The Mormon Church and its members seem to take pride in the fact that the Church has no paid clergy. This pride also extends to include the strong sense of volunteerism within the Church. Virtually every active adult Mormon receives a “church calling” – a responsibility like teaching children’s Primary, working in a temple, or genealogy work – which most members fulfill without any financial compensation. This selfless Mormon service is admirable, though it should be remembered that the same kind of selfless service is also found in non-Mormon churches and other charitable organizations all over the world. In the Mormon culture, this fact is often forgotten. Many Mormons take such pride in the idea of an unpaid clergy that they get a bit carried away and insist that nobody in the LDS Church gets paid. On Mormon.org the question is asked, “Why don’t Mormons have a paid clergy?” Members answer (for example),
April: “Oh! I love this question. I love belonging to a church where everyone works for free. Everyone from the top clergy members down to the people who take out the trash do it for free.” Bradford: “We have ‘clergy’ in the sense that we have leaders on local and worldwide levels, but all leaders serve on a voluntary basis. This helps to ensure that our leaders’ motives are pure, and that they are serving out of love rather than greed.” Neils: “All positions of leadership in the church is done voluntarily.” Christian: “Every member of the Church volunteers their time and talents to make the Church go. Nobody gets paid because we’re all in it together!”
Mormon responder Brandon offered this explanation of why it’s important that Mormon leaders are not paid:
“As we read the scriptures, we see that Christ’s disciples gave up everything they had to follow Him. This is what’s called consecration, when you dedicate yourself to whatever calling the Lord gives to you. The Lord never paid His disciples. The only one who was given money was Judas Iscariot because he betrayed the Savior.”
Wow. Brandon must be unaware of the fact that LDS Apostles (unlike Christ’s apostles) do receive financial compensation from the Mormon Church. The Mormon apologetic group FAIR explains,
“Some members of the Church are unaware that at least some General Authorities do receive a modest living stipend. While it is true that some Church leaders receive a living allowance while they serve in a given position, it cannot be said that the Church has a professional ministry in the traditional sense.”
Gordon B. Hinckley (who became the 15th Mormon President) clarified in a 1982 pamphlet published by the LDS Church,
“What of the Mormon clergy? …There is no paid or professional ministry. A small number of general officers and the presidents of missions are given living allowances. Add to this the necessary specialists and clerks who give their full working time to the Church. These constitute all who may be classified as paid personnel.” (What of the Mormons, printed September 1982, 5)
Mormon apologist and author Eric Shuster, responding to bloggers who claim some Mormon leaders are paid well for their church service, wrotein part,
“There are about 450 international, full-time LDS Church leaders who are offered a ‘living allowance’ (more like a stipend) when they are called – of which many to [sic] do not accept the allowance as they are often financially secure. In many cases the allowance is hardly enough to live on and only a token payment for incidentals.”
The Mormon Church does not release its financial information in the United States because the law does not require it. But in some countries it does, so this sort of information for the Church operating in Great Britain, for example, is available to the public. According to the most recent reporting (for year end 2009), the LDS Church in Great Britain employed 456 people in the broad categories of “teaching function” (23), “office administration” (202), and “building cleaners” (231). Nineteen of these employees each earned over $97, 000 US (broken down further in the report as follows [using currency conversion data from August 10, 2011]: 12 employees earned between $97,000 and $113,000; 7 employees earned between $114,000 and $129,000). If I did my math right, the remaining 437 employees earned an average of approximately $30,000 each. I don’t know who the 19 highest paid Church employees are in this report, but Jon at Mormon Discussions claims they include Mission Presidents and Temple Presidents (also see a relevant discussion here). As an average Church member at Mormon.org, Andrew seems to have a better grasp of the Mormon unpaid clergy issue than others posting there, acknowledging some pay for some leaders. He wrote,
“The highest leaders in the LDS church do receive a ‘living allowance,’ Church-funded housing, subsidized/discounted meals at Church-owned cafeterias, and an automobile or car pool service, all of which has a monetary value. Many individuals who teach Mormon doctrine or history receive payment from the Church as professional teachers, such as religion professors at Church-owned schools and seminary instructors who teach in Utah. However, local church administrators, and seminary teachers outside of Utah, are not paid anything of monetary value for their countless hours of service to the Church.”
I do not begrudge the LDS Church the right to hire (or not hire) as many people as they want, or the right to pay (or not pay) their employees whatever they choose. But I find it curious that so many Mormons insist on the superiority of their church borne out in the erroneous belief that nobody—no Church leaders–are paid. Or, if a Mormon admits that there is some financial remuneration for certain callings, he insists it is only a small living allowance that “is hardly enough to live on and only a token payment for incidentals.” I know a lot of people (my pastor included) who would love to receive a token living allowance of $113,000.
—
For more information see Mormonism’s Paid Ministry at mrm.org.
1). January 3, 1984
Hofmann tried to persuade both President Hinckley and the Church Historical Department to purchase the “Salamander Letter.” Both declined.
2). 6 January 1984
Steven F. Christensen purchases Salamander Letter from Hofmann for $40,000.
3). 12 April 1985
Steven F. Christensen, who had purchased the Salamander Letter from Hofmann on 6 January 1984, donated it to the Church. President Hinckley accepted the donation.
4). 28 April 1985
The Church News published the full text of the Salamander Letter
5). 15 October 1985
Two Hofmann bombs murder Steven Christensen and Kathy Sheets.
16 October 1985
Hofmann injures himself with one of his own bombs.
16 October 1986
After an exhaustive search of its holdings and archives, the Church denies possessing an “Oliver Cowdery history.” (It would be learned the next day that Hofmann was the source of the rumor that such a history existed.)
References.
[note] Richard E. Turley, Jr. Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hofmann Case (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 81, 83. ISBN 0252018850 Google books
[note] Gordon B. Hinckley Journal, 10 February 1984.
[note] Turley, Victims, 83.
[note] Cecelia Warner, “The “Martin Harris Letter”: Fact, Fiction. . . Fate,” Sunstone no. (Issue #50) (January 1985). off-site
[note] Church News, 28 April 1985.
[note] Gordon B. Hinckley, “First Presidency Message: Keep the Faith,” Ensign (September 1985), 3.. off-site
[note] Dallin H. Oaks, Address to CES teachers, 16 August 1985.
