Posted on 03/01/2012 10:57:22 AM PST by Colofornian
That is what is contained in the 2 Nephi 26-30, the section of the Book of Mormon that will be studied this Sunday in the LDS Church. This critique is set in the context of its supposed prophecy of Joseph Smith finding and translating the Book of Mormon.
These chapters contain quite a few condemnations of Christian churches. One that is emphasized and the one that I will be focusing on is its condemnation of the position held today by millions of Christians that the Bible alone is God’s revealed Word. Following are a couple of quotes from these chapters in the Book of Mormon that give a flavor for its position.
2 Nephi 28:29: Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
2 Nephi 29: 3-6 And because my words shall hiss forth—many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible. But thus saith the Lord God: O fools, they shall have a Bible; and it shall proceed forth from the Jews, mine ancient covenant people. And what thank they the Jews for the Bible which they receive from them? Yea, what do the Gentiles mean? Do they remember the travails, and the labors, and the pains of the Jews, and their diligence unto me, in bringing forth salvation unto the Gentiles? O ye Gentiles, have ye remembered the Jews, mine ancient covenant people? Nay; but ye have cursed them, and have hated them, and have not sought to recover them. But behold, I will return all these things upon your own heads; for I the Lord have not forgotten my people. Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?
As I said, that is just one of numerous condemnations of Christians and Christian churches in those chapters. As I reread those chapters this week, the thought that kept coming to mind was why would any Mormon today want to try to identify themselves, in any way, with the Christian church? These chapters draw a bold and distinct line between Mormonism and Christian churches. In fact, these chapters connect the actions and beliefs of Christian churches with Satan himself! That is even brought out in the conclusion of the teacher’s guide for this lesson. Its conclusion: “Explain that through studying the Book of Mormon and living the gospel, we will gain the power to avoid Satan’s deceptive illusions and be guided as we strive to stay on the strait and narrow path.”
In his book, Mormon Doctrine, Bruce R. McConkie, faithfully reflects the flavor of these chapters from 2 Nephi in his definition of Christendom. “The term also applies to the whole body of supposed Christian believers; as now constituted this body is properly termed apostate Christendom.” Again, I ask, why would any Mormon want to, in any way, identify themselves with apostates?
JustSayNoToNannies,
I do not respond do copy and paste arguments.
If I take the time to write to a person, I expect they can also take the time to respond in their own words, (with allowances for copied reference materials).
But a simply copy & paste answer?
Don’t was my time.
Let me add, I am not in the least surprised that a catholic would have come up with some voluminous post as to why a scriptural passage does not actually mean what it clearly and plainly says.
I support Santorum. And if Gingrich was to resurge next week ahead of Santorum, I'd vote for him.
Otherwise, allow me to be succinct in the first part of my response to this comment: A country that places a rival idol -- a literal flesh-and-blood person who actually believes he is already a 'god in embryo' & is growing up to full-grown godhood -- as the so-called "conservative" alternative to a candidate billed as a "Messiah" of sorts...DESERVES economic collapse...at least from God's perspective...
I might not want to hear that if I'm looking @ things from my own realites -- or especially that of my friends & family -- but that's the real long & short of it.
So why bother and not stay home, write-in Herman Cain, or vote for the Libertarian or Constitution candidate? One word: Obama. He is a "red diaper" baby with plenty of ties to Communists, their Muslim allies, and the Chicago Outfit.
If we're talking about Romney as the so-called "alternative" to Obama, you make some REALLY BAD assumptions here:
#1 That you can get enough pro-lifers to militate vs. their own conscience & vote for a pro-abort...just in Dec 07 Romney told Katie Couric that it's "OK" for PARENTS to give away their (embryonic) offspring to "research"...Hey, Mitt why stop @ embryonic stage?
#2 That you can get enough Christians to actually vote for a cultist who thinks he's a "god."
#3 That you can get enough anti-socialists for a man who introduced RomneyCare.
#4 That you can get enough social-issues conservatives who are willing to submerge their values & convictions.
#5 That you can get enough Independents & Dems & GoPs to vote for a guy who paid 10% of his income for the first 13 years of his life into an openly racist org...and who still believes in "scriptural" documents that still spouts racism...
