Author: fourpointer

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 9)

Tower To Truth Question:

9. Can you show me archeological and historical proof from non-Mormon sources that prove that the peoples and places named in the Book of Mormon are true?

—————————–

FAIR Answer:

This question is based on the mistaken assumption that the Bible message that Jesus is Christ and Lord is somehow “proved” by archeology, which is not true. It also ignores differences between Old and New World archeology. For example, since we don’t know how to pronounce the names of ANY Nephite-era city in the American archeological record, how would we know if we had found a Nephite city or not?

To learn more: Archeology and the Bible

For physical Book of Mormon evidence specifically, see:

Old World geography

Warfare

————————-

My Response:

Another smokescreen. Of course the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord is not proven by archeology. But by the same token, we are not to rely solely on a “burning in the bosom” (D&C 9:8), or “I just feel Him in my heart.” The Holy Spirit led Peter to admonish us to Always be ready to give a defense for the hope that is in you (1st Peter 3:15). In other words, if someone asks you why you believe what you believe, be ready to tell them why, don’t just rely on your feelings. Peter says to “give a defense.” And doesn’t the Psalmist say that The heavens declare the glory of God? (Psalm 19:1) What all this means is that God has given us a universe of evidence that we can point to and say, “This is why I believe,” then tell them why.

That said, let’s look at the evidence–or lack thereof–for the events chronicled in the Book of Mormon. This is a tricky matter, because determining the location of the great and final battle supposedly written about in Mormon 6 has been a sore spot for the LDS church over the years. For many years following the publication of the BOM, the LDS church assumed that the Hill Cumorah where Joseph Smith “found the golden plates” was the same Cumorah where the final battle in Mormon 6 took place. However, they later found that they could not match the geography of Mormon 6 to the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York. No evidence anywhere. Plus, there was no physical evidence that said any major battle–let alone a battle involving over 200,000 soldiers–took place in upstate New York. So, out the window went that theory.

Later, they decided that, well, maybe it happened in Central America. New problem (actually, another example of a problem with the first theory). There has never been even one shred of evidence that the people of Central America used horses, ox, cattle, chariots, brass, gold, iron, or any kind of metal in their weapons at the time these events supposedly took place. (Google tapirs + Mormon and see what you come up with.)

Which is why they have had to take their current stance: We cannot determine where the “New World” events in the Book of Mormon took place, so we’ll just say it doesn’t matter, that it’s not important. Well, it IS important. If the Bible says that Abraham traveled east from Jerusalem and wound up in Scotland, what would that say about the credibility of the Bible? It would go out the window. So accuracy in science, geography, etc is important in establishing the credibility of a book claiming to come from God. After all, if God didn’t know where Zarahemla was, He wouldn’t be all-knowing, would He?

See, one of the sticking points for skeptics of the Bible over the years was the supposed lack of archeological evidence. Many years ago it was that Belshazzar was never a king in Babylon. However, more recent discoveries have been unearthed which tell of a co-regent in Babylon named Belshazzar. See, archeology bolsters the credibility of the Bible. It would do the same for the BOM.

Now, consider this: The LDS church says that we are to simply believe that BOM is true, that everything that happened in it is true. Yet if the geography and archeology do not match up with facts, then one could rightly question other things the book claims (see the “Earth resting on an elephant” example above). Now, I will give them this: Some of the “Old World” places mentioned in the BOM are close to actual names. But anyone could have found these places by looking at a map and giving even a cursory reading to an atlas of the Arabian Peninsula, even in Joseph Smith’s day.

So why didn’t he do the same thing when writing about the “New World?” Well, it’s one thing to claim that a family travelled from this city to that city, etc. But to claim that a huge battle involving 200,000+ men outfitted with brass shields and metal weapons and thousand of horses took place in a location that could be easily excavated and found to have no evidence backing up the claim? Not such a good idea. So he had to come up with some imaginary names so nobody would be able to examine the claims.

by

Bezel333 on the “Intentions” of D. Wayne Dyer

In this Age of New Age, the sound scholarship of men like Bezel333 is a welcome oasis in a desert of…yuckiness.