[note] Dawn Tracy, “Hofmann Told Others He Was Shown Secret LDS History,” Salt Lake Tribune (17 Oct. 1986): C-13; see the belated admission of this connection, despite repeatedly using the claims about the Cowdery history without revealing its source in “Tried to Kill Self, Mormon Artifacts Dealer Says,” Los Angeles Times (1 Aug. 1987): 29.
Helen said
Helen, Joshua would not have been fooled if he first went to the Lord, he choose not to and simply believed what was told him. People make errors even those of us that follow God. The Difference is, we admit mistakes and admit we dont always go to God for answers, You guys on the other Hand claim to have personal revelation from God, but then either dont hear from Him or refuse to go to Him on matters that Count.
I’m still waiting for you and others to go to the lord and get issues of Adam God cleared up, or blood atonment, or many other major doctrianl issue. You know as well as I do, this will never happen, and you yourself wont even come back and say, Rick I prayed and recived an answer from God, and know I will go to the prophet of my church and tell Him I prayed and cleared things up. That will never happen.
Now please tell me the other cases of Prophets in the Bible being fooled by fraud since you mentioned it.
Excuse me Rick, I forgot to post the apology and a admittance to errors, 🙂
Church leaders, especially Gordon B. Hinckley, continued to field criticism for some time for “being duped” and being “unable to discern the evil intentions of a man like Hofmann”. Hinckley later noted: “I accepted him to come into my office on a basis of trust…. I frankly admit that Hofmann tricked us. He also tricked experts from New York to Utah, however…. I am not ashamed to admit that we were victimized. It is not the first time the Church has found itself in such a position. Joseph Smith was victimized again and again. The Savior was victimized. I am sorry to say that sometimes it happens.”
Kudos to rick and mike.
Isn’t it amazing the twists and turns and contortions Helen has to go through to defend the prophets of the Mormon church getting scammed. Not only did they not have any spiritual discernment, they really weren’t very smart.
Here the thing, they believed the Salamander Letter. What kind of spiritual leaders and supposed apostles and prophets would think such a thing was true? Only those who would believe all of the other wild tales that JS told.
Helen has to ignore the obvious and come up with fantastic explanations in order to maintain her faith in the Mormon myth.
Helen said
I replied to the Issue of Joshua, then I said
Helen, you said it so now back it up.
The Mormons point to their unpaid “clergy” at the wards as a point of legitimacy, credibility, and biblical accuracy as to what the Lord wants and commands. Once again, the Mormon’s closest allies, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, do not pay their elders that run the local kingdom halls. Would the Mormon’s give the JW’s their “salute” for doing the same thing they are doing? Hardly not. But, it would be unreasonable for us to expect the LDS Church and its members to be consistent in what they approve and disapprove. Should the Mormons and the JW’s pay their local leaders for their ministry efforts? I think THEY ARE CORRECT in not paying them. Why? These leaders of the wards and kingdom halls are not preaching the gospel of Christ. Only true ministers of the gospel who are devoting their entire lives to ministry should be paid to support them in the gospel outreach effort.
I have visited many LDS wards and listened to their talks. That is all that they are – talks. It’s not the gospel. The wards I visited had various people from the audience come up and give their own talks. Ward bishops are not “preaching” every Sunday. They are administrators and tithe collectors. These talks are nothing more than self-improvement lectures that could easily be transferred and spoken at the local Unitarian/Universalist Church. These ward leaders are not ministers of the gospel but rather a false gospel. They have no theological training; they are grossly ignorant of the Bible and have no handle on Greek or Hebrew in doing exegesis to effectively and accurately unpack God’s Word to His people. They don’t meet the qualifications to be paid. Mormons, please continue not paying your bishops for talking. You’re getting your money’s worth.
What does the Bible have to say about paying ministers of the gospel? The Apostle Paul speaks of this in great deal in 1 Corinthians 9. Paul spoke in favor of ministers being paid, but he stated why he declined payment for his support in verse 12. The Corinthians were grossly immature Christians and Paul knew that asking for financial support would have them howling in defiance. He didn’t want to make them stumble; he took on more of a burden to himself personally for their benefit and for the advancement of the gospel. Paul was a tentmaker and relied on that profession to support himself for his personal cares (Acts 18:3). Paul never condemned the idea of a paid ministry. He was in favor of it.
1 Corinthians 9:4-5 makes this clear. Ministers have a right to eat, drink, pay their debtors and take care of their families. Some of the apostles were married. They and their families deserved to be cared for financially by their fellow Christians so they can adequately fulfill their mission efforts. Paul gives the examples of soldiers, farmers, and shepherds in 1 Cor 9:7. Soldiers defend the homeland and are supported by its people. Farmers eat their own crops. Shepherds drink the milk that comes from their flock. Paul and the apostles are sowing spiritual things and should receive material things from their parishioners in 1 Cor 9:11. Paul stated in 1 Cor 9:14 that “the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel” (NASB). Jesus supported a paid ministry (Luke 10:7).
Are the Mormons consistent in their condemnation of Christians financially supporting their full-time ministers? Consistency and Mormonism are not synonymous. Let’s consider the young people that the LDS Church has out doing their proselytizing for Joseph Smith’s gospel. Starting in January of 1991, the LDS Church started financially supporting its missionaries regardless of where they serve. This started at $350. I have been told that today the figure is around $700 and could be more depending on where the missionary is assigned. The Mormon missionaries in my area are housed in some nice apartments across the street from the home subdivision that I live in. These aren’t cheap. Somebody is paying and it isn’t just the missionaries’ families. Missionaries are doing full-time service and receive financial support the home office in Salt Lake City. This is a form of paid ministry regardless of how the LDS Church may want to spin it otherwise.
The Mormons brag that their ward bishops are not paid. The boasting and self-righteous “chest pounding” is truly nauseating. However, Doctrine and Covenants states that the bishop should be paid in section 42:73 where it states:
“And the bishop, also, shall receive his support, or a just remuneration for all his services in the church.”
Mormons that give money to missionaries are true disciples:
D&C 84:89-91 – Whoso receiveth you receiveth me; and the same will feed you, and clothe you, and GIVE YOU MONEY. And he who feeds you, or clothes you, or GIVES YOU MONEY, shall in nowise lose his reward…by doing this you may know my disciples.
Mormons without families who receive income are supposed to give their money to the bishop: D&C 84:104.
D&C 72:3-4 states that a person’s worthiness in stewardship plays a part in one’s inheriting an eternal mansion.
What??!!