#6 That you can get enough Indies/Dems/GoPs to vote for a guy tantamount to a Scientologist.
Accumulating all these categories (& a lot more, BTW...such as the class warfare the MSM will use vs. Romney as well as other aspects of his culticness...baptizing dead Jews, for example) = an answer to those assumptions that is something Romney CANNOT overcome.
That means people would not only be throwing away their votes to vote for Romney, but would have to answer to God, Himself as to why they were supporting a pro-abortion, idol while simultaneously sending a message to the GOP establishment...hey, give us "anybody" & we'll vote for him.
Seriously, is there an actual POTUS candidate with an (R) next to his name that you or other GoP voters wouldn't vote for in any general election?
Adjective qualification here: a guy who paid 10% of his income the first 13 years of his ADULT life into an openly racist org...And...given that the Mormon church hasn't wiped about half-a-dozen racist passages from the Book of Mormon & the so-called "Book of Abraham" = MILLIONS more that Mitt has paid to support the last almost 34 years...
You've added it. I approached you in charity to explain my position in light of my understanding of Church teaching. What I get is anti-Catholic invective. What JustSayNoToNannies posted may have been pasted... but I read it and it was relevant. If you won't even consider a post because of the source, there isn't much room for dialogue. So much for a respectful conversation.
Maybe if an insipid hermaphroditic angel delivered an ear trumpet of genuine goldium to me I could hear you better. Then again I would recognize the source. God does not hiss abuse at Christians. The Father of Lies and his minions do.
Get thee behind me, Mormon.
Wow. I can’t believe I took the time to even respond or engage in dialogue with you. Rest assured it won’t happen again.
Suits me. Hit the road, and take your blackened windows with you.
You know, God gave us other men as well--something in the Old Testament known as "prophets."
Imagine if you will for a moment that you were such a prophet. That God would use you not only to foretell, but to forthtell -- to speak God's voice into a given contemporary situation.
Tell me something, PGYanke, would you as such a would-be prophet try to elevate your credentials as a prophet if you were tempted to put together a resume'? Would you try to place your personal authority on par with God's voice & impulses & leadings?
Really?
Or would you simply go the humble way & recognize that you're simply a mouthpiece...a mere servant-agent who has about as much authority as the apostle Paul, who billed himself as both a prisoner and bond-servant (slave) of the Lord?
See...this is the corner you've painted yourself into...
If a boss went on vacation -- and left detailed written instructions -- plus said he'd be "present" in other ways while gone...of course, there would be a derived authority with steward-managers in place while he was "gone"...
But bottom line...nothing these steward-managers could say -- no matter how much they might correctly point to their getting their derived authority from THE BOSS -- will contradict the ULTIMATE Boss' written directives. The written Word will always be the baseline of comparison.
You know, PGYanke, your position represents the Thessalonians. IOW...a not very "noble" posture. Whereas, the Bereans were deemed "noble." Why?
11 Now the Berean Jews were of MORE NOBLE CHARACTER than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (Acts 17:11)
What? Don't we all agree that God spoke thru Paul? Didn't Paul give us a good chunk of the NT? Why would the Bereans need to have a baseline (the Old Testament) to check to see if what Paul said was so?
Why? Because of this idea of Sola Scriptura. Acts 17:ll -- coupled with the reality of knowing how much Paul was used of God to give us most of the NT books -- alone shoots to hell your anti-Sola Scriptura rhetoric.
If God's people merely state that which is an extension of His recognized revelation, aren't we arguing about non-essential stuff? BUT, if these steward-managers are offering new interpretations -- new visions -- twisted distortions of the Boss' clear imprinted Voice ... THEN Sola Scriptura matters at that exact point of a "rub." We need to have a recognized "bottom-line" authority.
Oh, and Btw, as far as popes, alleged "heads" of the church, and the like, the last time I looked Paul in Ephesians & Colossians referenced JESUS CHRIST SOLA as the HEAD of the Church. And Jesus further said He would be with us ALWAYS (Matt. 28:20). And, finally, the OT process of speaking thru prophets was done away with because Jesus is our ever-Present, ever-living prophet...or do you just take some scissors like the Mormons do and virtually cut out Heb. 1:1-2 from your Bible?
