Discussions of Mormons and Mormon life, Book of Mormon issues and evidences, and other Latter-day Saint (LDS) topics.
After we visited back and forth a minute or two about what we were doing and all, I finally said something like, "You know, Mick, I have a question for you that I'd like you to answer for me." He said, "Well, I'll be glad to try." Then I said to him, "I have opportunity to be with young people in many different places around the world, and some of them have told me that the kind of music you and others like you sing has no effect on them, that it's okay, and that it doesn't affect them adversely in any way. Then other young people have told me very honestly that your kind of music has a real effect on them for evil and that it affects them in a very bad way. You've been in this business a long time, Mick. I'd like to know your opinion. What do you think is the impact of your music on the young people?"I knew there was something about him that wasn't quite up to Gospel standards.
This is a direct quote, brothers and sisters. He said, "Our music is calculated to drive the kids to sex." I'm sure I had a real look of shock on my face in receiving such a bold response. He quickly added, "Well, it's not my fault what they do. That's up to them. I'm just making a lot of money."
"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." (Matt. 21:12-13)Further, prophecies in the Bible show that the Temple would play an important role art of the Lord's work in the "last days" before the Second Coming of the Lord and would still be important after His return during the great Millennium:
"And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein." (Matt. 23:21)
"And they [the early Christians], continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, . . ." (Acts 2:46)
"And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. " (Acts 5:42)
"Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them." (Acts. 21:20-26)
"And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it." (Isaiah 2:2)After the loss of prophetic leadership and the loss of many covenants and sacred teachings in the Church through the process that we call the Apostasy, the mainstream Christian world found themselves without a temple and without a knowledge of the "mysteries" and sacred covenants and rituals from earliest Christianity whose details were not written down for the consumption of non-believers. Many have sought to justify the loss of a temple or to make it a metaphorical or spiritual entity, but the scriptures seem to call for the real thing in the last days. The covenant people will have the house of covenants, the Temple, and it will serve as a focal point for the gathering of people around the world, a source of wisdom and learning, a place to which the Messiah will return, and a place where the saints will serve God night and day in the Millennium. Where is the Temple of God? It has been restored through divine revelation and the ministry of angels through the prophet Joseph Smith. To those of you outside the Church, I hope you will recognize the significance of the ancient Temple concept that has been restored in these latter days: you are seeing Biblical prophecy fulfilled as part of God's great and marvelous work in these last days, when He is bringing about the promised "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). Where else can you find the Lord's Temple?
"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap. . . ." (Malachi 3:1-2)
"Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people." (Ezek. 37:26-27)
"Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them." (Rev. 7:15 - a description of the Millennium)
What was the Church to do? The leaders realized that they should have the prophetic gifts, and those of the Montanists were clearly counter to the rule of the Church, but they had nothing to exhibit in their place. It should be noted here that instead of resolving the conflict through revelation, as the Apostolic Church did, the Catholics were forced to hold councils to put down this heresy. Indeed, J.G. Davies reports that the first councils or synods known in Christian history were the result of the Montanist controversy.The canon was never meant to be closed. Mainstream Christianity today is adamant that the canon being closed and that prophets and apostles are no longer being needed. These positions are, sadly, inconsistent with original Christianity and are strong evidence that something vital has been lost from the early Church. While much good has been preserved in mainstream Christianity, we are happy to report that something wonderful has been restored. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not have all the answers, but we have some of them that have been given by revelation to modern prophets and apostles having authority from God that was restored through divine action in these last days.
By the fourth century, as we saw with the example of Eusebius, the churchmen still realized that the gifts were essential for any claim to spiritual authority, but contented themselves with tracing the gifts as far as they could in the Catholic tradition and then announcing that they were no longer needed.
The Closing of the Canon of Scripture
As a result of the Montanist controversy, the Church was forced to face the fact that the gifts were essentially gone. And in order to deal with that fact they were compelled to do an about-face on the issue of the canon of scripture.