So glad to accomodate,
Another example of a prophet being deceived, and of the mistakes that prophets can make, is given in 1 Kings 13. In that chapter, we read of a man of God with prophetic power and the gift of healing who was given an assignment by God and who was told by God not to eat or drink in that place. After having performed a great miracle, another “old prophet” wanted to meet the man of God and have the man of God eat and drink at his house. To achieve his vain desire, the old prophet told a lie, saying that an angel of God had told the old prophet that the man of God was indeed to come eat and drink after all. Sadly, the man of God – a powerful prophet – believed the lie. He was deceived (1 Kings 13:18). He joined the old prophet at his home where he ate and drank, disobeying the instructions he had received from God. God then gave a revelation to the old prophet – the one who had lied! – saying that the man of God would be punished for his disobedience, that “thy carcase shall not come unto the sepulchre of thy fathers” (1 Kings 13:21,22). That prophecy was fulfilled as the man of God was killed by a lion on the way home.
Scammed or just a lack of discernment, LOL.
Here is what our dear Falcon wants everyone to believe because he Googled it, but in doing do he failed to give a good reading (“holy discernment” on the information.
He claims the brethren got conned, here is his proof. “I did a quick google search looking to see how much $$$ the brethren got conned out of from Mark Hoffman and this is what I came up with.”
8. Jan ’84–”Salamander Letter”, $40,000. 14. Oct ’85–Hinckley extends $500,000 line of credit to Steve Christensen to locate and purchase damaging documents with Hofmann’s assistance.
Whoa, hit the brakes, get back on track and let the infusion of Discernment begin.
What are the facts?
1). January 3, 1984
Hofmann tried to persuade both President Hinckley and the Church Historical Department to purchase the “Salamander Letter.” Both declined.
2). 6 January 1984
Steven F. Christensen purchases Salamander Letter from Hofmann for $40,000.
3). 12 April 1985
Steven F. Christensen, who had purchased the Salamander Letter from Hofmann on 6 January 1984, donated it to the Church. President Hinckley accepted the donation.
Wish to refute it, then give us the references like I did.
References.
[note] Richard E. Turley, Jr. Victims: The LDS Church and the Mark Hofmann Case (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992), 81, 83. ISBN 0252018850 Google books
[note] Gordon B. Hinckley Journal, 10 February 1984.
[note] Turley, Victims, 83.
[note] Cecelia Warner, “The “Martin Harris Letter”: Fact, Fiction. . . Fate,” Sunstone no. (Issue #50) (January 1985). off-site
[note] Church News, 28 April 1985.
[note] Gordon B. Hinckley, “First Presidency Message: Keep the Faith,” Ensign (September 1985), 3.. off-site
[note] Dallin H. Oaks, Address to CES teachers, 16 August 1985.
[note] Dawn Tracy, “Hofmann Told Others He Was Shown Secret LDS History,” Salt Lake Tribune (17 Oct. 1986):
Helen said
Please, all you can do is make excuse as to why you cannot answer questions and you can dodge them, thats about it.
You went back to verse 30 again, yet you never went back and answered Johnny question. Then all the other questions you avoid, well I hate to be the one to tell you, but when your standing before God, you cannot dodge His questions. You will answer them Truthfully and honestly, those answers will be, Yes I wanted to believe what I wanted to believe, and yes It might have been lies, But I loved darkness rather than Light. Then you will get what you wanted, Eternal darkness as Jude speaks about it.
Well Helen,
I guess it’s the “everybody gets fooled” defense. Based on this then, I wouldn’t put too much stock in these guys. They obviously aren’t as infallible and knowing as is claimed by Mormons. And also Helen neither are you. You claim to have received messages and confirmations and audible voices no less and you accept it all without question.
Using the gift of discernment, I’d say your hearing from a side of the spirit world that doesn’t represent the God of the Bible. Your holy revelation is lacking in truth.
Joseph Smith fooled people into thinking that he could see buried treasure in the ground by means of a magic rock. That scam was his training ground for future religious scams.
I think you need to do a considerable down-grade of your prophets and their ability to hear from God, read the motives of people and be trustworthy in what they speak forth.
Since Mormon prophets have a very poor record of fore telling the future and in their ability to remain consistent regarding the doctrines of the Mormon faith, I think I’d move them off of the pedestal you have them on.
The last thing I’d do is give them any money.
There’s so much that can be shared concerning this episode in Mormon history [ the
Hoffman affair] , and it does’nt make the Church leadership look good. It reveals that
the Mormon leadership are not trustworthy spiritual guides ; at any given time they
can’t be relied on to relay truth from God to their followers. Mormon General Authority
Bruce McConkie teaches that the Spirit of God is giving direct and daily revelation to
Church leaders, these “living oracles ” claim that , “……You can always trust the living
prophets” [ True To The Faith, p129]. A Mormon leader issuing an “apology” after a
classic example of his claim to be a reliable spiritual guide is see to be false advertising,
is the least he could do . But it does little to erase the fact of a broken trust with his
followers. ” Mark Hofman has put the claim of revelation in the Church to the acid test
and found that the ‘ so-called living oracles ‘ are just as fallible as other men. Apostles Oaks
and the other Mormon leaders find themselves in a very embarrassing position . At the time
when revelation was really needed, they seemed to be completely oblivious to what was
going on. Not only did they fail to forsee the threat to the Church through revelation , but
they ignored the many warnings which appeared in the Salt Lake Messenger, a publication
which they feel is printed by ‘ apostates’ or anti’s . ” [ S.L. Messenger Sept 1987, p17 ].
Mormon leaders are really no different from other devout religious men who ask people
to follow them based on trusting their spiritual witness . Beware-Matt 7:15
I am very busy with work now and only pop in now and then on this site. I have to pull this little gem out –
RickB said “Have you read the Mormon hymnal? I did, the songs are about Joseph Smith, Not Jesus.”
Really? I have 2 hymn books at home, one from around the 70’s and the other we use now. What can you tell me about these songs which are in both of these books –
“I need Thee every hour, most Gracious Lord”
“Come follow Me, the Saviour said”
“Saviour may I learn to love Thee, walk the path that Thou hast shown”
“Come unto Jesus, ye heavy laden’
“Come oh Thou King of kings, we’ve waited long for Thee”
These are a few written by LDS members, but there are more in the hymn book written by non-LDS including numerous about the Atonement and Christmas.
I do agree there are songs about Joseph Smith, but there are also songs about this earth and the creations within it, about our faith and other things.