1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. Hebrews 1:1-2
You may have all kinds of living & breathing recognized mouthpieces of God...but we REALLY HAVE ONLY ONE PROPHET remaining -- Jesus Christ.
You may have an earthly "daddy," but you only have one true Father [...do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." Matt. 23:9...so stop setting up rival 'fathers' to the one]
You may have a propped-up "head" of your church, but we REALLY only have ONE HEAD: Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:22; 4:15; 5:23; Col. 1:18; 2:10)
You may prop up all kinds of "mediators" to lobby on your behalf before God, but there's REALLY ONLY ONE Mediator -- Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5).
Stop promoting the nonsensical "competition" to Jesus Christ as THE LIVING REVELATION, as the HEAD of the CHURCH, and as the Living Mediator for the church. And stop belittling His Word as the bottom-line, baseline authoritative Word.
(Well, thanks for inspiring a new tagline)
“You’ve added it. I approached you in charity to explain my position in light of my understanding of Church teaching. What I get is anti-Catholic invective”
I posted that comment to JustSayNoToNannies. I pinged you out of courtesy because you had commented on her post.
+++++++++++++++
“If you won’t even consider a post because of the source, there isn’t much room for dialogue. So much for a respectful conversation.”
It wasn’t the source that I found offensive, it was the lazy copy & paste without comment.
I will be addressing your thoughtful post separately - as soon as I have time to address it correctly.
How convenient for you.
Let me add, I am not in the least surprised that a catholic would have come up with some voluminous post
Catholics think about what they read.
Why? Because of this idea of Sola Scriptura. Acts 17:ll -- coupled with the reality of knowing how much Paul was used of God to give us most of the NT books
No "sola" necessarily implied by what the Bereans were doing - and if it were it would be sola Old Testament, as it was Paul being examined. They would hardly examine him against his own writings.
1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. Hebrews 1:1-2
So what's Matthew 16:19 about? "And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
Tell me something, PGYanke, would you as such a would-be prophet try to elevate your credentials as a prophet if you were tempted to put together a resume'? Would you try to place your personal authority on par with God's voice & impulses & leadings?
Really?
Is there a reason you're making this about me?
Or would you simply go the humble way & recognize that you're simply a mouthpiece...a mere servant-agent who has about as much authority as the apostle Paul, who billed himself as both a prisoner and bond-servant (slave) of the Lord?
How he described himself depended on the point he was trying to make at the time. You have to look at these things in context. Here's something else he said: "I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15). In addition to prisoner and bond-servant, he also described himself as father to his children in faith.
See...this is the corner you've painted yourself into...
Ok... if you say so.
If a boss went on vacation -- and left detailed written instructions -- plus said he'd be "present" in other ways while gone...of course, there would be a derived authority with steward-managers in place while he was "gone"...
But bottom line...nothing these steward-managers could say -- no matter how much they might correctly point to their getting their derived authority from THE BOSS -- will contradict the ULTIMATE Boss' written directives. The written Word will always be the baseline of comparison.
Typically, when the boss leaves, he leaves directives and the instruction: "You're in charge until I get back." I agree that the written directives must not be contravened, however, sometimes the manager has to explain how best to interpret the boss's meaning in light of their responsibilities.
What? Don't we all agree that God spoke thru Paul? Didn't Paul give us a good chunk of the NT? Why would the Bereans need to have a baseline (the Old Testament) to check to see if what Paul said was so?
Because St Paul opened the Scriptures to them as Christ did for His Disciples on the road to Emmaus. What you miss here is that St Paul spoke new meaning into the old Scripture. They searched the Scripture to see if what he said was true. The Church does the same. She proclaims Christ and explains Scripture. We can go to Scripture to find the same truths when understood under her teaching just as the Bereans understood under St Paul's teaching. Those who challenge the Church on this point are as Bereans who read Scripture for themselves and come back to tell St Paul he's wrong in his interpretation.
We need to have a recognized "bottom-line" authority.