D. Wayne Dyer, who sounds like a High Priest in the Church of Oprah, teaches a mushy-gushy, “You are everything” type of religion–kind of like the “prosperity ‘gospel'”.

by

Chuck Smith on suffering

From his commentary on 2nd Kings 13:14-19–

Let me tell you something; people of great faith get sick. People of tremendous faith die. And it is folly to believe that sickness or death results from a lack of faith or commitment to God. Sickness and death happen to everybody. But there are always those who are trying to sell snake oil. From the days of the early prairie. The cure-all. From bunions to earaches. And there always seems to be someone offering the spiritual snake oil or the panacea or the cure-all to all of the problems that a Christian faces. And these panaceas are offered to people and they go through various stages…people are offering these cure-alls. Enough faith, you never need to be sick. Enough faith, you’ll always be prosperous. And the spiritual cure-alls that are offered. And they go for a while, but soon there are people who try it and it doesn’t work and then all of a sudden as they share their failure, they find that other people have experienced the same failures. They’ve been praising the Lord for a long time, nothing’s happening to their situation and they’ve been believing; nothing’s happened. Who really can understand the ways of God?

I will frankly confess I don’t understand the ways of God. Now don’t let that surprise you. If I stood up here and told you I understood the ways of God, then I would be a first-class liar. Any man tells you, “Well, I understand the ways of God,” he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. And he is contradicting God because God said, “My ways are not your ways, my thoughts are not your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:8,9). For “my ways are beyond your finding out” (Romans 11:33).

And I frankly confess I do not know the mysteries of God. I do not know why God allows certain beautiful Christians to be sick. I do not know why God allows many beautiful Christians to suffer. I do not know why many beautiful Christians are in prison in Siberia and in China and been tortured for their faith. I do not know why James was beheaded and Peter was crucified upside down. And Paul was beheaded and the early disciples all suffered martyrdom, because they believed God just as much as any of these pseudo prophets today. And if God wanted us to all be wealthy and prosperous and all, then He would have declared it plainly in the Scripture, and there would be a consistency to it within the Christian body.

It’s a tragedy the way that these doctrines have proliferated through the country. People so anxious to believe. Let me tell you something, these doctrines haven’t really had an effect upon the Siberian Christians yet. If you went up there and said, “Hey, you know, God wants you all to be prosperous and wealthy. You all ought to be driving Cadillacs up here.” And yet, because of the hardships, they have been forced to a much deeper commitment than we even dream about. Their commitment to Christ caused them the slavery that they experience in Siberia. And there are thousands of Christians enslaved in Siberia today because they dare to proclaim their faith and commitment to Jesus Christ.

I wonder just how strong the commitment would be if God began to take away some of the Cadillacs…too many people who went out on the basis on this and began to charge their Cadillacs and their caviar and all, and when the bills came due, they didn’t have enough faith to pay them.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 8)

Tower To Truth Question:

8. Can you show me in the Bible the LDS teaching that we must all stand before Joseph Smith on the Day of Judgment?

—————————

FAIR Answer:

This is a misunderstanding and caricature of LDS doctrine. There is, however, the Biblical doctrine that the apostles will help judge Israel:

Ye [the apostles] are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Luke 22:28-30; see also Matt. 19:28)

Since the saints believe in modern apostles, they believe that those modern apostles (including Joseph) will have a role in judgment appointed to them by Jesus. Those who condemn Joseph on these grounds must also condemn Peter and the rest of the Twelve.

Learn more here: Joseph Smith’s status in LDS belief

———————

My Response:

If you click the link that says, “Joseph Smith’s status in LDS belief” it will take you to a page where they make a valiant effort at damage and spin control by saying,

Clearly, Joseph’s role is to function under the “direction…of the Son of God,” and the primary goal is the salvation of all who will accept any degree of Christ and Joseph’s witness of Him.