So why do you say that all the songs are about Joseph Smith? It really makes me think that you did not read it as you said.
As far as the topic is concerned – The church leaders get their ‘pay’ for the corporate side of things they do for the church. If they were asked to give someone a blessing, or marry a couple, or anything to do with their priesthood authority, they would not get any pay for it. And if the pay is only in the $100000 range – compare that to the CEOs of big corporations and their pay, it’s a pittance.
Ralph,
I know this is a little off topic, but I figured I would take the opportunity to ask you a few questions about the LDS hymnal since the topic was brought up. Mormons say to Christians: “We’re Christians just like you!” If that is the case, I would like to know why the most popular and well-known of all Christian hymns, “Amazing Grace,” is not in the LDS hymnal? It’s not in my 1998 hymnal nor in any other LDS hymnal I have ever looked at. Why are there numerous hymns that pertain to Joseph Smith and the prophets in general, but the saving work of Christ that is by unmerited grace through faith alone is nowhere in the index?
I also see many songs in the LDS hymnal that mention the cross of Calvary. However, it’s pretty clear that the LDS Church has a negative and sometimes vitriolic view of the cross. The sun, moon, stars, pentagrams, and other symbols are all over the LDS temples, but the cross is nowhere in sight. Moroni is at the top of the temples, but there is no cross in sight there or on the ward buildings despite JESUS CHRIST being in caps on the buildings and on the name tags of your young missionaries (great marketing strategy employed by the LDS Church thanks to New York City marketing firm consulting). Ralph, why sing about the cross if it is held in such disdain? Why have it in the hymnal if it’s so repulsive and offensive?
If Mormons want to be Christians, then they better overhaul their hymnal and start singing our hymns. They need to get happy about the cross of Calvary where Jesus paid the sin debt completely and totally for His people. Amazing grace!
Andy,
I don’t know why Amazing Grace is not in the hymnal as I was not on the committee that created it.
As far as the cross is concerned, I can only talk from my own experiences. We LDS do not have ”a negative and sometimes vitriolic view of the cross” when it comes to the actual aspect of Jesus’ Atonement. We teach that it was an integral part of the Atonement and without it we cannot return to live with Heavenly Father again.
What I do believe you observe is the way we distance ourselves from the supposed worship that other Christian churches (ie mainly Catholic and Orthodox) give to it – they bow down in front of it (I have sometimes seen people prostrate themselves in front of it crying and praying out loud), crossing themselves, etc. I understand that these people say they do not worship the cross just use it to focus their attention on Jesus when they worship, that is why I said ‘supposed worship’. But from what I have seen it does appear that they do worship it.
That is why we are ‘comfortable’ in singing about Jesus and His Atonement including the cross at Calvary, but do not have it displayed anywhere in our buildings, etc. I have said in the past that I am happy if my daughters are given a cross as jewellery by a friend and they want to wear it, its just jewellery. But I do draw the line at a crucifix as a piece of jewellery. I know a few Traditional Christians that think the same so I know it’s not my LDS upbringing.
But I was just making a comment on RickB saying that there are no hymns about Jesus in our hymnal.
Ralph,
I went to Catholic school and I can tell you most definitely that Catholics don’t worship the cross as an “object” nor do they “pray to statues” in an idolatrous fashion as some claim. Now I would claim that the Catholic practice of praying to the saints and Mary as intercessors to God is misguided.
The Bible clearly teaches that there is one mediator between God and man and that is Jesus Christ.
I point this out because Mormons believe that Joseph Smith must give the go a head to a Mormon before they enter the Celestial Kingdom on their way to becoming gods.
Also the atonement within Mormonism is not any where near what the atonement is in Christianity. The atonement in Mormonism is used for the Mormon to add to their own works in case they haven’t done enough to become gods. This is part of the two part salvation viewed by Mormons. The first part is a general atonement or universal atonement for everyone who ever lived regardless of whether they have placed their faith in Jesus for eternal life or not.
Ralph
I understand that when the Mormon temple was dedicated in Manti that Joseph Smiths magic rock was placed on the altar.
Do Mormons “worship” Joseph Smith’s magic rock? They may as well for all the good that following the glass looker can do for them.
Andy, you may feel happy about the Cross, but I don’t think the apostles were happy or the rest of Christ’s disciples eager to see a man crucified and tortured, what a terrible memory that brings up.
I my self am not happy nor was God the Father Happy as He turned His head and left Christ to suffer for awhile alone. So you orthodox christians, how wonderful that you proclaim the happy event of the Cross where one had to die in such a horrible and terrible way. Happy you say, my gosh how in the world does this make one happy that someone would have to suffer so horribly so that you can now claim grace has saved you.
Happy, how about Christ Resurrected, how about Christ alive, how about Christ free to walk and talk with those He loved so much, His apostles and disciples. How about being happy that He is risen and ascended to heaven to sit at the Right Hand of God. Happy for Christ alive, or as orthodox christian happy for the cross and it’s ramifications. As for me, I’m happy that Christ has shown us that all will be resurrected, every living being who ever lived on this earth, so happy.
Sharon Lindbloom, just wonder if this forum is going to be consistent in requiring anyone who makes claims, speculates or say they heard, something; too verify, confirm or reference that claim.
CASE in point, “I understand that when the Mormon temple was dedicated in Manti that Joseph Smiths magic rock was placed on the altar.”
Saying one heard; is this not just pure speculation without any factual foundation? I was called out for making a statement about what the Apostles and LDS taught as being the same in the Bible and was asked for scripture to prove my point.
[Helen, when you have doubts about a claim someone has made I encourage you to ask for documentation or evidence from that person, just as other participants here ask you to back up claims you make. It is when people repeatedly refuse to answer direct questions that a moderator may step in.]
rick,
Helen’s stated purpose for being on this forum is to correct misinformation stated about Mormonism. As it turns out about all she’s able to do is repeat the standard lines from the LDS church which (the church) hands out in order to cover-up its real history, practices and beliefs. Get her to the next level of questioning and she totally ignores the points under discussion. For her its just back up a few steps and repeat the same tired old cliches that work well among the faithful down at the Mormon wards.
Going any further and a Mormon is faced with the reality that the LDS church generally and its prophets past and present, aren’t as advertised within the religion.
The explanations Mormons use to prop up their sagging religion are comical but they work in the minds of the true believer.
This claim that the prophets got fooled and even Jesus got fooled is presented without any type of documentation to back it up. A Mormon just accepts it without thinking.
