On October 8th, 1854 Brigham Young delivered a conference discourse in Salt Lake City. After making several preliminary remarks to the congregation he said,
“I think these preliminaries will satisfy me, and I feel prepared to take my text: it is the words of Jesus Christ, but where they are in the Bible I cannot tell you now, for I have not taken pains to look at them. I have had so much to do, that I have not read the Bible for many years. I used to be a bible student; I used to read and study it, but did not understand the spirit and meaning of it…. My clerks know how much time I have to read. It is difficult for me to snatch time enough even to eat my breakfast and supper, to say nothing of reading.”
Brigham Young then launched into what future LDS Prophet and President Wilford Woodruff described as “the greatest sermon that ever was delivered to the Latter-day Saints.” What follows are some bullet points and quotes from this Brigham Young conference discourse.
- God the father differs from human beings only in that he is immortal and incorruptible (conversely, humans are mortal and corruptible).
- God the father is the father of our flesh, “he being the founder of that natural machinery through which we have all obtained our bodies.”
- God the father has a grandfather and a great-grandfather.
- There are very many who have attained to the position of Gods, who are “gathering around them thrones,” and who have the power to “organize elements and make worlds.”
- Worlds are “from eternity to eternity…have always been in progress, and eternally will be.”
- Every world has an Adam and an Eve, and a first-born son who, if faithful, will be the Savior.
- Adam was made of the dust from a different earth than the one upon which we live.
- Adam is the father of our spirits. He lived and died on another earth with his wives and, because of his faithfulness and priesthood, he was resurrected (by someone who had already been resurrected) to immortality and eternal life.
- “…Father Adam was a resurrected being with his wives and posterity, and in the Celestial Kingdom they were crowned with glory, immortality and eternal lives, with thrones, principalities and powers, and it was said to him, ‘It is your right to organize the elements, and to your creations and posterity there shall be no end, but you shall add kingdom to kingdom and throne to throne, and still behold the vast eternity of unorganized matter.’ Adam, then, was a resurrected being. And I reckon our spirits and the spirits of all the human family were begotten by Adam and born of Eve. ‘How are we going to know this?’ I reckon it. And I reckon that Adam came into the Garden of Eden and did actually eat of the fruit that he, himself, planted.”
- “I tell you, when you see your father in the heavens you will see Adam; when you see your mother that bore your spirit you will see Mother Eve”
- “Hear it all ye ends of the earth: if ever you enter into the Kingdom of God it is because Joseph Smith let you go there. …No man or woman in this generation will get a resurrection and be crowned without Joseph Smith says so.”
These teachings of Brigham Young are not found in, or supported by, the Biblical text. Promoting unbiblical doctrines — heresy — is what happens when a spiritual leader can find no time to read and study the Word of God.
Through the prophet Isaiah, God pronounced a stern warning: “If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20, KJV). Brigham Young apparently missed (or forgot) that truth. Now that you know it, what will you do with it?
—
Find a transcript of Brigham Young’s discourse at Brigham Young Addresses – Vol. 2, pages 130-146 (transcript pages [224] – [237]).
BY really blows my hair back and leaves my mouth agape with a big "HUH?". This ladies and gentlemen is a total wack-job in full free flow of consciousness mode. That's what happens with these "prophets". They begin to think that every thought that flashes through their minds is a revelation from God. BY also seems like a guy who never had an unspoken thought. What's that other line I've heard "……..a mind in search for a cogent thought."
BY, unfortunately, is not the only guy who was into this wild and wacky spiritual amusement park mentality. I've seen it in other preachers of various religious stripes who claim a direct connection with God and fall in love with the idea they are receiving direct revelation. The Bible becomes subordinate to the "prophets" own thoughts and whims. And might I add, it is accompanied by "feelings". These dudes and dudettes (as women can join in the fun also) speak with great confidence and have a real gift for convincing people (especially those willing to be convinced) that they've come to these wonderful insights and revelations by extraordinary supernatural means. Quite often they have visitations from some form of heavenly being that then validates their (prophet's) thoughts and words.
The Bible is the enemy of these spiritual phonies, although many can make great use of isolated Scripture to make their case with a twisted and creative interpretation. Joseph Smith was so taken with himself that he created his very own translation and inserted a prophecy about himself into it.
The Mormons have made sure that people stay in the cult first by telling them the Bible is corrupt and secondly that if they leave they'll go into eternal outer darkness. The lies and scare tactics have a way of keeping at least some of the folks in line.
I wonder what was BY´s agenda behind that teaching. He had to have spent some time preparing that talk, or if someone prepared it for him, he still would have read it and edited it if he thought necessary. I´m unaware of the historical context at the time he gave that speech, but it seems that those "revelations" come at a time when the people´s confidence in the prophet is down and they are starting to question, at least that´s what caused the Book of Abraham to come about. I personally think that´s the reason the church has 2 general conferences a year, to keep the members expectation´s high all year.
"Joseph Smith was so taken with himself that he created his very own translation and inserted a prophecy about himself into it"
There are very few members of the church i know that took that addition to the book of Genesis seriously. It´s one of those things you don´t talk about, you just acknowledge it´s there and move on.
>…No man or woman in this generation will get a resurrection and be crowned without Joseph Smith says so.”
Well, I'm sure I can just bribe him with one of my wives.
“I think these preliminaries will satisfy me, and I feel prepared to take my text: it is the words of Jesus Christ, but where they are in the Bible I cannot tell you now, for I have not taken pains to look at them."
That´s what happens when your priority is to build an earthly empire instead of bringing souls to Christ.
How can you criticize someone for their wacky diatribe when the Bible does the exact same thing: writings from men who were making up stories as they went along. Who is to say that either BY or any "prophet" before him has any validity to the words they make up? There exists no evidence for any of it.
I don´t know, he has so many already… unless he´s competing with Brigham Young to see who will have more glory, you know, more wives more glory.
And mormons complain they aren´t recognized as a Christian religion.
The book of mormon had one author. The Bible has so many that all 'back-up' each other's account. We have 66 love letters from God in the Bible. The book of mormon, a fantasy, a hook to get you to believe (burning in the bosom), no matter the argument, 'I know it to be true.' The Bible, 25,000 archeological artifacts, cities still exist. Fly me to a city in the book of mormon. Not all, just one. Then we'll talk. Read the bom. Does it say you cannot drink coffee, have to wear sacred garments, tithe 10% to get to heaven? The bom has been proven to be false, not the Bible. See letter to Smithsonian where they said, 'No thank you, we cannot use this book for any historical record.' I can take you anywhere in the Bible, cities, rivers, find artifacts that back up events. What have you got in the bom, the hill cummorah? I say we dig it up. Maybe there we will find a chariot, weapon, bones of hundreds of thousands, maybe a coin, something. Watch video listed at mrm.org Bible vs. the Book of Mormon. Watch Heart of the Matter episodes of bom. Then throw out accusations about how there is no evidence for any religion. Wow. Maybe read some of the psychology of mind control, then get back with some facts. Go to Living Hope Ministries, Althea Ministries, James White debating the bom vs. the Bible on YouTube instead of we should just all get along because all religions are 'made up.' See mrm.org introductory videos. Then we'll talk (or accuse) 'There exists no evidence for any of it.'