Now, if you’re not careful, they’ll slip that right past you. Not only do you have to accept Christ, but also “Joseph’s witness of Him.” It’s not enough to accept the witness of the apostle John, or Peter, or Matthew or Paul. You must accept Joseph Smith’s “witness” of Christ–which wasn’t any kind of witness, but merely a manifestation from the Satanic realm.
 

 

Interestingly, they then quote Brigham Young saying that if we do not believe Joseph Smith, that we are not of God:

I have taught for thirty years, and still teach, that he that believeth in his heart and confesseth with his mouth that Jesus is the Christ and that Joseph Smith is his Prophet to this generation, is of God; and he that confesseth not that Jesus has come in the flesh and sent Joseph Smith with the fulness of the Gospel to this generation, is not of God, but is antichrist.

Did you catch that? You must believe both prongs of this forked-tongue system. You must believe Jesus is the Christ and that He has come in the flesh, ***AND*** that Joseph Smith is His prophet with the fullness of the Gospel. If you don’t believe both of these prongs, you are not of God and you are Antichrist. This is not coming from some “bigoted, anti-Mormon” site. This is from a pro-LDS apologetics source.

The Scripture they try and use to back up this claim of Joseph Smith sitting on a throne and judging is Luke 22:28-30—“But you are those who have continued with Me in My trials. And I bestow upon you a kingdom, just as My Father bestowed one upon Me, that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” and Matthew 19:28—So Jesus said to them, “Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” However, we need to do some proper exegesis of these passages, because they could have also used 1st Corinthians 6:1-4, but we won’t get into that passage right now. Let’s look at what our Lord was saying.

In Matthew 19:28, we need to be careful not to assume that when Jesus speaks of the “regeneration” that He is talking about the final resurrection–whether the Bema of Christ, or the Great White Throne–because this is not what He is referring to. The word Jesus uses here is παλιγγενεσια (paliggenesia), not αναστασις (anastasis). The word παλιγγενεσια literally means “second nativity.” You might say that παλιγγενεσια means “Second Advent.” I believe this means Christ’s 1000 year reign on earth. Revelation 20:4—And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. I believe these twelve thrones will be filled by the 11 faithful apostles and Matthias. Notice Jesus says there will be TWELVE thrones. If Joseph was to be included in this circle of judgment, wouldn’t Jesus have said there would be THIRTEEN thrones? But I guess that’s one of those places where “careless transcribers” removed one of those truths that was “plain and most precious.”

Also, we need to remember this: To whom did the Father entrust ALL judgment? To the Son? Or to the Son and an occultist a money-digger a glass-looker Joseph Smith? John 5:22-23—22 “For the Father judges no one, but has committed ALL judgment to the Son, 23 that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” Help me out here. Is there any mention of honoring prophets? Is there any mention of Joseph Smith? Is there any mention of accepting the “witness” and “testimony” of Joseph Smith? Does Jesus say all judgment has been given to Him and Joseph Smith? No. ALL judgment has been given to Our Lord–Jesus Christ.

Besides, if you’ve read the last two “answers” about Joseph and his “First Vision” and how that was a fraud, then the fact that he is a fraud excludes him from sitting on any throne and judging anybody.

by

Oprah Winfrey’s necromancy

Isaiah 8:19-20–And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

You can hear Oprah Winfrey, the woman behind the man who wants to be our next president (Hussein Osama bin-Obama) speaking with a woman who “channels” Abraham. Ask yourself if this is the kind of person you want so close to the White House.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (Answer 7)

Tower To Truth Question:

7. Since there are several different contradictory accounts of Joseph Smith’s first vision, how did the LDS Church choose the correct one?

————

FAIR Answer:

The First Vision accounts are not contradictory. No early member of the Church claimed that Joseph changed his story, or contradicted himself. Critics of the Church have not been familiar with the data on this point.

The shortest answer is that the Saints believe the First Vision not because of textual evidence, but because of personal revelation.