GBH would have us believe that he and the rest of the scammed prophets were just like Jesus who they also claimed got scammed. Who did Jesus get scammed by? Was it Judas? Would the Helen’s of the Mormon world have us believe that Jesus didn’t know what Judas was all about? Even the apostle John talked about how Judas was in charge of the money and was dipping into the till. He wasn’t fooling anyone.
No, this is more of the same when it comes to the Mormon Helen’s with their claims to personal revelation trying to defend the flips and flops, fits and starts and obvious short comings of the men they sing praises to who are, at the end of the day, just the blind leading the blind.
Sharon, I have asked Falcon about verse 30 (book of mormon) , no response from him, asked about Salamander facts he got wrong, no answer, and now about the rock being on the alter of the temple, no answer. Only answer I have gotten is that someone else took over and answered for him. If someone makes a claim and I asked for proof or reference which I did, why do you give him a bye.
[Helen, I’ve looked back over your comments to find the questions you’ve asked Falcon, but I don’t see them. All I see are comments you’ve made about things he has said. No direct questions. If you have questions you would like answered it would be best ask them in a straightforward manner so there is no confusion. By the way, this is your 7th comment for today (1 over the daily limit), but I am approving it for posting in order to answer the concern you’ve raised here. -Sharon]
Helen,
Please don’t twist my words and meaning with what I said about the cross of Calvary with your heretical teachings of Mormonism. What I am happy about in regards to the cross is what took place for me SPIRITUALLY: atonement and reconciliation by grace through faith in Christ alone. No sane person would be happy and joyful about what Christ suffered PHYSICALLY on the cross. The fact that the Son of God/God the Son suffered in my place the wrath of the Father that I deserved is something beyond my mental comprehension. The Bible doesn’t say God the Father was “happy” about the physical sufferings of His Son. However, the Bible does say that “it pleased the LORD to bruise him (KJV)”. You can think about “pleased” and “happy” and come to your own conclusion. The Father predestined for this to take place before the foundation of the world (Acts 2:23; 4:27-28). The Son voluntarily took the role of providing the atonement for the people that God predestined and gave to His Son before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-5). The Apostle Paul spoke highly and favorably of what took place on the cross (Gal 6:14).
Let’s back to the topic that Sharon has written about in her article. I have written many posts in the last week regarding the LDS apostasy theory/conspiracy, polygamy, and now tithing. I, like many others, wait patiently for your answers. It is very clear to me that you have none. This isn’t a game and I’m not out to win anything or win arguments. My sole purpose is to expose falsehood, heresy, and inform those out there (lurkers) whom God is doing a work in their lives by drawing them to Himself. Your silence advances that cause.
Soli Deo gloria!
Helen, respectfully but Mormons really need to be careful with using Old Testament
references to prophets and how God used them . Since we’re in the New covenant , that
Jesus inaugurated , the criteria He laid down for us to evaluate false teachers is clear .
In 1 Kings 13 there is a great lesson God wanted His people to remember , but for Mormons
to use this passage of scripture as a alibi to excuse the ” mistakes” of their leaders really
only raises more questions. One quick example to consider is where have Mormon prophets
admitted to LYING like the old prophet here ? Or where has a Mormon prophet admitted to
receiving a revelation from God and then rejected that because another prophet convinced
him ( spiritual witness ? ) that this new revelation was really God’s revelation to him ?
We could go on with this but it is’nt necessary because this passage offers very little in the
way of an apologetic to use today. A truth here that I do find helpful is in vr.18. Notice it
says a prophet claimed to have info from an angel . Sounds similar to Gal.1:8 . Sadly, in
O.T. times because of their sinful ways God tested His people at times. The lesson
LDS can learn from the Hofman fraud case is that they should place their trust in God’s Word
and not in their leaders claimed exclusive authority. Not doubt multitudes of faithful LDS
( faithful to their prophet) simply relied on a spiritual witness which confirmed to them that
their leaders were not being led astray by Hofman. According to Pres. Hinckley Jesus was also
“victimized” ; did He pass on this info to Hinckley?
Helen,
You said: “Happy you say, my gosh how in the world does this make one happy that someone would have to suffer so horribly so that you can now claim grace has saved you.”
My question to you is: Do you not believe Jesus had to suffer so horribly so that we can now claim that grace has saved us? I am asking for clarification since you are not clear. Jesus died so that we might live. Is that not something to rejoice over? You can’t have resurrection without crucifixion. You can’t have life without death. The Latin “crux” is our “cross.” The cross truly is the crux of the matter.
Ralph,
What do you think about “Praise to the Man”? In this Mormon hymn, JS is being compared to God; in fact, his blood is given the same honor as the blood of Christ. Do you know what syncretism is? Syncretism is the blending of true traditions/practices with heathen traditions/practices. The LDS Church might sing the hymns you listed, but they also sing “Praise to the Man.” This is a perfect example of synchretism. The Israelites were warned about such practices.
Peace…
Andy,
I though about your question on hymns about grace – “I stand all amazed at the love Jesus offers me, confused at the grace that so fully He proffers me”. Does this fit into your category? It in the 2 hymn books I have at home. There may be a few more but that’s the one that came to me as we sing it quite frequently in my home ward.
Jackg,
I am sorry but I do not see how ‘Praise to the man” gives JS blood ”the same honor as the blood of Christ” (BTW it’s spelt honour 🙂 ). It says that his blood will plead unto heaven about his murder and that the people involved will have to answer for the shedding of his blood. Nowhere I can see does it state that JS’s blood was shed to atone us with God. So can you please explain to me how you came to that conclusion? The hymn gives his blood the honour of a martyr like the martyrs of old (ie Peter, Paul, etc), but nothing so high as the same honour as Jesus blood.
Falcon,
Did you not read what I wrote – I said ‘supposed worship’. From outside parties, that is exactly what it appears to be happening, they are worshipping the cross (and statues when they bow down and pray in front of them). What exactly is the difference between a ‘Christian’ bowing down in front of a cross and praying to their god, and a ‘pagan’ bowing down in front of an idol and praying to their god? If both claim to see the object in front of them as a focal point and not the object of worship, but the god it symbolises is the item of worship, why does the ‘Christian’ claim the pagan is worshipping the idol but they (as in the ‘Christian’) is not worshipping the cross?
