have a ‘budding psychiatrist’ here at MC:
Grindael seems like a lost soul, not quiet sure that he made the right decision of leaving the LDS Church, so spinning facts and evidence even though he filters in some truths makes me wonder also about his agenda. Is he here to convince me, or convince himself, I think it is the latter.
I don’t try to CONVINCE anyone. I let God do that, like He did with me. What I am doing is presenting ‘evidence’. The pure panic of the chuckler’s responses and her fabrication of SIGNS and changing of dates on quotes shows who the real deceiver is here.
Grindael,
There is a website online where you can type anything you want in and it puts it on a Baptist Church sign. I’ve done it myself –
http://www.says-it.com/churchsigns/classic1.php
Well thank you bfwjr and setfree. It’s nice of you to defend me against the rabid attacks of the rascally Mormons!
I think I’m the second longest regular poster out here on MC with Rick The Hammer predating me. I always like it when he’s around because he makes me appear quite moderate. I’ve personally met the Hammer and yes, he is as scary in public as he is on this blog! Mormons were running and tipping over chairs and tables to get away from him in the food court of the mall were we met. It was quite a scene. One I’m sure that was captured on mall security cameras and is used in the Mormon missionary training center. I’m sure there’s a “Wanted Dead or Alive” poster out there in Mormonland some where with Rick’s picture on it.
So why do I do this? Well I keep trying to get out of it but the Lord has told me to keep at it until he gives me something else to do. I have a definite strategy which I don’t mind sharing. First of all I rarely if ever read anything a Mormon posts. I get the drift by reading the posts of the Christians. My targeted market niche is the Mormon lurkers. I have about a half-dozen themes I keep pounding away at realizing that like talk radio, people are constantly tuning in at various times and may not have seen one of the main points I think are important. I’m not really all that concerned about the Mormon posters because by and large they are hardcore and come here for a while and move on when they realize that this is a well informed bunch of Christians on MC. The TBMs just provide a foil to bounce off of.
My basic promise to God is that I will vigorously defend the Gospel of Jesus Christ against all threats foreign or domestic. Our salvation was bought with the precious blood of Jesus and to see his Gospel maligned, twisted, and mis-characterized is unacceptable. As Christians we understand that we aren’t battling against flesh and blood but the forces of darkness in the heavenlies (Ephesians 6).
Christ calls us to this work.
messianic,
Thanks for the response.
The BOM does not contradict the Bible. No more than the NT does. Can you explain how you think the BOM contradicts the OT or NT?
Consider when the LOM was given- around 1400 B.C. Are you saying that before that, no laws of God existed or were revealed? Of course not.
The LOM was given as a lesser law because Israel could not live up to the higher law. It was given to direct their minds and hearts to the ultimate sacrifice that would be offered in Christ.
But what do you think of the thousands of years before the LOM was given. Under what law did people like Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Joseph, Noah live? The LOM came thousands of years after many of these guys.
We contend that the gospel had been revealed to the patriarchs. Consider that Enoch “walked with God.” Do you not think the entire gospel was revealed to him and others? I think people believe that because it is not described in the Bible, it didn’t happen. And I think that is crazy.
These were some of the most holy men in history. The LOM was a lesser law given to a stubborn and hard-hearted people.
The laws and ordinances of the modern Church of Jesus Christ predate the LOM.
How much reading of the BOM text constitutes “enough” to know it? Would you be comfortable glancing at the OT casually and making conclusions?
And the Melchizedek Priesthood is not only possessed by Christ. Why would it be called the Melchizedek Priesthood if that were so? It was known as the Priesthood after the order of Melchizedek. What is an “order?” I invite you to look it up in dictionary.
What authority did the patriarchs posses, if any? Did priesthood only enter the picture with the Levites? The answer is no.
Many people narrow God’s interaction with man prior to Christ down to the LOM. And this is simply uninformed.