The Church didn’t really “choose” one of many accounts; many of the accounts we have today were in diaries, some of which were not known till recently (1832; 1835 (2); Richards, Neibaur). The 1840 (Orson Pratt) and 1842 (Orson Hyde) accounts were secondary recitals of what happened to the Prophet; the Wentworth letter and interview for the Pittsburgh paper were synopsis accounts (at best). The account which the Church uses in the Pearl of Great Price (written in 1838) was published in 1842 by Joseph Smith as part of his personal history. As new accounts were discovered they were widely published in places like BYU Studies.

————————

My Response:

If you click on the link that says “Only one Personage appears in the 1832 account” it will take you to a page that says:

the question becomes—Why did the Prophet construct the 1832 narrative in the manner that he did (so as to exclude explicit mention of the Father’s appearance)? A careful analysis of the 1832 First Vision text reveals that it was deliberately constructed on the framework of many scriptural citations. The apostle Stephen’s view of both the Father and the Son is clearly utilized by the Prophet in one section of the 1832 text but, more importantly, Joseph Smith told the actual theophany portion of this narrative in language that very closely corresponds to the apostle Paul’s vision of Jesus Christ (Acts 26:).

Paul did not report that he saw the Father alongside the Son, and so it is logical that this is the reason why Joseph Smith did not explicitly mention the Father’s appearance in his text either. The Prophet’s strong sense of connection with Paul’s visionary experience is referred to by him right in his 1838 First Vision account. The context of this connection is the persecution experienced by both men for speaking publicly about a heavenly manifestation. Joseph Smith relates in his 1838 history that he was informed by a clergyman that his vision was “all of the devil.” This piece of information may help to explain why the Prophet chose to couch his first known written account of his vision in heavy biblical language and imagery. He may have hoped that by doing this his story would have a better chance of being accepted amongst a populace that was steeped in biblical content.

First of all, what difference does it make what language Paul used in relating his vision? Or Stephen? Why not just tell people what he saw? After all, there were many other things Joseph wrote that supposedly “came from God” that weren’t accepted by people. Why “couch” his vision in “biblical imagery?” This is why: Because in order for people to believe that all the other whacky doctrines he taught were “from God” Joseph would have to convince people that he was indeed a “prophet of God” and he had to use flowery language and rhetoric to do so.

Now, as far as Paul seeing Jesus on the road to Damascus: Could it be that Paul didn’t see the Father because the Father didn’t appear to Paul with Jesus? Second, Paul, in his account in Acts 22, said that the soldiers did not hear the voice. This does not necessarily mean they didn’t. He may have thought they did not hear the voice. But just because he told the people they didn’t does not make this a contradiction. Now, if Luke had written, in his own words, that the soldiers did not hear the voice, after writing that they did hear it, that would be a contradiction.

Of course, the position of FAIR–as well as that of many LDS apologists–has been to say that Joseph had forgotten some of the details, he couldn’t remember everything, etc. Uh, what? Maybe it’s just me, but if I had been visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ, I think I would have remembered a little bit about that. And don’t you think that he would have, oh, I don’t know, jotted down a little something about it? Crazy, I know.

At the other link, FAIR again attempts to discredit the apostle Paul by claiming that he gave two different versions of Christ’s appearance to him. A careful reading of the two accounts (Acts 9, Acts 22) shows the two are not different. However, what of Joseph’s “First Vision?” Have the details ever changed? Well, for that answer, I would direct you to a couple of articles from Mormon Research Ministry (Link 1 and Link 2) that go into more detail than I have room for here. Here are some tidbits from Link 2:

Version 3. In 1835, Joseph Smith dictated his own account of the first vision for his personal diary…it appears in the official diary of the Prophet, and this journal entry is accepted as accurate and valid. In this account, which was first published in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought (VI, No.1, pg. 87), the evil power is mentioned for the very first time. In all previous published accounts (listed below), no evil power was ever mentioned by Joseph. Also, he does not claim that the messengers were God and Jesus, just that many angels visited him. That seems to be a very curious omission.Version 2. In February 1835, the LDS publication Messenger and Advocate recorded the account of the vision that Joseph Smith gave to Oliver Cowdery. In this account, Joseph was 17 years old, the revival is in 1823, and no mention is made of James 1:5. Instead, Joseph claimed he had been wondering if there was a God and if his sins could be forgiven. His only reason for praying was to ask if God did exist. After “11 or 12 hours” in prayer, he was visited by “a messenger from God” who forgave Joseph’s sins. While this vision is given in the Messenger and Advocate as the first vision of Joseph Smith, this story was later revised and published as a second vision from the angel Moroni preparatory to giving Joseph Smith the golden plates.Version 1. The earliest known account of the first vision was written in 1831-32 in Joseph Smith’s own handwriting. This was the version made public by Paul Cheesman in 1965, published later that same year by Jerald and Sandra Tanner in Joseph Smith’s Strange Account of the First Vision. This account had been in the hands of LDS leaders for over 130 years, hidden away in their vaults – presumably because it differs so greatly from the official version. In this account, Smith claimed to be 16 years old and that he already knew that all churches were wrong from reading the Bible. Joseph sought forgiveness, and it was Jesus alone who visited him and forgave his sins.

It should be noted that this account was printed not only in an LDS publication but also during the lifetime of Joseph Smith. No statements by Joseph against the accuracy of this account have been found, indicating his approval of the information given. It was also a second-hand account given by Oliver Cowdery, a witness to many of the key events in LDS history. The same account was also copied unchanged into Joseph Smith’s Manuscript History of the Church and subsequently into the LDS publication Times and Seasons. Since it was copied into so many LDS publications and records without any changes, the account must have been considered accurate and valid to Joseph Smith at that time. This adds quite a bit of significance to the differing details of this version.

Now, how important is it that Joseph Smith’s “First Vision” be accurate? I mean, what difference does it make? It’s just a vision, right. No, not really. Joseph’s “First Vision” is the ground and pillar of the LDS church. Gordon Hinckley thought it of more importance than even the crucifixion. “Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision. It either occurred, or it did not occur. If it did not, then this work is a fraud. If it did then it is the most important and wonderful work under the heavens.”

Once again, rather than show convincing proof that the “First Vision” was true, they simply attempt to smear the names of true men of God, and equate a 14-year-old money digger and glass-looker with great men like Paul and Stephen.

by

4 Simpsons–“Aspiring” abortion doctors

Found this over at 4 Simpsons Blog. Apparently, there is a new breed of “doctors” coming out of med school whose sole ambition is to dismember, mutilate, maim, and kill. In other words, they want to go into the abortion racket (article text in italics, Neil’s commentary in bold green):

Denver – FOURTH-year medical student Megan Lederer recently helped deliver a premature baby at barely six months gestation. The newborn was tiny, unimaginably fragile, but she survived.

Caught up in the moment, Lederer didn’t think about the implication for her chosen career. Later, though, she wondered: Could I have aborted that pregnancy?

She could have, she decided. She would have felt an obligation.

Please pause here for a moment. She delivered a live baby and says she would have felt obligated to abort her had the mother not wanted the child. Everybody got that? No twisted philosophical reasoning about when the unborn become human, just a plain, old choice of whether to kill a viable human being or let her live.

Lederer, 30, can’t relate to the images that drew an older generation of physicians into abortion work. She can barely picture it when they talk about life before legal abortion: the blood-spattered apartments, the women racked with infection from stabbing sticks into their wombs.

This emotional ploy still seems to work. The truth is that most pre-Roe v Wade abortions were done in doctors’ offices (”Uh, you’re late this month . . . better do a D&C to get things back on track.”) And note how she can “barely picture” those gruesome images but ignores the gruesome images of abortions noted below.

But she and other young doctors-in-training have found their own motivation to enter a field that they know will put them at risk of isolation, harassment and hatred. For them, doing abortions is an act of defiance – a way of pushing back against mounting restrictions on a right they’ve taken for granted all their lives.