It is like the claim on this site and by many non-LDS that we worship JS. We revere him as a prophet, great man, and martyr, but we do not bow down and worship/pray to him (nor pictures/statues of him). We do not hold him in the same stead as Jesus Christ, ie as the Messiah. Yes we do teach that he has a say in whether we can go to heaven or not, but we teach that of all the other prophets as well. They will be the ‘witnesses’ to whether we accepted God’s word coming from them. However, we do teach that ultimately it is Jesus who makes the final judgment and allocates our reward/punishment – NOT JS or any other person.
There are references to other judges besides Jesus in the Bible (eg the 12 Apostles of Jesus time will be the judges of the children of Israel), but ultimately Jesus is the final judge.
Jackg, my only comment would be that Andy misspoke and did not articulate what his happiness meant.
Andy poorly expressed himself:
They need to get happy about the cross of Calvary where Jesus paid the sin debt completely and totally for His people.
I can be happy that Jesus paid the debt of Justice, and that he freely gave of his love for all mankind and not just the chosen. But choosing a CROSS to remind me of how it cost our Savior dearly in pain and torture is not the symbol I want to ware around my neck or pray too.
The Cross was a instrument of horror, death, punishment and ultimate means to show by example how horrible death can be if you don’t follow the ways of man.
Happiness was Christ resurrected, a example to all that everyone comes under the Grace of God, both the Christian and Atheist. Happiness is Christ alive, not dead. Happiness is Christ reunited with God the Father and sitting on His right hand side. Happiness is not a symbol, but Christ Himself.
The
I’ve posted a link to a Mormon Times article that some may find interesting. Notice how it says:
“Instead, Reed found the cross all over Mormondom. It appeared as jewelry on Brigham Young’s wives and daughters. It appeared in floral arrangements in funerals. It appeared as tie tacks on men’s ties and watch fobs on men’s vests. It appeared on cattle as the OFFICIAL LDS CHURCH BRAND. Crosses were on church windows, attic vents, stained-glass windows and pulpits. They were on gravestones and quilts.”
Obviously Mormons used the cross. There was a Cross on the Kirkland Temple. It’s been stated here before that in the 1950’s Pres. David O. McKay told the LDS to stop wearing their cross jewelry because it is strictly Catholic. The LDS church wanted to distance themselves from the Catholics, it wasn’t until later that the whole, “It’s a murder weapon! Would you wear gun around your neck if your mother was shot?” or “Mormons focus on His life not His death.” excuses came out. Mormons truly think that the Cross is foolishness. They have something so much better, such as mythical golden angels, moons, sunstones, and the symbols of Free Masonry. Sorry, but Jesus is found in NONE of these symbols. 1 Corinthians 1:18
Now this article is from a Mormon apologetic view, it says,
“It turns out that cross “aversion” was a Protestant pastime in times past.”
I have never heard this before and I’m wondering if any of you have. I get the feeling that it’s mentioned in the article so the Mormon writing it can say, “See! The Protestants did it so we can too!”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2336661/posts
Kate I love how, “well the Mormons also did it”, rebuttal.
Well what if I came back at you and stated a truth, Orthodox Christians were also racist back in the Day Of Joseph Smith. So being a little more careful in just the usual, well the Mormons did it, usually comes back to bite the behind of someone who indulges in tit for tat. Fair play, so a word to the wise, be careful that what you accuse someone of might be more of a problem for yourself then you realize.
Smiling, 🙂
Helen said
Helen, Grow up. You cry about Falcon not answering your question, Yet remember, that question was answered by many of us and so he could simply repet what we said, but why bother. Then Still this makes 3 times I have said this to you, Johnny answered it and you never replied back to him.
Then you avoid questions by everyone so often it’s not funny, it’s non stop dodging with you.
I bet you still wont answer Johnny Question about verese 30 will you.
Then as far as the Cross, we Christains DONT WORSHIP the Cross. But you better go back and read the OT, The Cross is all through out the OT. The Pass over speaks of the Cross. Moses and the people were told to camp out in a certain fasion where if you had a plane and flew over them they would look like a cross, so God the father looking down saw the Cross. King David in Psalms spoke of how Jesus would die on the Cross, and how his beard would be ripped out, and his garments would be gambled for. So you really need to go back and study the entire Bible and not your BoM.
Kate, that info you shared on the cross in Mormon history was incredible. It’s another
example of why Mormons should dismiss their leaders authoritative guidance over their
lives ; they can’t seem to make up their minds, again . As far as any “cross aversion ” in
Protestant times past, this term, “Protestant” is almost such a generic term the way many
Mormons use it. The truth about the cross and how we look at it is revealed in the Bible and
Andy did a great job of laying out that fact . I personally liked how the cross symbol was
used on a brand ( I have our ranch’s branding iron in my home , it REMINDS me of what my
Grandfather did for me by building the ranch where I was blessed to live the western lifestyle )
Helen,
Yes I know people of the past were racist. I’ve often said Joseph and Brigham were a product of their time. The difference is Helen, Joseph and Brigham claimed to be the mouthpiece of God. God told them to be racist. God told them that they were the less valiant of the pre existence, so they are cursed with black skin. God told Brigham Young that Blacks wouldn’t hold the priesthood in this lifetime. They wouldn’t hold it until Christ’s return. Oh I forgot, that was “just his opinion.” so it “doesn’t count.” We often see Mormons on this board (such as yourself) that try and show that someone in the Bible did it (had many wives and concubines for example) so it was perfectly OK and commanded of God for the Mormons to engage in such a practice. I was pretty much referring to that attitude when I made the comment about the Protestants did it so it’s OK for Mormons to do it! I don’t see this as a problem for myself at all. Just calling it like I see it.
Ralph,
Could you do me a favor and post the lyrics for “Praise to the Man”? I can’t remember the exact words, but I think it would be great for everyone to read them and draw their own conclusions as to whether or not Mormons put the blood of JS on the same level as the blood of Jesus Christ. That would be interesting, I think. Thanks in advance.
Peace…
Rick B. sorry but you must have missed the question, I asked Falcon if he was going to continue quoting the Book of Mormon scripture that states Jacob is telling the people that what they were doing was evil yet leave out verse 30. It’s interesting that some will manipulate our scripture to twist it so it reveals only one view, yet when confronted with verse 30 they hide from the light of truth and will not agree that yes, it should be added in the quote so as to give all guest and visitors the fair and balanced version so they can decide for themselves just what the Lord is actually saying. Hiding from verse 30 just shows that someone is afraid to be fully front and center when making such outlandish criticisms that have been shown to be of little to no valve in the context they choose and obviously are manipulating word context in furthering their agenda of hate for the Mormons and Joseph Smith. Best you fully read my question next time before going off on me.