There really isn’t much doctrine in the BoM that the Mormon’s use. Are you really going to try to tell me that God revealed the Sabbath as the 7th day only at the time of Moses and that it was always Sunday prior to that? Please, that is rediculous! To answer your question, I read about half of the BoM as well as most of the D&C and some of the Pearl of Great Price. It was really the latter 2 that had the majority of contradictions in them. The BoM read mostly as a ficticious novel that was highly plagerized from the Bible without the understanding of the culture of the time. During the time I read the BoM I had an incredibly open mind and prayed for guidance and truth from God. I felt a confirmation that it was not true. And in fact studying Mormonism actually led me to the beliefs I have today. I was previously a strong Evangelical Christian and was led to the truth through study of the Bible in order to refute Mormonism. I not only found Mormonism to be unture, but I found a lot of problems with the Evangelical movement as well. While I think most Evangelicals are well meaning and probably saved, I think the doctrine has a lot of issues and contradictions.
Before Moses the laws were not written down, but they were always in existance and known to the forefathers. How do you think Cain knew what to sacrifice? How did Abraham know the commandments? How did Noah know what was a clean and an unclean animal? Re read the Torah and you will see that there are hints of the law being present throughout before Moses. There was a reason that the manna only came down 6 days and not the 7th, but spoiled when they kept it longer than a day except on the 7th day. This was God observing the Sabbath before the ‘Law of Moses’! God’s law is unchangeable and forever. The law was not given because the Israelites were weak, it was given because it was God’s instructions, His holiness revealed. We can never live up to to the law, but that is not the laws imperfection, it is ours.
messianic,
How can you say “There really isn’t much doctrine in the BoM that the Mormon’s use” when you have ready maybe half of it?
It sounds to me like you are repeating something you have heard from somebody else.
Your statement is absolutely false. I speak in church all the time and use the BOM as my primary source. It is used all the time. Show me one doctrine or teaching that we do not “use.” Please don’t say the Law of Moses.
You seem to keep going back to worship on the 7th day. That can be argued. But why single out the LDS church for that? It sounds like that is primarily what you are referring to when you say the LDS church has “changed the law.”
So you agree that the patriarchs had revelations and knowledge not recorded in the Bible? The EVs have a hard time with that.
lol, Jim, Ev’s don’t have a hard time with the ‘patriarchs’ having the law of Moses… we have a hard time with the ‘patriarchs’ having the law of Joseph (Smith)
Janet on March 7th, 2010
15 For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.
Janet
grindael on March 8th, 2010
Janet,
I’m intrigued. Tell me exactly what is PERFECT KNOWLEDGE, as day from night. You seem to know since you have quoted the scripture twice.
This is ‘her’ answer:
Does God ask us to not Judge others, so a perfect knowledge is beyond an opinion or speculation, or gossip. God gives us the ability to know for sure, good from evil. There is no gray area as many would like to think, black or white there is no middle ground.
No here is my answer:
Janet on March 8th, 2010
Does God ask us to not Judge others, so a perfect knowledge is beyond an opinion or speculation, or gossip. God gives us the ability to know for sure, good from evil. There is no gray area as many would like to think, black or white there is no middle ground.
So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
God does not allow for any unclean thing to enter into His Kingdom in Heaven. God does not tell us evil is beautiful, that is mans theory and most likely his gray area.
Janet
Falcon,
I ”follow a guy who you claim as a great prophet of God who was an avid practitioner of occult magic, who ran about the country side scrying with a magic rock, who practiced occult second sight vision, who “married” at least thirty-three women and girls, some of the women who were married to other men, who stole and introduced occult Free Masonry rituals and introduced them as “sacred” rituals
Practitioner of occult magic – Genesis 30:31-43 Jacob/Israel defies the laws of genetics/science; 2 Kings 6:5-7 Elisha iron does not float after placing wood in the water near where it fell in; Moses parting the Red Sea by raising his staff; 2 Kings 2:8 Elijah parting the water by throwing his cloak onto it. Anything else I can put in here?
Scrying with a magic rock – Moses, Joshua, Aaron, and others who have used the Urim and Thummin. These were stones that the viewer looked into/through to gain revelation from God. We have been through this about the function and use of the Urim and Thummin giving webpages from Jewish authors as references. Do you want all that again?