Soulure,
Your name to me imply's you are trying yourself to lure souls. As a matter of fact you are, straight to hell. You say, the Bible is false, well then back your mouth up. How it is wrong? were is it wrong? Have you ever read it from cover to cover? If not, how can you say it is wrong. Who else said Gods word was/is wrong? Satan.
Then if you dont believe the Bible, why are you here?
Hay, welcome to Mormon Coffee.
I like it when we get atheists here. Now here's the deal, if you're going to get into the discussion you have to come up with some arguments to bolster your point. If you can't do that, I'm going to conclude that you're simply a drive-by-shooter of a poster. That's the kind who isn't really serious and doesn't have any real ammo in their gun. I would suggest you do a little study on the history of the Bible especially it's accuracy. Now to its truth, that's a matter of faith.
What Sharon is getting at in her article, is that BY claimed to be a prophet of God and yet he had no time to study and consider the Biblical text. This is typical of many cult leaders. True prophets stand on the Word of God. Mormon prophets stand on their personal revelation which at the end of the day is no more valid than the average Mormon pew sitter.
Anyway, thanks for dropping in. If you want to stick around I'm hoping you'll get beyond some atheistic mottos.
Soulure, welcome. Can I ask you to stay on topic ? The subject of the thread is Brigham Young, and
his spiritual authority as a realiable teacher of God's Word. He's on record as saying that what he
preaches is consistent with scripture, and that it is his duty as the leader of the Church to make sure
that correct doctrine is advanced. There is no more important question than the authority of the Mormon
prophet/apostles to be reliable guides in Biblical truth. The eternal fate of every LDS is at stake, for no
one can have a right relationship with God if they follow a false prophet/teacher. Can you understand this?
Thanks. ww
Wow Sharon, I've just posted an article on my Blog about this very same discourse today! It's a four-parter, and I'll be posting the entire discourse. You can read it here: http://blog.ldsfacts.org/2010/12/16/brigham-young… This discourse to me, is devastating to Mormonism. It shows that Young in no uncertain terms taught that Adam was God, and so by any Christian or Mormon perspective, he was a false prophet. My favorite quote from this sermon is this one:
“I feel inclined here to make a little scripture. (Were I under necessity of making scripture extensively I should get Brother Heber C. Kimball to make it, and then I would quote it. I have seen him do this when any of the Elders have been pressed by their opponents, and were a little at a loss; he would make a scripture for them to suit the case, that never was in the Bible, though none the less true, and make their opponents swallow it as the words of an Apostle or one of the Prophets. The Elder would then say, "Please turn to that scripture gentlemen, and read it for yourselves." No they could (p. 7) not turn to it but they recollected it like the devil for fear of being caught). I will venture to make a little."
Young then proceeds to lay out the case for Adam-god. I adjure all to read this sermon, it's essential in understanding Young and his teaching on Adam-god. (grindael)
Johnny, It's good to hear from you again. I always enjoy your contributions here .
ww
I thought maybe you dropped off the end of the earth. Good to hear from you again. I think you must have chased all of the Mormons away because we don't get any TBM posters around here much any more. I guess it must be kind of hard for them to cope with you exMormons who've lived the life and know the program from the inside.
I went to your facebook page. Very interesting. I sent you a "friend" request but neglected to include a message so you'd know who I am. If a picture appears, that's me with my rather bad golden doodles when they were about six months old.
My sense is that Mormons find "progressive revelation" much more exciting than Biblical scholarship. One of the things that was a surprise to me as I began posting on MC three years ago, was the ferocity with which Mormons defended Mormonism in the face of clear Biblical evidence that (Mormonism) isn't in any way, shape or form Christian. The very core of this of course is their aberrant, heretical and I would say blasphemous contempt for the God who is revealed in the Bible. To my thinking, this ferocity is the result of the emotional hook of Mormonism. If someone buys into something emotionally, evidence to the contrary will not impress them. They do not want to give up the thing that they are in love with.
The degrading of the Bible as a corrupt revelation is needed to make Mormonism work. Joseph Smith, as with other false prophets, had to get people to doubt the veracity of the Word of God in order to accept his new revelation and restored gospel. Once people see the Bible as suspect and not reliable, they are susceptible to the whims of the prophet they are trusting.
Coming to see the Bible as the revealed Word of God that it is and holding "prophets" accountable by holding up their "revelations" to Biblical standards, is the first step to a Mormon truth seeker finding God.
(Ezekiel 22:28, New King James Version) Her prophets plastered them with untempered mortar, seeing false visions, and divining lies for them, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD,’ when the LORD had not spoken.
Note that the false prophets were "devining lies." "The word "occult" means secret or hidden knowledge. Divination is any practice not specifically ordained in scripture that seeks to gain secret knowledge (i.e. spiritual knowledge God has not revealed). God purposely limits His people's access to such spiritual knowledge for their own good. That which is outside of "the things revealed" is not for us. Why? Because there are spirit beings out there who have been practicing the art of deception for many thousands of years. They are good at what they do. If we dabble in their world we will be deceived." (from: http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/dangersofdivi…
Jeremiah 28: 15-17 (New King James Version) 15 Then the prophet Jeremiah said to Hananiah the prophet, “Hear now, Hananiah, the LORD has not sent you, but you make this people trust in a lie. 16 Therefore thus says the LORD: ‘Behold, I will cast you from the face of the earth. This year you shall die, because you have taught rebellion against the LORD.’” 17 So Hananiah the prophet died the same year in the seventh month.
In this passage, notice that Hananiah the false prophet had "taught rebellion against the LORD.'" "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft…" (I Samuel 15:23, NKJV)
(Acts 13:6-12, NKJV) 6 They traveled through the whole island until they came to Paphos. There they met a Jewish sorcerer and false prophet named Bar-Jesus, 7 who was an attendant of the proconsul, Sergius Paulus. The proconsul, an intelligent man, sent for Barnabas and Saul because he wanted to hear the word of God. 8 But Elymas the sorcerer (for that is what his name means) opposed them and tried to turn the proconsul from the faith. 9 Then Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked straight at Elymas and said, 10 “You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery. Will you never stop perverting the right ways of the Lord? 11 Now the hand of the Lord is against you. You are going to be blind for a time, not even able to see the light of the sun.” Immediately mist and darkness came over him, and he groped about, seeking someone to lead him by the hand. 12 When the proconsul saw what had happened, he believed, for he was amazed at the teaching about the Lord.