I don’t expect Falcon to answer, he made his point and that suits him just fine even though he knows down deep he misrepresented the truth. If you want to follow in his footsteps, be my guest and follow. 🙂
Kate, why do Christians not know that treating Blacks as nothing more then pedestrians that should sit in the back of the Church or go out and start their own. Some one who claims that the Bible is the word of God and still treat them as less then Christian is you and others trying to hide the facts and blaming it on the times and events of those days. Shame on anyone who makes such excuses, at least Joseph Smith came out against slavery and worked for the freedom of all men, regardless of the color of their skin, not so with the Christian Churches that were most popular in those days, they acted like Christians but failed to comprehend the Word of God, why Kate?
Jackg,
I all honesty, I doubt Ralph will post the words, It wont help the Mormon cause, But Andy has the Hymnal and I believe Sharon, Aaron and Bill has it, Maybe they would post it if Ralpf wont.
Ralph, You guys sing praises to the man, but why not to Moses? How come we dont read in the Bible The apsotles singing to Moses? Or King David? or any of the prophets. Why only JS?
Jackg,
Here are the words to the song with the references to JS blood bolded. As you can see they just mean what I stated earlier – Those who murdered him will be held accountable for it, and he was a martyr. That is all, no elevating him to the same status as Jesus as you intimated. It can be found on the earth website quite easily with additional information.
Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah,
Jesus anointed that prophet and seer,
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him and nations revere.
Praise to his memory he died as a martyr,
Honoured and blessed be his ever great name,
Long shall his blood which was shed by assassins,
Plead unto heaven while the earth lauds his fame.
Great is his glory and endless his priesthood,
Ever and ever the keys he will hold,
Faithful and true he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.
Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven,
Earth must atone for the blood of that man,
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice,
Millions shall know brother Joseph again.
(chorus)
Hail to the prophet ascended to heaven,
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain,
Mingling with Gods he can plan for his brethren,
Death cannot conquer the hero again.
On another note ( 🙂 ) here is another song for grace – “Sweet is the Work”; one line states “Thy works of grace, how bright they shine”. That’s another one I have grown up singing in church many times. It’s by Isaac Watts, a non-LDS composer.
RickB,
We have hymns in general about all the prophets and in Primary (ie children from 4 – 12) they have a song listing some of the prophets of the Bible and BoM and what they did for us (I think there are 12 – 14 verses). The main 2 prophets I see us focusing on with hymns are JS and Moroni as these 2 had the most impact on the church in this latter day. But we have more hymns in our hymnal about Jesus and His atonement than we do about JS. Whereas you said earlier that you have read the LDS hymnal and there are no hymns about Jesus but they are all about JS.
Helen,
In 1838, Joseph Smith answered the following question while en route from Kirtland to Missouri, as follows: “Are the Mormons abolitionists? No … we do not believe in setting the Negroes free.”(Smith 1977, p. 120)
“In the evening debated with John C. Bennett and others to show that the Indians have greater cause to complain of the treatment of the whites, than the negroes or sons of Cain” (History of the Church 4:501.)
On February 7, 1844, Joseph Smith wrote his views as a candidate for president of the United States. The anti-slavery plank of his platform called for a gradual end to slavery by the year 1850 . (Wikipedia)
So could it be that the changing of his mind had something to do with his plans to run for President?
“My cogitations, like Daniel’s have for a long time troubled me, when I viewed the condition of men throughout the world, and more especially in this boasted realm, where the Declaration of Independence ‘holds these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;’ but at the same time some two or three millions of people are held as slaves for life, because the spirit in them is covered with a darker skin than ours.” (History of the Church, Vol.6, Ch.8, p.197 – p.198)
Didn’t the LDS church forbid the Blacks the priesthood and temple endowments until 1978 “because the spirit in them is covered with a darker skin than ours?” There is more to racism than slavery. I know that there has been racism against many different peoples since Adam. I don’t know why men have to be so horrible to each other. (cont)
I’m not trying to hide the facts of anything. Please don’t put words in my mouth or assume that you know what I think or stand for.
“At least Joseph Smith came out against slavery and worked for the freedom of all men, regardless of the color of their skin, not so with the Christian Churches”
What freedom did the Mormons give to all men regardless of the color of their skin. Just because Joseph Smith said a few words about abolition and slavery while planning to run for President, doesn’t make him the righteous man you are claiming. Let’s look at a few quotes by Mormon leaders to see just how “not” racist they were:
“Had I anything to do with the Negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization” (Joseph Smith History of the Church, Volume 5, pp.218-219).
“In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds. We knew that the children of Ham were to be the “servant of servants,” and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 172). Hmmm…Which prophet to believe? Smith or Young??
“Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, IS DEATH ON THE SPOT. THIS WILL ALWAYS BE SO.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).
Kate, That assumes that in 1844 abolition was a politically convenient position.
In 1838 Joseph Smith answered questions “which were frequently” asked him. Question number thirteen was concerning slavery:
Thirteenth – “Are the Mormons abolitionists?”
“No, unless delivering the people from priestcraft, and the priests from the power of Satan, should be considered abolition. But we do not believe in setting the Negroes free.” (History of the Church, vol. 3, p. 29)
When the Mormons migrated to Missouri they encountered the pro-slavery sentiments of their neighbors. Initially, Joseph Smith, Jr. supported the laws regarding slaves and slaveholders, but eventually rejected the institution and supported its abolition
Book of Mormon on dark skin:
O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness…” (Jacob 3:8-9).
On (December 16, 1833), Joseph Smith, Jr. dictated a passage in the Doctrine and Covenants stating that “it is not right that any man should be in bondage to another.” (Covenant 101:79).