Occult second sight vision – I don’t understand exactly what you mean by this but the Bible explains that God will visit His prophets in visions and dreams. So going through the Bible we have Moses, Peter, Saul/Paul, Elisha, Elijah, etc.
Polygamy – Moses, Jacob/Israel, Abram were prophets who had more than one wife at a time.
Marrying girls – The majority of the men in the Bible married girls. It is widely accepted that Mary was between 12 and 14 when she fell pregnant with Jesus, thus Joseph married a ‘girl’.
Introducing occult rituals – Baptism was originally a pagan ritual. What does this say about Christianity then? But let’s look at who baptised – John the Baptist, Paul, the majority of Jesus’ apostles. Who was baptised/accepted baptism – Jesus.
So can you please tell me which one of these am I following?
Falcon (ctd),
It does not matter what their life is/was like does it? They taught what God wanted them to teach so they were faithful prophets. Why can’t JS, BY, etc be the same? Just because they teach differently to what you choose to believe does not make them incorrect, it just make either you or them incorrect. I, like you, have my own evidences that I am following the true God, thus it does not matter what JS’s lifestyle was like, I believe that he was a prophet of God, just like the prophets in the Bible and their lifestyles.
Liv4jc,
I know that my Heavenly Father and Jesus are not the same as the God of Trinitarian Christianity, but I also know that the Trinitarian God is not described in the Bible, but is an interpretation of the Bible from picking various verses and forgetting others. So how can you tell me that the Trinitarian God is the one and only God of the Bible when there are at least 3 other descriptions of God from interpreting the Bible floating around in other Christian churches, except for the fact that you have decided to believe in the Trinity? Yes I know we have been through how you can find the Trinity described in the Bible, but we have shown you how we LDS find our God in the Bible, that is not my question. My question is why are you so sure you are correct given that the Trinity is only one of a number of interpretations from the Bible of who God is? Don’t use history or 1600 years of tradition as your answer either because there were a number of ‘gods’ being worshiped in Christianity up until the Nicene creed was formalised as the standard for Trinitarian/mainstream Christianity. What if one of the others were correct and that is now what the LDS believe in? Then we would have history on our side wouldn’t we?
I won’t bother going over old ground about what is wrong with how you describe our Heavenly Father and Jesus, it has all been said before and you just won’t listen.
Where oh where is Janet’s Sign picture? Having trouble producing it Janet?
Olsen-
I should have clarified this thought better. Let me explain: “There really isn’t much doctrine in the BoM that the Mormon’s use”
The LDS may quote the BoM and refer to it as an inspired work, but if that is the only book they used they really would not have the church as it stands today with it’s many doctrines. For example, plurality of God’s, the seperateness of God the Father and Jesus, a heavenly mother, a preexistance, satan and Jesus as brothers, the temple ordinances and rituals, the word of wisdom, man becoming god etc….. These doctrines are all present in the other works or in church theology, but not the BoM. If the LDS church had only the BoM the doctrine they preached would be much different, it would look a lot more Christian. You would have a very similar theology to the churches that Joseph Smith grew up around, dare I say it would be almost identical to the Protestant churches of today just with a book about a made up history. The LDS doctrines that differ from Christianity come out of the D&C, the Pearl of Great Price and the Mormon prophets mouths.
You wrote:
“You seem to keep going back to worship on the 7th day. That can be argued. But why single out the LDS church for that? It sounds like that is primarily what you are referring to when you say the LDS church has “changed the law.””
I single out the LDS church because they claim to be restoring the original church yet they don’t do the things the original church did. For example, observing the Sabbath on the 7th day, keeping the feasts and festivals (Passover, unleavened Bread, First Fruits, Sukkot etc…), eating a biblical diet (no pork or shellfish etc…). It is the entire Torah that is abandoned, not just the Sabbath. The Evangelical church claims that these laws were done away with, while I think they are wrong and are teaching a somewhat gnostic gospel, they do not claim to be restoring the truth of the early church.
cont…
The LDS do make this claim and then turn around and include all the wrong doctrine that the Catholic church fathers inserted into Christianity. They keep Sabbath on Sunday, observe Christmas and Easter and Halloween (Pagan celebrations), omit the festivals, eat unclean foods and observe pagan rituals in their pagan temples.