“It’s like when your big brother says you can’t do something,” Lederer said. “That just makes you want to do it even more.”

Your big brother says not to kill innocent human beings, so it makes you want to do it more. Check.

Rebellion is alive and well in the human heart.

So they think that opposition to dismembering living human beings “makes them want to do it even more.” Tells us a little bit about the unregenerate human condition, doesn’t it? This is where I have to stop people who go around crowing about how we have “free will” (can someone please show me where the Bible says anything about that, BTW?). When we are born, from the minute we open the matrix and the doctor cuts the cord, we are slaves to sin. We don’t know God, we don’t want to know God, we could not care less about God. And neither can anyone who thinks that abortion is simply a “woman’s choice.” She may make a “choice” but it costs her child his/her life.

Genesis 8:21–Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth”
Jeremiah 17:9–The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?
Ecclesiastes 11:5–As you do not know what is the way of the wind, or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, So you do not know the works of God who makes everything.

by

Bezel333 on how to “Become a Better You”

The way it’s going, this might just become a regular thing!

Bezel333 is a fellow who has many apologetics videos on YouTube. If you get a chance, check out his channel. This week, the target of his finely-honed arrows is Joel Osteen. Can you say “shooting fish in a barrel?”

Did you notice something in that last clip of Osteen? Notice how he says, “We don’t like to close without giving you an opportunity to make Jesus the Lord of your life.” Oh, I must have missed that part where God needs Joel Osteen to “give us an opportunity.” As if this is the only time in your life that you can do it, and it’s up to Joel to show you how to say a little prayer and ask Jesus into your heart, so you can get that taken care of and go on with the really important business of becoming a better you!

by

What’s in a name? Just ask Creflo DOLLAR

Skimming through the blogosphere, I ran across this article by PJ Miller at Sola Dei Gloria. Not content to let todd Bentley be the only one commanding angels, Cashflow Creflo has decided to ratchet up his heretical pattern of demanding that God do what Creflo commands Him to do:

Angel Power Confession

Because I am the righteousness of God, angels have been sent to minister to me. They respond to the Word of God which I speak. Therefore, I loose angels with the words of my mouth. I say today, let the Lord be magnified who takes pleasure in my prosperity. In the name of Jesus, I command the angels to bring to me prosperity in my spirit, in my home, in my body, in my family life, and in my finances.

I declare promotion and command the angels to bring promotion into my life. I have a blood-bought covenant promise from God Almighty to multiply exceedingly. Therefore, I confess I am exceedingly fruitful and blessed, right now, in Jesus’ name! I command the angels of God to go and bring this covenant to pass in my life now! I have the power to get wealth, and release the angels to bring wealth into my life.

I declare right now that I am healthy, healed, delivered, and freed from the bondage of sin. I am the head always, and never the tail. I am above only, and never beneath. I lend, not borrow, and everything I put my hands to prospers.

I walk in the favor of God and my favor is increased even as I am speaking. I have more than enough money to pay every bill that comes in, and I declare I am totally debt-free now! I have the authority of Heaven and in the name of Jesus, I declare that whatever I bind on the Earth, is bound in Heaven, and whatever I loose on the Earth, is loosed in Heaven.(source)

I don’t even know where to begin with this nonsense. The angels are NOT at our command. We can no more command angels than we can command God. We are never promised health or wealth. I wonder why it is that all thse heretics who love to go around spouting about how Abraham was rich, David was rich, Solomon was rich–but they never once talk about how the apostles, after they started spreading the gospel, were never rich. They lost everything. All of them–save John–were martyred insome of the most gruesome ways possible. We could spend all day talking about how the apostle Paul’s life wasn’t always sunshine and puppies after he started preaching the gospel. But these robbers and thieves won’t tell you these things. They’ll just cherry-pick a few verses, twist them in the molst abominable ways, and abscond with your cash.