In this passage, notice how Bar-Jesus (Elymas) was both a sorcerer and a false prophet.
"The original Greek word for sorcerer is pharmakeus which means "an enchanter with drugs." This, in turn, comes from the word pharmakeia from which we get our modern English word pharmacy. The word in its original Greek means the occult, sorcery, witchcraft, illicit pharmaceuticals, trance, and magical incantation with drugs. Why does God condemn those that practice these forbidden arts? The purpose of any one of these forbidden practices is to seek knowledge over and above that which is allowed by God, whether it be to foretell the future, to have power over others or to control things that belong to God. In short to be as God Himself." http://www.intothelight.org/witchcraft-sorcery.as…
Jesus said, when speaking to the Pharisees and others in the temple treasury, 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.” (John 8:43-47, NKJV)
Satan wants us to believe a lie, because he is a liar and the father of lies. People who listen to those promising "secret knowledge" are setting themselves up to be led astray by Satan. Notice, in the first passage, that Sergius Paulus called for Barnabas and Saul, "because he wanted to hear the word of God."
Brigham Young did not have time for the Word of God. He made time for vain imaginations but not for the Word of God. He, and his predecessors and successors, sought "secret knowledge," the example set by Joseph Smith, and were led astray. This, sadly, continues to the present day. People engage in practices forbidden in the Old and New Testaments; like the Pharisees choosing to listen to the father of lies, when God, through His Word, has told them the truth – a truth they will not receive.
NKJV, Copyright 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc.
Hi Falcon, I've gotten no request from you, please resubmit it…if you want, just email me at [email protected] … I was thinking about you the other day, when I sent out blog invitations, but did not have an email for you! Sharon's link to those Brigham Young discourses is a MUST READ! I've read them all, and there is a lot of things in there, that need to come out! This discourse is just the tip of the iceberg. Actually all, I read this blog all the time, and repost it often at Facebook. I'll be stopping in more often, I've sure missed all of you, but been busy with other projects!
Young, in this discourse has been misinterpreted by Mormons as 'backing off' of Adam-god. This could not be further from the truth. Young was concerned that this 'pearl' as he called it, would be cast to the dogs, and so he softened his rhetoric with it, but still said the things he taught here, were essential for Mormons to know, as he put it " I expect in my remarks I shall allude to things that you search after as being ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for salvation in the kingdom of God."
This concept, was reiterated after Young's death (pearls before swine), when they were setting up shop in California and ran into Christians who brought up these teachings. The First Presidency reply:
"The Council did not deem it wise to lay out any line of procedure in which to deal with the subject, but felt that it is best to AVOID BRINGING IT UP, and to do the best we can and as the Spirit may suggest when it is thrust upon us. Your having got so many of the Josephites was received with marks of particular pleasure. This, like many other points of more advanced doctrine – too precious a pearl to be cast before swine." ( Franklin D. Richards to Ephraim H. Nye, December 18, 1897, Franklin D. Richards Letterbook, pp. 363-64, Richards Family Collection, LDS Archives. On March 8, 1898, Richards wrote Nye indicating that he and Joseph F. Smith had tried to get Nye's article reprinted in the Deseret News, but the News declined their request. – Adam-god for Dummies, Part Five, emphasis mine)
If anyone desires to read Adam-god For Dummies, mail me and I'll send you a link. (grindael)
First, thank you mrm.org for taking my comment.
Secondly, "straight to hell?" I don't need an idea of a torture room to frighten me into believing your position. There is no such place outside of books written by 2000 year-old desert nomads and using it as a persuasive measure against me is flagrant fear-mongering.
How is the Bible wrong? I think that a book that endorses slavery, mass murders, and rape is immoral, even if it also preaches love and tolerance. Google it for references. Those are the major talking points outside of no shellfish, no women speaking or holding positions of authority in church (new testament sexism). Justify away those passages so it suits your belief any way you'd like it, but using the bible to back up any belief is personally immoral to me. Any why should we blindly follow a book? Why not base our morals and values on the human condition and how it affects real live people today here and now? Who is to say really that the bible is the word of a god? The bible itself? That's circular reasoning.
"Have you ever read it cover to cover?" Yes, including every single LDS church cannon and various other endorsed LDS church texts: Journal of discourses, Mormon Doctrine, etc. But an appeal to my personal authority would be a fallacy; it doesn't matter how much I've read – we should weigh arguments on their own merits.
"Who else said Gods word was/is wrong?" Which God? In terms of what is observable outside of people's minds, there is equal weight to believe in Horus as there is in Yahweh. Who are you to say that Horus was/is wrong? The question is troublesome because it assumes there is a god to begin without a way to verify that claim.
"If I don't believe in the bible, why am I here?" Because I find the posts here on LDS doctrine to be interesting and it provides good talking points among my mormon friends.
Thanks for the dialogue and giving me a chance to respond. I'm not opposed to new information and I've started watching the videos as recommended below by the user named Violet. Cheers.
That was really good!! I'd give you five stars for what you wrote if it were allowed. You get my award for poster of the day and top post on this thread. Let's do lunch! I'll buy!
Christians and Christian denominations vary in the amount of personal and corporate revelation they tolerate (for lack of a better word). But here's the thing, they all hold the Bible in high esteem. It's one of the eight main foundational, orthodox principles of the Christian faith.
If we were to draw out a continuum with the left end being Bible only with little or no personal/corporate revelation to the other end on the right with little Bible and a majority personal/corporate revelation, we'd put Mormonism on the far right end. Now with Christians, we'd see some variation but my guess most would fall some where around the midpoint, like a bell curve. I could be wrong in my linear thinking here, but Mormons don't stand on the Word of God. They stand on revelation and they think that's hot. In fact they think it's superior to Christians who they wrongly assume worship the Bible.
Within the Christian family we have the Word-Faith people of course. They treat the Bible as if they can isolate some verses, speak them out loud, join their positive confession with faith and call things into fruition or existence. To them, the Bible, God's Word, contains certain promises that we can appropriate with the correct application of faith.
I bring this up because it's important for people to know what the proper application of God's Word is in the life of a believer. Mormons depend on false extra scripture and false revelation and have no proper foundation in the Bible or the way it needs to be understood and interpreted.
People run-off on all sorts of tangents because they refuse to discipline themselves spiritually.
Thank you, yes, staying on topic I have to agree with you fully that BY has no spiritual authority but likely for not the same reason as you would say. Is it possible to describe what it actually means for someone to have spiritual authority? Could an unbias observer validate said authority? If we are to say that a clergyman in one religious sect has spiritual authority, does that preclude anyone else from having said authority in other belief systems across the world?