You wrote:
“So you agree that the patriarchs had revelations and knowledge not recorded in the Bible? “
Yes and No, do I think the patriarchs had revelation that we do not see revealed directly to them in the Bible? Yes. Do I believe that they received different revelation that was not the same as that which was revealed to Moses? No. God’s law is God’s law. The law Moses was given is the same as the law that was given to all those before him. God’s law is the standard for holiness, it is God’s standard, not Moses, not the Israelites, but God’s alone that He revealed through Moses to mankind. We, as fallen wretched sinners could not ever meet His perfect and holy standards, that does not make the standards any less holy or perfect. Jesus met that standard and is our only hope. Through Him we are reborn, a new creature, and are now able to, in His power, begin to step by step follow Him.
“Moses, Joshua, Aaron, and others who have used the Urim and Thummin. These were stones that the viewer looked into/through to gain revelation from God.”
This is just completely wrong & a Mormon Myth. Bottom line, historians are totally unsure what it was.
Scholars believe the Urim and Thummim were put inside a pouch, (on the breastplate of the high priest) & they were presumably small and fairly flat, and were possibly tablets of wood or of bone.
They were used for casting lots, Urim essentially means guilty and Thummim essentially means innocent, this would imply that the purpose of the Urim and Thummim was an ordeal to confirm or deny suspected guilt; if the Urim was selected it meant guilt, while selection of the Thummim would mean innocence.
It is a Mormon Fabrication invented long after Smith translated the BOM that he used a urim & thummim and that his peepstone was one.
Go here for more info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urim_and_thummim
Grindael,
This is what I have found out about the Urim and Thummim from the internet and from NON-LDS sources. It is much different to what you found on wikipedia (which is a great source of truth, isn’t it?). A couple of these sites are from Jewish origin so it’s not just ‘LDS myth’ as you put it but Jewish myth.
Question: “What were the Urim and Thummim?”
Answer: The Urim “lights” and Thummim “perfections” were gemstones that were carried by the High Priest of Israel on the ephod / priestly garments. They were used by the High Priest to determine God’s will in some situations. Some propose that God would cause the Urim and Thummim to light up in varying patterns to reveal His decision. Others propose that the Urim and Thummim were kept in a pouch and were engraved with symbols identifying yes / no and true / false.
It is unclear whether the Urim and Thummim were on, by, or in the High Priest’s ephod. No one knows the precise nature of the Urim and Thummim or exactly how they were used. The Bible simply does not give us enough information. References to the Urim and Thummim are rare in the Bible. They are first mentioned in the description of the breastplate of judgment (Exodus 28:30; Leviticus 8:8). When Joshua succeeded Moses as leader over Israel, he was to receive answers from God by means of the Urim through Eleazar the High Priest (Numbers 27:21). The Urim and Thummim are next mentioned in Moses’ dying blessing upon Levi (Deuteronomy 33:8). The following Scripture likely also speak of the Urim and Thummim: Joshua 7:14-18; 1 Samuel 14:37-45; and 2 Samuel 21:1.
http://www.gotquestions.org/urim-thummim.html
Urim and Thummim
by Rabbi Geoffrey W. Dennis
(Meaning uncertain, possibly “Light and Perfection” or “Perfect lights”). A method for inquiring of the God of Israel that was kept part of the priestly garments. Little is truly known about the Urim and Thummim; even the name has been subjected to wildly different translations. The Rabbis understood the Urim and Thummim to be part of the Breastplate of the High Priest and that its oracular function came from light shining through the twelve gemstones mounted on the breastplate. This was achieved by having a plate inscribed with the Tetragrammaton inserted behind the gemstone mounts. Supernal light radiating from the divine name would illuminate different stones. Since each stone was inscribed with the names of the twelve tribes, the Talmud teaches that it functioned as a kind of ouija board, with messages being spelled out for the High Priest. Some believe the Urim were the lights, while the Thummim was a device or code that helped in interpreting the message.