As they command angels. Hogwash.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 6)

Tower To Truth Question:

6. Since the current LDS prophets sometimes contradict the former ones, how do you decide which one is correct?

——————————–

FAIR Answer:

Most “contradictions” are actually misunderstandings or misrepresentations of LDS doctrine and teachings by critics. The LDS standard for doctrine is the scriptures, and united statements of the First Presidency and the Twelve.

The Saints believe they must be led by revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which they now find themselves. Noah was told to build an ark, but not all people required that message. Moses told them to put the Passover lamb’s blood on their door; that was changed with the coming of Christ, etc.

No member is expected to follow prophetic advice “just because the prophet said so.” Each member is to receive his or her own revelatory witness from the Holy Ghost. We cannot be led astray in matters of importance if we always appeal to God for His direction.

————————

My Response:

Not so fast there, my friend.

  • “When prophets, who are inspired by the Holy Ghost, speak, their words take precedence over other statements” (Teachings of the Living Prophets, p. 18).
  • “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done” (Improvement Era, June 1945, p. 354).
  • “The Latter-day Saints hold as a principle of their faith, that … the President of the Church is recognized as the only person through whom divine communication will come as law and doctrine to the religious body; that such revelation may come at any time, upon any subject, spiritual or temporal, as God wills; and, finally, that, in the mind of every faithful Latter-day Saint, such revelation, in whatsoever it counsels, advises or demands, is paramount” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith, p. 221).
  • “It would be absolutely inconsistent, unreasonable and absurd to suppose that after God had called one man and appointed him to this work, that He should pass him by and go to somebody else to accomplish the same purpose. No sensible person would accept for one moment such a proposition. To seriously contemplate any such idea would be charging the Almighty with inconsistency, and with being the author of confusion, discord and schism. The Kingdom of God never could be established on earth in any such way” (ibid).
  • Also the 1986 edition of Gospel Principles says, “The Lord will never allow the President to teach us false doctrine.” However, the newest edition, available at their website, says, “The Lord will never allow the President to lead the Church astray.” Now, what’s the big difference? With the first statement, they are saying that whatever doctrine the President teaches will always be correct. With the second, they give him a bit of wiggle room, so that if he does say something wrong or contradictory (which is usually about once every time the sun rises), that somebody will catch it and correct it, so that the church is “not led astray.”

Now, what was all that about each person being able to receive his/her own “revelation” and No member is expected to follow prophetic advice “just because the prophet said so.” Each member is to receive his or her own revelatory witness from the Holy Ghost. We cannot be led astray in matters of importance if we always appeal to God for His direction.
See, “revelation” in the LDS church starts at the top, and flows down. It cannot go the other way. If a person speaks a word that contradicts the “prophet”–whether or not what the person is saying is the truth–the words of the “prophet” will negate what the other person is staying.

And saints are to believe the word of the prophet no matter what they think about it, unless it contradicts the Standard Works, which are subservient to the words of the current prophet, unless what the current prophet says….or is it….um….

I think you get the picture. Just listen to what the prophet says, don’t think about it just do it, and you won’t have anything to worry about.

by

Two good videos on election

First, James White’s closing statement in a recent debate he participated in (about 10:00). In it he spells out the doctrine of election with such clarity that I do believe even John Wesley would have been convinced (Don’t misunderstand. I believe John Wesley to be one of the godliest men who has ever lived. He was simply a backslidden Calvinist, was all 🙂 ). Hat Tip: Domain For Truth.

Next we have John Piper exegeting Romans 8:28-31. This is a little longer (about 47:00) and is actually one part of a conference on Calvinism. (Hat Tip: Black Reforming Kid. Check him out. He’s got a few other treats there as well.)

Yay! Finally got it! Like they say, when all else fails, read the directions.

by

“Don’t bother reading your Bible”

Over the last few years, I’ve noticed a pattern among many false religions and false teachers of the Word.

Catholicism–Don’t bother reading your Bible. You can’t understand it. Let the Magisterium tell you what it means.

Mormonism–Don’t bother reading your Bible. You can’t trust it, it’s been corrupted. Just let the General Authorities tell you what it means.