On that we can agree. You don't give a hint on your profile page of your denomination. Let's just say you are a Baptist... by what authority would a Presbyterian come to share their own interpretation with you? Outside of the Church, this authority doesn't exist and it has brought disunity, division and confusion. Certainly, this isn't what Christ prayed for us in John 17:21.
Oh, and Btw, as far as popes, alleged "heads" of the church, and the like, the last time I looked Paul in Ephesians & Colossians referenced JESUS CHRIST SOLA as the HEAD of the Church. And Jesus further said He would be with us ALWAYS (Matt. 28:20). And, finally, the OT process of speaking thru prophets was done away with because Jesus is our ever-Present, ever-living prophet...or do you just take some scissors like the Mormons do and virtually cut out Heb. 1:1-2 from your Bible?
Last I checked it wasn't Christ in the flesh visiting the Corinthians, Bereans and Thessalonians. It was the men appointed by Christ who came in His Name to preach, teach and baptize. By your argument, you invalidate the commission of the Apostles... if Christ is with each of us always and as an ever-living prophet, then the Apostles are superfluous. You expand the universe of the conversation too far. In Hebrews, you have the writer (assumed to be St Paul) explaining their priestly role in service to Christ. As he said elsewhere, some were given to be Apostles, some prophets, and some pastors and teachers. We all have our roles to play and they are not all the same with the same gifts.
You may have an earthly "daddy," but you only have one true Father [...do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." Matt. 23:9...so stop setting up rival 'fathers' to the one]
Rebuttal here.
Stop promoting the nonsensical "competition" to Jesus Christ as THE LIVING REVELATION, as the HEAD of the CHURCH, and as the Living Mediator for the church. And stop belittling His Word as the bottom-line, baseline authoritative Word.
The Church isn't a rival for Christ, She is His Bride joined in the Marriage Feast of the Lamb which was Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross. We are bound by a family bond in the spirit of adoption in the New Covenant (Rom 8:15). We are the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12) carrying on His mission of salvation to all of the world. We do not compete with Christ, we submit to His Holy Will until He comes to take us home.
Nice catch! (Not copied and pasted, I hope ;-D )
Nope.
“the OT process of speaking thru prophets was done away”
Really?
1 Corinthians 12:28
And God indeed hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors; after that miracles; then the graces of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches.
1 Corinthians 14:29
And let the prophets speak, two or three; and let the rest judge.
Ephesians 3:5
Which in other generations was not known to the sons of men, as it is now revealed to his holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit:
Ephesians 4:11
And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors,
"Gave" - past tense
(Unless you want to inform ALL of us exactly (by name) who your titled apostles are in addition to who your titled prophets are)
1 Corinthians 12:28 And God indeed hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors; after that miracles; then the graces of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches. 1 Corinthians 14:29 And let the prophets speak, two or three; and let the rest judge. Ephesians 3:5 Which in other generations was not known to the sons of men, as it is now revealed to his holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit:
Of course. (How many of the original disciple-apostles were "deceased" when this was written?)
Paul does describe an ongoing spiritual gift still available today -- speaking with a prophetic voice. That is someone who as the Spirit speaks, gives utterance to God's forthtelling.
But it may not be for a universal application (tantamount to "scripture"). Pastors in their sermons may be speak with prophetic utterance.
The difference between the OT & NT is "title" vs. "gift."
The Holy Spirit gives gifts; and He may dismiss gifts. Nobody necessarily has any ongoing title any longer as "prophet" -- lest He be in competition with THE Living Prophet -- THE Living Revelation -- Jesus Christ. That is the plain meaning of Heb. 1:1-2. If you want to argue with that text, be my guest (you won't be arguing with me).
I mean how long have you had this problem in understanding basic words such as "past" and "now?"
Btw, the Holy Spirit speaks at times thru all believers -- not just those with a "prophetic" gift.
The disciples were promised that "the Spirit of the Father" would situationally speak thru them when the need arose (Matt. 10:20).
The NT makes it clear, we, too are disciples.