Other interpreters suggest that the Urim and Thummim were separate objects that were both kept in a pouch on the breastplate. In the Bible we read about one individual who made a counterfeit breastplate for his personal cult. For his breastplate he substituted teraphim for the Urim and Thummim (Judges 17-18; Hos. 3:4). This is a tantalizing but frustrating bit of data, because we know even less about the teraphim then we do about the Urim and Thummim. Consequently, the association of the two objects does not shed much light on either, no pun intended. The best evidence is that the two may have both been made of light-reflecting stone; Mesopotamian sources also mention an elmeshu stone used by the gods for oracular purposes.
TBC –
The context for its mention in Scripture indicates the Urim and Thummim was only used for questions of grave importance, usually connected to the function of the state, such as whether and when to go to war, though there is one passage in Numbers that hints at the possibility it was used for more mundane questions, such as resolving difficult legal questions. The answers given by the Urim and Thummim recorded in the Bible were full sentences, suggesting either that the device was merely an aid to oracular prophecy, or that the Rabbis were correct in their claim that it spelled out messages from the letters on the breastplate.
Mention of the Urim and Thummim ceases early in the history of Israel, indicating that it was no longer in use at the rise of classical prophecy (8th Century BCE). There is some indication that it was reintroduced briefly during the Persian period, but it quickly disappears from the records. Since then it has become part and parcel of Western occult lore; Joseph Smith claimed to have used the Urim and Thummim to read the “Reformed Egyptian” language of the golden book given him by the angel Moroni. (DDS 4QQ376, 4QpIsa; Antiquities; B. Yoma; Exodus Rabbah; Number Rabbah; Sifrei Numbers; Targum Pesudo-Jonathan; PdRE; Zohar; Ramban on Ex. 28).
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/u/urim_and_thummim.html
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=52&letter=U
Ralph,
You answered your own questions with this:
No one knows the precise nature of the Urim and Thummim or exactly how they were used.
So calling Smith’s peepstone a Urim and Thummim, again, is a Mormon Myth.
Here are the references from the Wiki article:
^ a b c d Peake’s commentary on the Bible
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Jewish Encyclopedia
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Cheyne and Black, Encyclopedia Biblica
^ 1 Samuel 14:37
^ Exodus 28:13-30
^ Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Exodus 28:30
^ Yoma 73a-b
^ Yoma 44c in the Jerusalem Talmud
^ Sifre, Numbers 141
^ Yoma 73b
^ 1 Samuel 28:3-6
^ Israel Finkelstein, The Bible Unearthed
^ Exodus 28:30
^ Hosea 3:4
^ Sanhedrin 16a
^ Yoma 41b (Jerusalem Talmud)
^ Shebbit 2-3, and 16a
^ Shebbit 33d (Jerusalem Talmud)
^ Sanhedrin 19b (Jerusalem Talmud)
^ Yoma 7; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Exodus 28:30
^ Josephus Antiquities of the Jews (volume 3) 8:9
^ Sotah 9:10
^ Yoma 21b
^ Tamid 65b (Jerusalem Talmud)
^ Ezra 2:63, which is also Nehemiah 7:65
why would you then make the comment (which is a great source of truth, isn’t it?) and denigrate the sources, which include jewish ones?