By LDS standards at least, BY did not have a duty to maintain consistency with previous LDS accepted writings (scripture). That's because as their appointed leader (prophet) the organizations ruleset allows him to re-write or supersede any previous rule or doctrine with his own and I know mormons personally who think that is fine, because, well, that's what they believe. LDS faithful will see following any new teaching/revelation from their leaders as a point in their eternal favor so it is not troubling to them.
I understand that the problem is that it troubles you. If you personally feel their new doctrine supersedes your doctrine, then it would be more appropriate to classify your concern as a personal belief they are in trouble. As an outsider to both doctrines and seeing no reason to believe either of them, I don't see it as a problem for anyone's eternal fate because I think people should be able to believe what they want so long as it doesn't harm others.
Thanks for your reply. -S
"There is no such place outside of books written by 2000 year-old desert nomads"
I´m going to steal Falcon´s phrase: "I'm hoping you'll get beyond some atheistic mottos."
"but using the bible to back up any belief is personally immoral to me"
Who are you, and why should i subscribe to your notion of what is moral or not?
"why not base our morals and values on the human condition and how it affects real live people today here and now?"
Are you serious? Do you watch TV? Do you know how human condition is going these days? Seriously, whose opinion are you going to take as the base for your moral and values, and how can you prove those will be good and fair – and how can you guarantee you won´t be able to twist those as well to fit your own personal agenda?
"Who is to say really that the bible is the word of a god? The bible itself? That's circular reasoning."
Another atheistic motto. Violet did a great job addressing that issue. The Bible wasn´t written by one author alone, even though today we have it all together in a single volume. It isn´t circular reasoning at all.
"we should weigh arguments on their own merits."
Agreed but so far you have´nt presented any argument. You also contradicted yourself because you said a little before "using the bible to back up any belief is personally immoral to me".
Everything else in that post is just a collection of atheistic mottos, i won´t even bother to address them.
Hi Violet, I agree with you completely that the book of mormon (bom) is fiction for all the reasons you stated. Do you think that because we can visit a city named in the bible that it lends additional evidence to the claims that the stories are necessarily historically accurate? Should we say the same about the Koran?
I think one of the most interesting differences between the bible and bom is that the bom specifically claims that is a complete account of actual historical happenings whereas the bible is not clear on if the stories are meant to be taken literally or figuratively. What method should we use in order to discern which bible stories we should take figuratively and which ones we should take literally? Specifically, tower of babel, global flood, rising from the dead?
"Is it possible to describe what it actually means for someone to have spiritual authority?"
You´ve claimed to have read the Bible, so you should know this already. In a nutshell, Moses and the entire people of Israel saw God appearing to them on Mount Sinai, it was a national revelation unlike any other in recorded history. God made clear who He was and showed His power many times proving that He was the Creator of everything there is, us included, and therefore He makes the rules and He´s also responsible for judgement.
As always, we stand on Jesus as our evidence for that, because the New Testament manuscripts are historical records, and there are records outside of the Bible that prove Jesus´ historicity, and that His tomb was found empty just like the Bible tells us.
This is an interesting Walter Martin debate on the resurrection of Jesus – http://podcast.fightingforthefaith.com/fftf/F4F12…
The evidence is strong for Christ´s resurrection, and by doing that He proved He was God and therefore everything He said was true, the Old Testament included(the creation, the flood, etc.). The evidence is there as a basis for faith and a basis to measure other religions as well.
The Old Testament has requirements for someone to be a prophet, otherwise, as you say, anyone could be a prophet or speak in the name of God and it wouldn´t make a difference what they said. I don´t remember the exact references, but the requirements are, for example, when a prophet prophesy the prophecy has to come true, a prophet can´t teach the people about different (man-made)gods than the One revealed to Israel, and God obviously can´t contradict Himself, so a prophet can´t teach something contrary what God has already spoken. That´s what wyommingwilly is referring to, and by that standard BY doesn´t have any spiritual authority and he isn´t reliable to teach God´s word.
Now, why can Christians say that about BY? They can say that because the Mormon Church accepts the Bible as revealed scripture as well and that means they have to comply with what the Bible says otherwise they make themselves liars, wether they do it intentionally or not.
Dear Sharon,
An amazing post you have written. Thanks. I was not familiar with this particular address by Brigham Young.
One reason I do not accept Brigham Young as a prophet of God is that I believe he was a prophet of a false god. In his candor, he left no doubt the god for whom he was a prophet is not the God of the Bible. "I have not read the Bible for many years." No, apparently not. He was following (at best) his heart. "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it" (Jeremiah 17:9)?
He believed that worlds (creation) are from eternity to eternity? That is untrue. God is from eternity to eternity. Confusing creation and Creator is an error spoken of in the first chapter of Romans. An error which led them to depraved minds.
He did not know God. He was lost. Sadly, he lead many after his ways.
Well, thanks so much! I regularly enjoy the clarity and substance of your posts, so I appreciate the kind feedback! I did note that I accidentally omitted verse 46 in the John 8:43-47 quotation, so that last portion should read: 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
I appreciate this site. My Dad had a Mormon secretary (back before they became administrative assistants) for years; and, though Dad knew the Bible amazingly well, he didn't quite understand where she was coming from. I know Dad would have liked Mormon Coffee!
Two of the most grievous lacks in orthodox Christianity today are the lack of clear, regular, and diligent presentation of the Bible by those in ministry and the lack of commitment by individual Christians to personal time in the Word of God and in prayer. The reason that people who truly do see the need for such personal study often struggle with it, I believe, is that Satan knows the power of it. As one who sometimes gets too busy, I know that the absolute quenching of my thirst and assuaging of my hunger that I experience when I get into the Word or make time to be in the presence of God reinforces how very much I need the food and drink of God's Presence and of His Word!
(Psalm 42:1, NKJV, Copyright 1982, Thomas, Nelson, Inc.) – As the deer pants for the water brooks, So pants my soul for You, O God.
2 Timothy 2:14-20 (King James Version) 14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. 15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
Soulure said
You told me you read the Bible, I really find that hard to believe. If you really read it you would know that Jesus said, It is His love that leads us to repent, not the fear of hell. Also you say Hell does not exist, Can I see the brain in your head? No I cannot, does that mean it does not exist simply because I cannot see it? Dont reply with, after I am dead you can cut open my head and see it, because I will reply with, after your dead you will see hell and know you were wrong.
Soulure claims she read the Bible, but then see goes onto say,
First off, if you must say,
Then that tells me you do not know where things are, so I suspect you really never read the bible. Then you claim the Bible endorses Slavery and mass murder and rape. The news papers report and talk about women being raped and people being killed, does that make the news paper immoral? Well the Bible tells us women were raped, But Did God tell Guys, Go rape that women? No, you could never find a verse where God tells some guy, go rape that women, So it's reported in the Bible, its reported in the news, No difference. That shows you are ignorant.