Jehovah’s Witnesses–Don’t bother reading your Bible. You can’t interpret it. Just let the Watchtower tell you what it means.

Postmodernism–Don’t bother reading your Bible. Nobody can understand. No one knows what it means.

Warrenism–Don’t bother reading your Bible. Unless it’s “The Message” because that’s the only one anybody can understand. Just read your “Purpose Driven Life” and let Rick Warren tell you your purose.

Prosperity “Gospel”–Don’t bother reading your Bible. Satan won’t let you understand it. Just blindly swallow the verses we cherry-pick and take out of context.

Lying Signs and Satanic Wonders Movement–Don’t bother reading your Bible. Only Pharisees try to undertsand it. Just trust the dog-and-pony-show, I mean sleight-of-hand, I mean signs and wonders we perform on stage every night.

On the other hand, the Bible tells us that even the words of the Old Testament alone are enough to lead us into truth. “from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus” (2nd Timothy 3:15). And we have the Holy Spirit, of whom Jesus said, “He will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13). So we don’t need a Magistreium, or General Authorities, or a Watchtower, or lying signs and Satanic wonders to lead us into truth. By the leading of the Holy Spirit in opening His Scripture to us, He will lead us into the truth.

by

From the fine folks at Planned Parenthood

[Post edited by me 🙂 ]

I did not realize it, but I had originally posted the very same two videos Pilgrim posted back in September. So that I don’t needlessly chew up bandwidth, I’ll link to the post with the videos of Michelle Malkin and Sean Hannity PWNING Planned Parenthood. Below I’ve posted a video of Lila Rose, the girl that exposed PP as the liars that they are, as featured on Bill O’Reilly.

Ecclesiastes 11:5–As you do not know what is the way of the wind, or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, so you do not know the works of God who makes everything.

by

Does your bookstore carry this man’s material?

Some people may wonder, “Why do you guys worry so much about what bookstores are selling? So they sell TD Jakes’ books. What’s wrong with that? A lot of people like TD Jakes!” So, what IS wrong with TD Jakes? (Actually, the easier question to answer is “What ISN’T wrong with him?)

Here are a few quote, courtesy of Symphony of Scripture:

“And God said, ‘Let us. Let usssssss…’” says Jakes, and then digresses: “…One God, but manifest in…three different ways, Father in creation, Son in redemption, Holy Spirit in regeneration.” (“Spirit Raiser,” Time Magazine, September 17, 2001)

“My brothers and sisters the power of life and death is in the tongue. You can have whatever you say.” (Intermission of “The Bone Collector Part II,” TBN, August 12, 2004)

“You’re entitled to have wellness in your body. Stop begging for what you’re entitled to.” (T. D. Jakes, “God Never Meant For You To Lose,” TBN, July 29, 2004)

“You gotta speak to stuff or it won’t change. Are you following what I’m saying?” (“The Bone Collector Part II,” TBN, August 12, 2004)

“I want to challenge you to sow and come into agreement with me. I believe you don’t have to go for it, you can sow for it! And God will bring it to pass in your life. I want you to write me, put in your prayer request and sow a special seed. Believe God for supernatural resurrection harvest in your life!” (“Heirs of The Promise I,” After the sermon T. D. Jakes said this while in the studio, March 21, 2005)

“His holiness, John Paul II was truly a dedicated and courageous messenger of God. His legacy will be a model that all of us should follow. His Holiness was not only a leader of the church, but also a leader of the world. His life was an example everyone can learn from. His mission to spread the Good News of faith throughout the world, and his dedication to human rights was an inspiration.” (“Bishop T. D. Jakes Statement on The Passing of Pope John Paul II”)

Well, I guess other than the fact that he is a Word-of-Faith, Name-It-And-Claim-It Prosperity huckster who denies the deity of Christ while glorifying a pope who dedicated his life to glorifying the Virgin Mary over Christ–I guess he’s not such a bad guy 😉