It is notable that the term “Urim and Thummim” is not found in the Book of Mormon and was never used by Joseph Smith with reference to producing the Book of Mormon until after 1833. In that year, a close associate of Smith, W.W. Phelps, speculated that the ancient Nephite interpreters mentioned in the Book of Mormon and by Joseph Smith might be the Urim and Thummim of the Old Testament. Phelps wrote in the LDS publication The Evening and Morning Star (Jan. 1833) that the Book of Mormon had been translated, “through the aid of a pair of Interpreters, or spectacles — (known perhaps, in ancient days as Teraphim, or Urim and Thummim) …”14 Phelps words, “known perhaps in ancient days as Teraphim, or Urim and Thummim” show that it was merely speculation on his part that associated Joseph’s magic seer stone with the biblical Urim and Thummim. Phelps’ speculation gained quick popularity to the point where LDS writers used the term Urim and Thummim to refer to both the mystical interpreters Joseph Smith said were with the gold plates, and to the seer stone Joseph placed in his hat while dictating the Book of Mormon.
It should be noted that the mention of the Urim and Thummim in Doctrine and Covenants 10:1, dated “summer of 1828,” was written back into this revelation at a later date. In its original form as Chapter IX of the 1833 Book of Commandments, the revelation makes no mention of the Urim and Thummim 17 (view scanned image of 1833 Book of Commandments, Chapter IX). The mention of Urim and Thummim in what is now designated D&C 10:1 first appears in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Commandments, where it is found as Section XXXVIII.
http://www.irr.org/MIT/divination.html
Where oh where is Janet’s Sign picture? Having trouble producing it Janet?
Gee gredael, after you rained on my parade and proved that anyone can put up a Sermon Topic on the First Baptist Church Marquee I just forgot to get back to you. I have the pic, but when I went to the web site, guess you were right, bingo the same pic I have, but you have to admit, it was a chuckle 🙂
Seriously, you need to be less serious, have some fun it’s not the end just yet, I’m sure you will one of the righteous to be Raptured up.
Janet. 🙂
OK Grindael,
There is more to the story than I found when I looked a few years ago. But you did miss out on copying and pasting from the Wiki article some quotes that verify what I say and are different to your assertions.
So this says the meaning could also be ‘lights and perfections’ not just ‘innocent or guilty’ as you are saying.
This part here agrees with what I have found, that they were gems and ‘supernatural’ readings came from them in sentence form not just yes or no.
Finally ”In ancient Israelite religion and culture, Urim and Thummim is a phrase from the Hebrew Bible associated with the Hoshen (High Priest’s breastplate), divination in general, and cleromancy in particular. Most scholars suspect that the phrase refers to specific objects involved in the divination.” In other words, the Levite priests were involved in divination when using the Urim and Thummim
Why am I not surprised? But I doubt there was a parade to rain on. The Baptist’s have more intelligence than that.
Your latest post Ralph, is irrelevant. And that is why I put (for more info use the link). Your original comment is still wrong:
These were stones that the viewer looked into/through to gain revelation from God.
Again it is speculation that they were involved in divination. It can’t be ruled out, but making it a ‘given’ is disingenuous.
Bottom line (again): no one really knows what they were or how they worked.
I agree, I have some very good friends who are Baptist. In case you haven’t gotten over it, as I stated it was a chuckle. Lighten up, Mormons don’t hate Christians.
Janet.
Your ‘chuckles’ are ambiguous at best Janet, but your tries at being a psychiatrist are amusing.
grindael,
Well I think you pretty much sliced and diced Ralph’s “arguments”. This is typical Ralph stuff. He contradicts himself, agrees with you and doesn’t see it. Ralph will cast about for anything to support his on-going support of the false prophet and occultist Joseph Smith. Ralph has chosen to follow the spirit of the dark side and to him it all looks like light. This is what cult indoctrination is all about. Cults change the normal thought process so that any explanation or piece of information support the cults aberrant and might I say dangerous doctrine.
I mean think about this. Smith was taking other men’s wives as his own play things and Ralph can find an explanation that works to support his faith in the guy as a prophet. Ralph’s usual justification is to run to the Bible and produce a verse that shows that one of the Biblical characters sinned. In regards to polygamy Ralph conveniently leaves out the fact that Smith spun a yarn that an angel with a sword threatened to kill him if he didn’t start collecting Mormon babes. In fact Smith institutionalized his adultery and “revealed” that a man had to have a bunch of wives to reach the highest level of godhood in the Celestial kingdom.