So Kate, how about all the wonderful Christians during that time that did not speak out against slavery. Watch out, you started this debate and I have a feeling you just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole to try and climb out of. Just my opinion. 🙂
Kate, you’ve reminded us again of an important part of the Mormon gospel , the spiritual
guidance from the top officers in Jesus’ church in this last dispensation , which are Mormon
prophets and apostles. What these spiritual guides counseled their followers concerning
Black people is clear. Rather than embracing what Jesus has directed His Church to do with
this issue ( Acts 10 ) , it was easier for Mormon leaders to copy the behavior of some of those
abominable churches around them , thus the spiritual witness of Brigham Young was borrowed
from these other church leaders. Perhaps Helen will admit that her prophets advanced false
spiritual witness on this vital issue (despite THEIR claims to the contrary ) . If Mormons would
have followed what Jesus said to His apostles [ Acts 10:34-35 ] , not Mormon apostles, this
error would have been prevented. Sadly , but the Mormon people have been persuaded that
when their prophet speaks, ” the debate is over” and that this prophet is the source of “pure
unpolluted guidance ” [ Gen Conf. 10-1998, Virginia Jensen ]. Jesus said to Beware –Matt 7:15
The good news is that the Mormon people simply don’t need their prophets , a simple dynamic
fuller relationship with God is available without them as far as receiving eternal life is
concerned. Heb. 7:25 . May God give these precious people the strength to pursue this truth
soon.
CASE in point, “I understand that when the Mormon temple was dedicated in Manti that Joseph Smiths magic rock was placed on the altar.”
Saying one heard; is this not just pure speculation without any factual foundation? I was called out for making a statement about what the Apostles and LDS taught as being the same in the Bible and was asked for scripture to prove my point.
It isn’t speculation:
“The statement has been made that the Urim and Thummim was on the altar in the Manti Temple when that building was dedicated. The Urim and Thummim so spoken of, however, was the seer stone which was in the possession of the Prophet Joseph Smith in early days. This seer stone is now in the possession of the Church.” ~Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956), 3:225.
Grindael, sorry but here is what he wrote:
Wilford Woodruff, as new president of the church in 1888, dedicated the Manti, Utah temple. While there, Woodruff had the stone upon the alter: “Before leaving I Consecrated upon the Altar the seers Stone that Joseph Smith found by Revelation some 30 feet under the Earth [and] Carried By him through life” (Wilford Woodruff’s journal, 18 May, 1888)
I was not a object to worship, hence Falcons ridicule. It was not part of the Dedication since the Alter it self had to be first dedicated. I was no more then a consecration of the Stone, just as the Priesthood consecrates oil for the healing of the sick, or consecrates a home or burial.
The facts are, it was placed on the Alter only after it was dedicated to the Lord. Just before leaving the Temple after the dedication, he stopped to consecrate the Sacred Rock.
Fact, not speculation.
Falcon’s comment again,
“I understand that when the Mormon temple was dedicated in Manti that Joseph Smiths magic rock was placed on the altar.”
He doesn’t say during the Dedication CEREMONY. He says when the Temple was dedicated. It took two days, the calling and ordaining of the Temple President took place the next day, when the stone was consecrated.
Your wrong Helen and Falcon’s comments are accurate. _johnny
Helen,
Oh sweetie you are so confused. It wasn’t Joseph Smith who freed the slaves. Who was it that voted against it? Christian men! I know that some Christians believed in slavery. I’ve never claimed they didn’t. There were however those Christians who stood against it during, and even before the time you are speaking of.
“Though facing much opposition – from violence to the U.S. Postmaster General refusing to allow the mails to carry abolition pamphlets to the South [92][93] – many Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian members freed their slaves and sponsored black congregations, in which many black ministers encouraged slaves to believe that freedom could be gained during their lifetime. After a great revival occurred in 1801 at Cane Ridge, Kentucky, American Methodists made anti-slavery sentiments a condition of church membership.[94] Abolitionist writings, such as “A Condensed Anti-Slavery Bible Argument” (1845) by George Bourne,[95] and “God Against Slavery” (1857) by George B. Cheever,[96] used the Bible, logic and reason extensively in contending against the institution of slavery, and in particular the chattel form of it as seen in the South.” (Wikipedia)
How do you explain Brigham Young’s comment:
“In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds. WE KNEW THAT THE CHILDREN OF HAM WERE TO BE THE “SERVENT OF SERVANTS,”and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 172).
All you have shown is discrepancies in what your leaders taught. (AGAIN)
Ralph,
This is where context comes into play. Within the context of Mormonism, JS is hailed as someone who has done something that even Jesus Christ couldn’t do, which is to start a church and keep it going. That’s what JS had to say about his “accomplishments.”
There is only ONE KING of kings that deserves to be put in the category of KING, and that is Jesus Christ.
Ralph, sorry, but the only blood that can do any pleading is the spilled blood of Jesus Christ. This hymn displays a selfish man whose life was so important that his blood cries out to the heavens for justice for himself. The blood of Jesus cries out to the heavens to justify us–sinners.
The tenor of this hymn is elevating JS to a place that only Jesus Christ occupies. The title says it all. You can praise JS; I will praise the LORD. This hymn is not as benign as you would have us believe.
Blessings…
So, commenting on this thread threw me into the Civil War! 🙂 I’ve been reading some fascinating stuff! This is a great site that I have found. Something that may be interesting to some of you who have been following my dialogue with Helen, is who I found that fought against slavery (and other reasons as well). It wasn’t the Mormons!
360,000 Yankees died–110,000 in battle and 225,000 of disease. That’s a lot of Christian men standing up for what is right. Granted they were fighting against other Christians, but this shows that there were good Christians who believed in abolition.
http://www.historynet.com/who-was-the-common-soldier-of-americas-civil-war.htm
JackG,
I guess God didn’t know that Jesus blood is the only one that can do any pleading when He spoke with Cain –
Genesis 4:9 – 11 And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper? And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground. And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand
Then Jesus uses the blood of Abel (which cried out to God from the ground) to denote the blood of all the prophets from Abel to Zacharias –
Matt 23:34-36 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
It never states that JS is the King of kings anywhere in the hymn, so I don’t know where you got that idea from. It says that he will be crowned in the midst of the other prophets, but that only makes him a king. And there are many instances in history of a king being subject to another king – in this case all are subject to Jesus who is the King of kings.
cont’d
And we have been over the statement you made ”Within the context of Mormonism, JS is hailed as someone who has done something that even Jesus Christ couldn’t do, which is to start a church and keep it going. That’s what JS had to say about his “accomplishments.”
Just look at what Jesus taught in John14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
This is not discussing the Atonement as it was the greatest thing performed on this earth. But it does say that Jesus true believers can and will do greater miracles and work than Jesus did. In this case, we teach that the church Jesus began while on this earth fell into apostasy. But JS was given the promise from God that the church Jesus restored through him will never fall into apostasy and will remain on this earth until the millennium. So while I disagree with JS boasting about this, it is true and Jesus stated that it could be done (ie a greater work than He did).