You claim the Bible is immoral because of mass murders, Well if you read the Bible, The Jews were attacked and defended themselves. At times yes they went and killed people before they were killed, is it ok for people to attack the Jews and kill them? But the Jews cannot fight back? You mean it's ok for a guy to rape you, but not ok for you to fight back and maybe if need be kill him?
You say the Bible speaks of slavery. You forget to add these facts, When the Jews were slaves, The were taken by other nations, How is that Gods fault? When the Jews allowed themselves to be slaves to each other, it was to pay of debts. Why is that wrong? They are working to pay of debts. Then if you really read your bible you would read, God told the Jews to let slaves go and release them of their debt every seven years. You forgot to add that. Are you sure you really read your Bible? If you really did, then your being dishonest when you leave out this information.
Soulure said
Your kidding right? Who decides what is right and what is wrong? What if I decided it's ok to rape and kill and you say it's not. Who is right and who is wrong? who decides? Have you been reading the news paper, we have groups of people who want to kill us, they are trying really hard. How about the Government, all they do is lie to us and demanded money from us. How about the prisons, were running out of room, were are so back logged in our nation for trying to solve murders and rapes that we cannot keep up. Hows those morals working for you know?
I can go on, but will leave it to this for now.
"The Bible wasn´t written by one author alone, even though today we have it all together in a single volume. It isn´t circular reasoning at all."
Multiple authors telling each other they are correct is not evidence of their correctness. That is the definition of circular reasoning. The question remains, f_melo, how do you personally determine which books (written by men) are of a god, and why? Is it the answer you just gave: that books within the book tell you that the book is correct and so you believe it? Is it that outlandish to say I don't find that argument compelling?
I do not agree that the Bible is to be considered a historical document. The question of the historicity of the Exodus has long been debated, without conclusive result. Additionally, the evidence I am aware of for the resurrection is not compelling. Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be "strong evidence" for Christ's resurrection?
If you want to say, that according to your personal belief system BY doesn't meet the credentials to be a prophet, you're probably right. Likely, BY would agree that by your standards he doesn't which is why he and other mormon leaders are keen on a continual-revelation system that enables them to redefine the rules and standards at a whim in order to justify their own behavior and beliefs.
I have downloaded the MP3 and will listen to it this weekend; thank you for your response.
"Can I see the brain in your head? No I cannot, does that mean it does not exist simply because I cannot see it? Dont reply with, after I am dead you can cut open my head and see it, because I will reply with, after your dead you will see hell and know you were wrong."
What if I told you Vishnu real and was promising you something after you die. Would you let me use the same argument against you or would you demand some kind of evidence for that which you cannot *observe*? At what point do you set aside your demand for objective verifiable proof and accept something someone tells you? We can observe brain activity, MRIs, even open skull brain surgury. Is there another example you'd like to use?
PART 1.
A Christian is required by God to have faith, but it does not have to be blind faith. He has given us plenty of proof. The proof of God is in the world all around us. One mighty proof is the existence of the Jewish people. You cannot explain the Jewish people without reference to God. They defy all logic as a people. Logic tells us that the Jews should have ceased to exist long ago. Many rulers have tried to exterminate them, yet the Jews are still around. In the days of Jesus, Rome was an occupying force in Israel and placed heavy taxes on the Jews, which always plotted a rebellion. One such rebellion took place in 66 A.D. In 70 A.D. the Temple was destroyed. Jesus predicted the destruction of the temple, which was fulfilled to the letter; "Not one stone shall be left upon another." In 130 A.D. Emperor Hadrian provoked the Jews by building a pagan temple on the Temple Mount to provoke another rebellion, which ended with the Jews dispersed throughout the whole world. Now this is not the only time that something like this has happened to a nation. What normally happens is that within a generation or two the nation that was dispersed ceases to exist. The people melt into the countries to which they are sent and just disappear. The Jews were different. Even though the Roman Empire ceased to exist, the Jews remain. Even after nearly 2,000 years they are still a distinct people. They may be a Russian Jew, or an American Jew, or an Ethiopian Jew, or a Chinese Jew, but they are all still Jews.
They even had more reason then most other nations to disappear. They have been hunted down and killed and persecuted in many of the countries they found themselves. If they had just melted into the rest of the population they would not have sustained so many problems. Yet they remain Jews. Go ahead and explain the Jews without using God, I don't believe you can.
But the children rebelled against me; they did not walk in my statutes, and were not careful to observe my ordinances, by whose observance man shall live; they profaned my Sabbaths. "Then I thought I would pour out my wrath upon them and spend my anger against them in the wilderness. But I withheld my hand, and acted for the sake of my name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations, in whose sight I had brought them out. Ezekiel 20:21-22 This is the very reason that there will always be Jews. If anyone could ever manage to destroy them completely it would prove that either God is not real or He has no real power. He will not allow His witness to be destroyed. God predicted in His word that they would again become a nation and that they would be a thorn in the world's side. If you don't believe God got it right, you haven't been following the news very closely. The Jews remain God's witnesses to the world. Again not because they are a holy nation, in fact most modern day Jews have little concern for God. They are God's witness to the world because there is no human explanation for them and their continued existence. Since becoming a nation again in 1948, God has preserved the nation of Israel from defeat by it’s enemies. Outnumbered by the nations all around them and attacked on all sides, the nation of Israel has not only defended itself three times, but regained more of the land that God promised Abraham each time they were attacked. It is heartbreaking to see the nation of Israel so willing to give up the land God promised them in return for peace which will never come, until their Messiah, whom they have rejected comes back. Replacement theology has become very popular today. It teaches that God is done with the Jews and has replaced them with the church. This is unbiblical and very dangerous for anyone who believes it.
PART 2.