Oh, and btw, Roman Catholicism also tries to prop up special men as "priests" ... when the Bible makes it clear that there is now a "priesthood of all believers" (1 Peter 2:4-9; Rev. 1:6). And the saints are not just elite "superstar Christians" of the past...We in Christ are set apart by the Holy Spirit, thereby becoming set-apart, sanctified ones (saints). [People can do a word study on that term]
Let's cut to the heart of Jesus' comments about authority and servant-leadership.
Did He not emphasize servant-leaders vs. institutional hierarchical ones?
As for authority, it's plain as day in His Word...Jesus said: 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. (John 1:12-13)
The word for "right" there in the Greek is exousia -- authority. (Our authority rests in receiving our "heir" status as children of God)
C'mon. Tell us. If you inherited your father's business, Did He absolutely NEED to give you some hierarchical status? Oh, sure, to a couple of sons he might give special roles in the family biz; but All receive the "authority" as heirs.
THAT is Jesus' plain words in John 1:12-13.
Last I checked it wasn't Christ in the flesh visiting the Corinthians, Bereans and Thessalonians. It was the men appointed by Christ who came in His Name to preach, teach and baptize.
Hmmm...I guess you must stay out of the book of Revelation then, eh? (Who made the rounds to those seven churches? See Revelation 3)
So you stay out of Revelation, too?
What? No literacy on Revelation 3 in this thread?
The Holy Spirit gives gifts; and He may dismiss gifts. Nobody necessarily has any ongoing title any longer as "prophet"
Makes sense to me; this wasn't clear from your original statement, "the OT process of speaking thru prophets was done away with."
See this is the basic problem of too much of that which calls itself a "Christ-based" church...
Too many people either want to reduce Jesus to...
...yesteryear (vs. Matt. 28:20..."lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the age.")
...or they want to reduce His omnipresence to only "the right Hand of God" -- almost making Jesus either a Deist-type of God or somebody who 100% delegates things...
They certainly aren't comfortable with a Jesus Christ who actually visits -- Himself -- local churches. (Hence, the ignorance or illiteracy of recognizing Revelation 3)
They certainly aren't comfortable with a Jesus Christ who still serves as THE LIVING PROPHET -- THE LIVING REVELATION. Hence, those folks either never quote Hebrews 1:1-2 -- or they outright militate against it. They certainly don't address the text directly in its plain language.
Hence, we see a constant "roller derby" approach to elbowing God/Jesus/Holy Spirit out of the way and substituting Him with men.
You & others are just like people prior to the time of King Saul. They looked around @ other tribes & wanted a flesh-and-blood king just like they had. God's reaction? 7 And the LORD told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. (1 Sam. 8:7)
Israel dethroned God as their king; elevating Saul instead. The same thing is true today with those who would make mere men as their "heads" of churches; as their "fathers"; as their "prophets"; etc.
Ironically, we'll probably wind up in this conversation actually citing the same Biblical verses -- but approaching it from distinct emphases...The two verses I am thinking of are:
15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for, “Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Cor. 2:15-16)
27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:27)
IOW, you seem to emphasize that God can do "end runs" about Scripture to teach man; and these men are indeed our teachers to others. Well, of course He can. Who are we as humans to tell a Sovereign God what He can or can't do? But the evidence is on your end to prove that He actually/regularly does these "end runs" around His written word. My "take" is that when Jesus and the Holy Spirit speaks to us, it's the same basic stuff you find as part of the "whole counsel of God" in the written word that Paul referenced (Acts 20:27).
The above just says we know the mind of Christ. The apostle Paul indeed talks about the Holy Spirit illuminating our minds. And John emphasized how the Holy Spirit gives us an anointing that teaches us -- to the extent that some of us don't even need human teachers per 1 John 2:27.
The distinction in emphasis seems to me: You keep wanting to place the focus on what men do or say @ the behest of God. I keep placing the focus on how Jesus and the Holy Spirit says/does directly to men -- and that He hasn't 100% delegated either speaking to men ... or through men.
Do you see my point? You want to seemingly glorify the outward temple of flesh and blood, His Church; I say that the "glory" of that temple -- and indeed a glory is there & real -- is WHO the Indweller is...the Holy Spirit (see 2 Cor. 3).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.