Ralph is living testimony to the fact that to a true believer, any explanation will do because in the end, Ralph can add the tag line “therefore the church is true” to any piece of information even that which proves just the opposite.
Welcome to the wacky world of Mormon cult thinking!
Chuckle who me, we can leave this to our chief resident Psychotherapist Falcon, who does if for free. Anything dealing with Chronic Symptoms of Mormon Thought Process and other LDS problems can come here and be rewarded with specific solutions that focus on the patients treatment to overcome what he is prone to believe as Occult Mental Health and its cure. If we would all follow his counsel and professional advise Mormonism would cease to exist for lack of credibility and full knowledge that JS was at best just a man.
Since I’m not prone to quackery, even thought it may be free counseling, this type of misguided treatment is problematic at best and any suggestion or advise would be deemed relatively wanting in spiritual guidance.
Janet. 🙂
My friend jackg, an exMormon, keeps reminding me that we have to exercise a tremendous amount of patience with Mormons because their cult indoctrination has produced a type of thinking that acts both as a blockade and a filter through which information is not processed in a normal fashion. jack says that he knows because he used to think like that.
To me, this is the real fascinating aspect of this ministry to Mormons. For example, grindael regularly provides enough documented information to serve as the last amount of weight needed to sink the LDS Titanic. However there’s a game Mormons play. They’ll say, “give me documented evidence”. Documented evidence is produced and they’ll say, “It’s not enough.” So then grindael or one of the other posters, unloads a truck load of information on them, all well documented. Mormons will respond, “It’s the wrong kind” or they’ll contend that the information/evidence doesn’t really say what it says (see adam-god, god the father having sex with Mary et al). So then Mormons will say, “I want you to give me your testimony.” So we give them very heart felt sincere accounts of our conversion experiences with examples of even miraculous occurrences and they either dismiss it or malign it.
Another feature of Mormon cult thinking is the inability of the TBM to even accurately repeat the salient features of the orthodox Christian Gospel of Jesus Christ. I’ve often said that we could write it out on a three by five card and they couldn’t even read it back accurately. Thus is the depth of the delusion and the spiritual darkness Mormons are in.
It’s all about John 6:44.
Posters opinion, “grindael regularly provides enough documented information to serve as the last amount of weight needed to sink the LDS Titanic. However there’s a game Mormons play. They’ll say, “give me documented evidence”. Documented evidence is produced and they’ll say, “It’s not enough.”
So lets look at the documented information of just one of the last disputes and criticisms “Men on the Moon”. Suggested that there is enough documentation to sink the Titanic, gracious that is immense amount of information.
I don’t know where to even begin, lets see, evidence so far is a LDS member, Oliver B. Huntington, with a bad memory claiming that JS father gave him a blessing,
“In my Patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph the Prophet, in Kirtland, 1837, I was told that I should preach the gospel before I was 21 years of age; that I should preach the gospel to the inhabitants upon the islands of the sea, and to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you can now behold with your eyes.” (The Young Woman’s Journal, published by the Young Ladies’ Mutual Improvement Associations of Zion, 1892, vol. 3, pp. 263-64)
So what are the facts that can rebutt this immense amount of information, enough to sink the Titanic. I’m not sure that my measly rebuttal of facts and evidence can overcome such a hurdle of gross evidence.
Now why would I say Huntington may have had a bad memory?
First he tells the story some 40 plus years after the incident.
Second he does not get the facts right.
Third he gets the person who gives the blessing wrong.
Forth, if this is evidence of JS giving doctrine of men on the moon, where is the tons of other witnesses claiming that this was taught in Sacrament Meetings, Sunday School, Standard Works of the Church, Priesthood meetings, General Conferences etc, etc. If it was not Doctrine, then surely it was a personal opinion of the Prophet. Could this be? Yes and no, it is a big whopper of a mistake? hardly.
Titanic or row boat?
So for the well indoctrinated cult member, any explanation will do to reinforce what they’ve been taught to believe. There is nothing that is implausable or out of reach to soothe the sensibilities of someone who wants desperately to believe that for which they have an emotional attachment.