Dangerous because by trying to take the place of the Jews they are despising God's very special witness to the world. God is not done with the Jews. The year 1948 should have put this theology to rest but it didn't. 1968 should have put this theology to rest, but again it didn't. 1973 should have put this theology to rest, but again it didn't. In the book of Ezekiel we read about some of God's promises to Israel. He promises to bring them back to their land from all the nations where He scattered them. That is happening before our eyes. He promises them that He will take out their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh and that they will follow Him. This has not happened yet, but it will. We also read about the Temple that Ezekiel saw and was told to describe in detail. This Temple is yet to be built, but it will be. God is not done with the Jews and the nation of Israel and they as a people are completely different from the church as believers. Yes there are Jews who believe in their Messiah and are part of the church, but the nation of Israel still has promises from God that will take place. Not all the promises are pleasant to contemplate. There is a time coming called the time of Jacob's trouble. It will take place during the tribulation and it will be very unpleasant for the Jewish people. But the very fact that it is coming and was prophesied in the Bible means that God is not done with the Jewish people as a whole. Don't be fooled into the false doctrine of replacement theology, it is not true. We should pray for the Jews and Israel as a nation. We should demand that our nation support them and help them. God's promises are not dead, they are alive and well. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves." Genesis 12:2-3 This is a promise to Abraham and to the whole world. The whole world has been blessed through the nation Israel by the coming of the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world. The promise and the warning are still valid. God will bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel. And Israel will remain God's witness to the world.
from: http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TCMPL6HG5JA…
NOTE: In that 2002 article I e-mailed previous to this e-mail, Dennis Prager pointed out that "Among those 6 billion people are nearly 2 billion Muslims – roughly 20 percent of the global population." He also pointed out that "There are today about 14 million Jews left." Two billion divided by 14 million is 142.857143. Therefore, as of 2002, there were almost 143 times as many Muslims on earth as Jews! And what is one of the Muslims' main goals? To exterminate the Jews! Yet, after 1400 years of Islam, the Jews have not been exterminated! Yet another proof of God's existence, if you ask me!
I love how you avoided much of what I said. Is their a reason why? Also despite what you think, the Bible is not blind faith, we have tons of evidence we can see and use. So your argument about Vishnu is lame since their is nothing wrong with asking for evidence and yet again if you read your bible you would read verses that tells us, we are NOT TO BE IGNORANT. We are to look into the evidence to know if this stuff is true and not simply blindly believe.
If your going to avoid answering questions, then it will make me think, then say my thoughts out loud, so others will think, maybe your a liar and never read the Bible and really are not interested in looking for the truth. Rick B
Soulure, is a difference between Blind Faith and faith with evidence.
Blind faith is the people who simply believe Life Arose from Non Life. You guys have zero evidence that life came from Poison gas that was struck by lighting.
Then single cell creatures were scratched and those mutations formed eyes and arms and other things to cause life, Yet after a long period of time, it got to the point where these mutations now will kill us.
We have no evidence, but it takes great faith to believe this. Jesus said in the Bible, Many things He did to prove who He was. He said he did lots of things.
Funny how we can say, I never meet George Washington, yet I believe he existed because of the written records. We use History to prove many things happened or people existed. Yet people who reject the Bible toss all this evidence out the window, when it comes to the Bible.
"I love how you avoided much of what I said. Is their a reason why?"
Yes, I didn't find your response helpful in contrast with the other responders who have given me some interesting things to think on. You make assumptions about me and question my answer when I straight up told you I read the Bible. I don't appreciate your accusations of me being a liar or not interested in the "truth."
When you compared the bible to a newspaper I blinked. Is that your own viewpoint or that of a religion I'm not aware of? I'm sorry but I'm not impressed with the analogy. For the record I'm not totally opposed to responding to every point you made but given what I just said and after reading the posting guidelines here I'm trying to not monopolize this forum and keep my posts short. That's why I chose to respond to the part of your post I found most relevant.
Give me a break, You mean to tell me that you feel the Bible is wrong, then you provide zero evidence of why you feel it is wrong. Then you tell me you read the Bible, but instead of quoting verses you feel are wrong you reply with, you can google them. Sounds to me like you lied, then you tell me, Well I dont want to take up much space on this blog in replies. Please, do you really think your going to get the boot for an honest debate? I am going to call you on the carpet when I think your lying or avoiding subjects.
But here is something to think about.
For years, Antony Flew has been a figurehead for atheists. Now, though, he has abandoned his atheism and accepted the existence of God. In a recent interview for Philosophia Christi with Gary Habermas, Flew explained his new beliefs. Though Flew has not embraced Christianity, he now accepts the existence of God, saying that he “had to go where the evidence leads”.
http://www.existence-of-god.com/flew-abandons-ath…
"Multiple authors telling each other they are correct is not evidence of their correctness."
Sorry, having read that i have to doubt you ever read the Bible seriously. That question just shows me you have no interest in understanding it at all, you haven´t even bothered to do a basic research on the subject.
"The question remains, f_melo, how do you personally determine which books (written by men) are of a god, and why?"
I don´t determine that, you have to read how the canons were put together, the criteria used and then come to your own conclusion about it but that will require a little bit of research.
"Is it the answer you just gave: that books within the book tell you that the book is correct and so you believe it?"
books within the book tell you the book is correct, what are you talking about? Are you not familiar at all with how the Bible was put together?
"Is it that outlandish to say I don't find that argument compelling?"
I find outlandish to believe you ever actually read the Bible. I don´t see any reason to continue this discussion until you do a basic research on the matter and come with the intention to hold a meaningful conversation about it.
"I do not agree that the Bible is to be considered a historical document"
Well, if you don´t explain why it´s going to be difficult for anyone here to actually approach you in any way, especially via the internet…
"Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be "strong evidence" for Christ's resurrection?"
This is a good article that breaks it down – http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth22.html
"If you want to say, that according to your personal belief system BY doesn't meet the credentials to be a prophet, you're probably right."
What you´re missing though, is that Mormons don´t claim to be Muslim, meaning that they are not from a different background. See, Mormons claim to be Christian, and hold the Bible to defend that claim. Technically we shouldn´t have separate belief systems, since we all have the same source of information about God. That´s exactly why i can point out why BY is wrong.
If Mormonism was independent from the Bible and did not claim to be the only correct form of Christianity, then i could actually consider your argument reasonable.
Soulure said
I think I gave a good reply, so let me re-word it like this. You said or implied that the Bible was wrong because we have rape in the Bible. How does that make the Bible wrong? Again, no place in the Bible will you see God saying, go rape these women.
You dont like me saying or implying you lied, Yet you claim the Bible is immoral because we find slavery in the Bible. Yet as I pointed out, God told the Jews to let the slaves go free every 7 years and release them of their debt. So how is that immoral? Why is it wrong for the Jews to pay their debts? You mention mass murders, why is it, or how is it wrong for the Jews to defend themselves against attackers? They are being killed to this day and no one says a word, but once they fight back, the entire world crys foul, why is that? How come it's wrong. so tell me, why you avoid answering these questions. It's not because my reply was lame, it's because you cannot answer them. If your as honest as you claim you are, and if you really read the bible as you claim you have, then you would know this stuff. But to act as if this is not found in the Bible and then claim the Bible is immoral for these reasons is deceitful and that makes you a liar.
Jesus was the embodiment of the Word of God. He was God's revealed Word to the contemporary society in which He lived and then to the rest of the world over the centuries since His life, death and resurrection (occurred). When Jesus appeared to His disciples after the resurrection, He demonstrated that it was Him by showing His wounds but He also pointed them to Scripture so that the disciples might know who He was and what His mission was.
Luke 24:44-47 "Now He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and He said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance for forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem."
My point is that as God incarnate, Jesus appealed to His Word, the Scriptures, which He had previously revealed to the prophets. What we see in BY is a man who got too big for the Word of God. He couldn't really be bothered with it any more. First of all He was to busy to spend any real quality time with the Scriptures. Secondly, as a self-proclaimed "prophet", he didn't need the Scriptures any longer because he was receiving direct, personal and progressive revelation. And finally, Mormonism is a religion that naturally must hold the Bible as suspect because it doesn't confirm Mormonism.
So what this degrading and ignoring of the Bible results in, is a religion built on error fueled by impulsiveness of thought. We can see how modern day Mormons run as fast as they can away from BY because he's even too much for them. One would think that Mormons would come to the logical conclusion that the guy was not only flakey but a fake. The problem is that when a person pulls out one of the face cards of Mormonism the whole house of cards falls.
Without a large dose of rationalization and illogical thinking, Mormonism can't survive. It's the desire to believe it and shear ignorance of the Scriptures along with fear and social pressures that keep Mormons in the fold. Thankfully most leave in one way or another.
Soulure. Please forgive me. My parent do not believe in Jesus as our Savior. More of God is good. God is in the flower kind of thing. I understand you more than you know. Mom, born 1931 Lodz, Poland (20 miles from Warsaw), was in apartment when Germans bombed Poland. Ten years of living with relatives, displaced persons camps, in Germany. Men follow men, Hitler. How could there be a God? War. etc. Dad's mom poor housekeeper widow gave all of her money to word of faith preachers on TV. How could there be a God that would prey on poor widows? Me. Crashed car drunk driving into wall, single-car accident, put face through windshield, broken leg, lots of time to think. Two weeks St. Louis U Trauma. Lost job, old boyfriend said loved you like a sister, people avoided me like the plague, kids winced in stores. Rejoiced inside. Burden lifted. Knew there was a God. Just a realization looking out the window of hospital. I know painkillers? Read The Road Less Traveled, M. Scott Peck. Changed my life. Married grandson of Lutheran preacher. Follow Bible not men. Long story. Mormon neighbors loved bombed, said other churches were Satan, and I went to their 'ward', my mom went to their 'ward', and son told my son, 'all other churches were Satan. That's why I'm here. I would suggest The Bible Answerman. Turned my life over to God, Alcoholic Anonymous calls it surrender. Tried to find answers in myself, men, perfection, good works, job, money, drugs, alcohol, music. There are no answers there.
Soulure, here is something to think about. You told me you did not answer my questions because I did not really give you something to think about. Well I have been debating atheists, real hard core God hating atheists for close to three years now. From my experience they, like you, avoid questions on the Bible . They claim the Bible is wrong, and God is evil, yet they dont really back up what they say.
Well their was years ago an atheist posting here; she went by the name interested. I started and still do follow her blog and debate her and everyone that goes to her blog. She posted a topic by an Ex-Mormon who is now an atheist, his name is Steve Benson. And yes this is Steve Benson, Pulitzer Prize-winning U.S. editorial cartoonist for The Arizona Republic. She posted a topic called "I couldn't have said it better". There is a link to her site and Bensons topic can be found here. http://interested01.blogspot.com/search?updated-m…
The reason I am saying this is because, I went to Benson's website and tried debating him on the topic he wrote. All he could do was insult me and call me names, this from a so called (Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist). If all he can do is call me names and insult me, and not even try to answer my questions or honestly debate me, then that tells me I must be asking honest and hard questions.
I'm posting the link to her site so you can check for yourself that I'm not making this up. She (interested) Even tries to defend Steve by saying the reason he is full of bitterness is because of what he went through. Now she provides a link to Steves website. It might be hard to find our debates because this was over a year ago and their are over 9,000 posts on his site. But the evidence is there that the atheist saw what I wrote to Steve and how she admitted he is full of bitterness. So if you guys what to fool yourselves into thinking I am some dumb rube who cannot hold a good debate, then you keep telling yourself that. I now from Steve that I can hold my own with the Biggest boys in the atheist world. If all they can do is attack me and call me stupid and some real foul names and make no attempt at an honest answer, then that tells me I must be striking chords. Rick b
"the reason he is full of bitterness is because of what he went through"
Oh, poor Steve, he must be like nobody else… Does that excuse me to be bitter and to offend people too?
Atheism does more harm and twists more your mind than the Mormon Church ever wished it could…
Soulure, Thanks for your reply, and thanks for staying on topic, ie Brigham Young's authority
as prophet. You said, " is it possible to describe what it actually means for someone to have
spiritual authority. " If you were a Mormon ( you never mentioned that you were, so I'm
assuming that you were ) you would know the answer to that question. If you would reread
what I said above you will notice that this authority is that of a reliable Bible teacher, and as the
prophet of God, B.Y. is said to be the mouth piece of God who knows the mind of God so what
he says should be consistant with what God has reveiled in His Word. ( Even most Mormons
would agree to this criteria )
cont. You said, " By LDS standards at least B.Y. did not have a duty to maintain consistency
with previous LDS accepted writings ( scripture ). " I agree that some Mormons see no
problem with new doctrines produced by their prophets even if these doctrines are at odds
with previous pronouncements. However, B.Y. did say that we could take up the Bible and
compare LDS beliefs with it and see if they stood the test. Also, as far as his "duty" is
concerned, he mentioned it was his duty not to advance incorrect doctrine. Yet some Mormon
leaders have actually admitted that what he taught, especially concerning Adam-God. was
false doctrine. You said " LDS faithful will see following any new teaching/revelation from
their leaders as a point in their eternal favor so it is not troubleing to them. " That is too
simplistic of an answer, as many Mormons were indeed troubled when they heard B.Y.
preach on Adam-God. ( And the word "troubled" was used to describe these followers )
cont. You said, " I understand that the problem is that it troubles you. " Perhaps it is
troubleing to me when I see good, decent sincere people being misled by false prophets
as Jesus so warned would happen ( Matt. 7-15 ) I guess that I am good company as
this scenario also concerned the apostle Paul and John, and even Jesus–see Gal.
1: 8-9, Acts 20:28-30; 1 John 4:1. Lastly you said, "as an outsider to both doctrines and
seeing no reason to believe in either of them." I gather that. By reading your post to
others here it appears you're an athiest, so that leaves me scratching my head as to what
you have to offer on this thread topic. Please understand that there are other forums that
can address your arguments relative to your personal views. If you were once LDS and
now athiest this is not unusual. Autocratic religions can do this to people. Don't give up on
God. Thanks and have a good weekend. ww
Violet,
Thanks for posting your story.