One thing that comes to mind is the BoM claim that Jesus was born in Jerusalem. Now everyone, but Joesph Smith it seems, knew/knows that the Bible teaches that Jesus was born where, for five points contestants. Yes if you answered Bethlehem you got it right. But keeping with the theme of any explanation will do, Mormon apologists will say, “Well, Jerusalem is close to Bethlehem and it’s the ‘area’ we’re talking about.” And so the faithful Mormon trots off all satisfied that this rather significant error has been “fully” explained.
It doesn’t take much to keep someone who wants to believe something satisfied. It’s why family members will cover up abuse in a family and protect the abuser and attack the abused. Emotional equilibrium must be maintained at all costs. That the unthinkable could be true, in this case Mormonism is a myth, is just to upsetting. It’s easier, in TV lingo, to jump the shark and make the ridiculous be acceptable and believable.
For Saul of Tarsus it took getting knocked to the ground, being blinded and hearing the voice of Jesus to wake him up. When he was healed something like scales fell from his eyes and metaphorically and in reality he had new vision. The world looked different to Paul. He had more than an attitude adjustment, he had a spiritual awakening. This is what it takes to be able to see clearly what the Bible teaches us about God and our Redeemer Jesus Christ.
Mormons have made a bad bargain. We need to continually pray that the eyes of their understanding will be opened and that they will see the Father in all of His glory and come to an understanding of who Jesus is, what he has done for us and transform their lives.
OJ said
Jim, I’m going to challenge you on this, You said you teach class and teach from the BoM, So lay out the Doctrine for us from the BoM and give Chapter and verse. I have read the ENTIRE BoM, and I have not seen this Doctrine in the Book.
Also I issued this Challenge before, I think 6 times now between this blog, my blog and a few other places, Not ONE SINGLE mormon to this day has ever taken me up on it. You said it so back it up. Check it out here, I wrote it, http://mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com/
I’m waiting for your proof, I’m going to state for the record, you will either ignore me like Janet, you will simply disappear or you will make some excuse, But I am guessing you will not take up my challenge and you will not provide the “Doctrine” you teach from the BoM.
For the record, I suspect to hear, Well were not in a class so you cannot teach us, we would not understand, or we need milk before meat. No matter the reply, I’m stating one of these things will happen. Rick b
OJ said
Wrong, the BoM does Contradict the Bible, along with the D and C and the Pearl. I would be more than happy to provide problems, But I also know that you guys will blow of all these problems are us merely not understanding things. Or someone will say, we have answered these before.
Cont,
Cont,
Janet must have missed this post by me:
Ah, the little details. Smith Sr. DID preside at the meeting where Oliver’s father gave him that patriarchal blessing. Both Hyrum Smith and Brigham Young DID believe in men in the moon. Where could they have gotten that from? I wonder. And Woodruff’s blessing at the hands of Zebeede Coltrin (President of the Seventys)? Woodruff wrote it down in his diary, and affirmed the truth of it (by God no less). I know it might be hard for some Mormons to believe these things, but there they are in black and white. Denying and accusing others of misinformation (once again and big drum roll here) WILL NEVER CHANGE THE TRUTH.
*******************
From Hyrum Smith’s 1843 sermon preserved by George Laub:
Every Star that we see is a world and is inhabited the same as this world is peopled. The Sun & Moon is inhabited & the Stars …. The stars are inhabited the same as this Earth.. (BUY Studies, 18:177)
Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed “the man in the moon,” and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets. (Brigham Young, JD 13:271)
Huntington also published his recollections in 1892 in a Church Magazine, The Young Woman’s Journal.
Here are THREE SOURCES, all contemporaries of Smith. (And where oh where could they have gotten it from????)Yet Janet believes in a whole doctrine like Baptism from the Dead on ONE Bible Verse.
Plus the fact that Jos. Fielding Smith made his comments about the Moon.
Connect the dots folks…just connect the dots