I've been a believer a long time, or so it feels, and then I get to read stories like yours every so often, and then I think, "hey, this stuff actually delivers" and it picks me up.
Soulure,
I've only had time for a quick scan over your posts and the replies. I am not a believer in the post-modernist creed that you seem to subscribe to. Firstly, because it doesn't deliver; secondly, because it rests on a very shaky historical foundation (if, indeed, it has any use for history at all). You might not agree with me, but I think your world-view is not at all "natural" or "right", but it has been acquired from the prevailing culture and affirmed by cultural trends that, in the ultimate analysis, are not concerned with your welfare. I ask that you use your natural ability to question things, to seriously question how you got where you are.
Joseph Smith's religion is based primarily on visions he reported having and revelation(s) he said he received including those written on gold tablets which he received from an angel and interpreted using a magic rock which he placed in a hat. The test of whether or not a person would find this true is to pray about it, read it, and if one receives a sign known as a "burning in the bosom" (a positive warm feeling), then that is confirmation (of the truth). It is supposed that this feeling is given by God to the seeker. After receiving the feeling, the then believer in the revelation, is to stop questioning and doubting the veracity of the revelation. Not only that, the then believer is to follow the prophet, unquestioningly, and involve themselves in the life of the one true church.
I'm wondering if the same test could be applied by Mormons to the Bible? That is, pray about it, read it and ask God to provide the "burning in the bosom" confirming if it is true. That way we could put to rest this Mormon claim that the Bible is unreliable because the "true" gospel was lost due to transmissional errors when the Bible manuscripts were copied. Now if the Mormon didn't receive that "burning in the bosom" testimony about the Bible we could apply the other Mormon rationale which is that the person wasn't sincere when reading (the Bible) or praying about it. We could then advise them to keep reading the Bible until they received the "burning in the bosom" feeling.
I remember one time reading the Apostles Creed and getting a "burning in the bosom" contemplating the truths revealed in that document. So I "know" it's true based on this experience.
BY's confession that he didn't have much time, if any, for Bible reading because of his responsibilities tells us all we need to know about him personally and about Mormonisms view of the Holy Scriptures. It also tells us how important unsubstantiated revelatory claims are within the Mormon experience. As I've pointed out previously, this is also a lot more fun (revelation) and emotionally satisfying.
What did Jesus think of the Scriptures? Well we can look to John 17:17 to find out. I would encourage our Mormon readers to take a look at these passages and see how they feel about them!
This whole question of transmissional or transcriptonal errors in the Biblical text is easily debunked. First of all, when Christians claim that the Bible is theopneustos or "God-breathed" we are referring to the "initial" breathing of God. This breathing upon the authors of the various books of the Bible produced God's thoughts. Again, when we Christians talk about and claim infallibility of the Bible, we are referring to that original text.
So how accurate are the copies and did God's message to His messengers survive the copying of the text? We know that a hundred years ago the percentage of the questionable material in the available copies was about five times greater than that which is considered questionable today. So what's happened over time is that many of the questions regarding the text from the past are being resolved in the present. The amount of questionable text is decreasing rather than increasing with time. Less than one-half of one percent of New Testament material is of questionable material none of which effects any of the major doctrine of the Christian Church regarding salvation, evangelization, our spiritual maturity or the Churches eventual triumph over evil.
Those who want to develop their own religion based on their own revelations and thoughts, will not embrace the revelation of God that we call the Word of God or the Bible. Without considerable massaging of the text and outright twisting of the Scriptures, false religious revelations fall because they run contrary to God's revealed Word.
Once people let go of the Bible as their source of truth and rely on the claims of those who say they are prophets but are not, they are led into all sorts of aberrant and heretical beliefs that can cause them to be separated from God for eternity. They have chosen to believe a lie rather than depend on God's truth to nourish, teach and sustain their faith in Him and the salvation He wrought for us through Christ Jesus Our Lord.
Falcon said
I would like to add to all the people looking into mormonism, JS Had 9 (NINE) First vision accounts and they spanned a few years. So when you get your burning in the bosom, make sure it's not some spicy food you ate. And when you pray about the truth, ask God which of the 9 first visions are true, then after God tells you, then ask if your really asking God, or if Satan is really telling you, since the Bible tells us, Satan comes in the form of an angel of light to device, AND God is not the author of confusion, and Nine First vision accounts are confusion.
According to Joseph Smith, his prophetic utterances and revelations, were superior to any scripture, thus he solidified the Mormon concept of on-going, progressive revelation and the subordinating of God's revealed Word the Holy Bible. What a set-up! So now Mormons wait on pins and needles for the latest and greatest revelation from their apostles and prophets. The interesting thing about Mormon revelation is that first of all, as is the case with future telling, the prophesies don't have to come true. Secondly, prophetic words do not have to be tested by scripture or even by previous revelation(s) from former prophets.
Mormons also like to claim that theirs is the only religion that has prophets and apostles so therefore Mormonism must be true. So if a church identifies or labels someone a prophet or apostle, it must also be true, correct? I would like to point out that there are groups of Christians who identify their leaders by the labels "prophet" and "apostle". Even the ones that don't, have men who function in those capacities but without the office fixed on their name tag.
The Book of Ephesians provides a list of what is often known as the five fold ministry of the Holy Spirit. In Ephesians 4:11 we read; "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets and some as evangelists and some as pastors and teachers……" So if God gave these to the Church they must exist whether they are promoted as such or not.
In First Corinthians chapter 12 starting with the first verse, the apostle Paul also discusses the Gifts of the Holy Spirit which are given to the Church for the purpose of ministering to the Body of Christ. The list includes the word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, miracles prophecy, distinguishing of spirits, various kinds of tongues and interpretation of tongues. We are told that the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. Paul then explains that the distribution of the gifts are for the whole Body to participate and benefit and that the individuals gift is for the Body.
Now whether a group of Christians exercise what would be considered the more dramatic gifts such as speaking in tongues or exercises the gift of prophecy, the fact of the matter is that most believe in and attempt to exercise the rest. Now the bottom line is the maturity of the Body in discerning the true from the false. This is why a born again believer in Jesus can recognize and dismiss the claims of Joseph Smith and Mormonisms out of hand. But a person who is not being guided by God's Spirit, will buy the false claims and in fact may be impressed by them.
Let's get real here. How much discernment does it take to figure out that a guy who puts a magic rock in a hat, shoves his face in the hat, and claims he can by this method, translate some golden tablets, is a false prophet? Mormons will mock the dependence of Christians on the Bible, claiming it is a corrupted scripture, but believe the Joseph Smith fantasy.
I believe that God can break through the deception of Mormonism and lead a Mormon to a belief in the Jesus of the Bible. It's just a matter of how hard the Mormons heart is causing them to resist God's promptings.