As was mentioned above, modern Christians are adamant that they have a Bible and there can be no more Bible. But was this always the case? Bishop Wand discloses that the canon was not closed by divine decree, but out of the necessity to combat the Montanist heresy. "The best defense set up by the Church against such conversions [as Tertullian's] was to close the canon of scripture, and by so doing to deny any authority to the Montanist prophecies." In this way "the possibility of a new revelation was excluded . . . ."
But it never occurred to anyone to close the canon until nearly the third century! Historian Willem Van Unnik notes that until that time the Christians would have had no objection whatever to "someone . . . add[ing] something to the word of the Gospel." The very existence of a document such as the Shepherd of Hermas shows that the possibility of a new word of revelation was nothing to be wondered at. The Shepherd, which purports to be a series of revelations given to one other than the Apostles or their associates in the first half of the second century, hovered on the edge of the canon for centuries. Indeed, included in the Shepherd is a series of mandates which Hermas was commanded to write for the benefit of all who might read them.
Andrie B. du Toit, Professor of New Testament at the University of Pretoria, South Africa, explains that before the middle of the second century the "oral tradition was used alongside and even preferred to the Gospels." Even in the latter half of the second century, Clement of Alexandria could report that "the first elders . . . preferred to speak the truth rather than write it down."105 Therefore, while there was always a set of authoritative texts, the idea that the canon was forever fixed, or that the prophetic word was only to be found in a certain set of written works, was foreign to the first Christians.
Mainstream Christians, especially Protestants, often counter Mormon arguments on this point by citing a statement near the end of John's Revelation:
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)
Since Revelation is placed last in the New Testament, many assume that this is an official proclamation that the canon was to be closed. However, apart from the fact that Revelation may not have been the last New Testament book written by John, it should be pointed out that the New Testament canon was not even established at that time. It would be centuries before a final list of canonical books was agreed upon. Another fact that must be taken into account is that the Lord made an identical proclamation through Moses: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." (Deuteronomy 4:2) Were all the prophetic books written after the Law of Moses false? Jesus took away certain commandments of the Law, so was he just another false prophet? The answer, of course is that Jesus was God, and God can add or take away whatever He wants from His word. True prophets and Apostles speak for God, so their writings can be added to God's word, as well.
26 Now ye know that Moses was commanded of the Lord to do that great work; and ye know that by his word the waters of the Red Sea were divided hither and thither, and they passed through on dry ground. . . .The deliberate word play is also suggested in 1 Nephi 15:24, where Nephi, after mentioning the rod of iron, tells us to "hold fast" to the word of God - something easily done with a rod but not with a word.
29 Yea, and ye also know that Moses, by his word according to the power of God which was in him, smote the rock, and there came forth water, that the children of Israel might quench their thirst.
It is well attested that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery both testified early and often that angels ordained them to the holy priesthood. Why, though, the question remains, did Joseph Smith seem to publicly proclaim his written revelations and safeguard his visions, including details of priesthood restoration?
John Wigger's influential book Taking Heaven by Storm shows how early Methodism gained converts in great numbers by acknowledging popular spiritual experiences and in appealing to the longings of ordinary people. As America and Methodism became more middle class, however, revelatory experiences became suspect. Samuel Goodrich described this process tersely by saying that "orthodoxy was in a considerable degree methodized, and Methodism in due time became orthodoxed."
Informed by this larger history, Richard Bushman argues that perhaps Joseph chose not to trumpet his heavenly visions as he did his printed revelations for fear of being marginalized even more. This view finds support in Joseph's own accounts and other early documents. He reported relating his first vision to an influential minister, following which he was persecuted, "but all this did not destroy the reality of his vision" (Joseph Smith-History 1:24). He explained that he and Cowdery "were forced to keep secret the circumstances of our having been baptized, and having received this priesthood; owing to a spirit of persecution which had already manifested itself in the neighborhood." In particular, they "had been threatened with being mobbed." Martin Harris said at least one Palmyra man threatened Joseph Smith with violence in 1827 for claiming that "angels appear to men in this enlightened age." Bushman, the most informed scholar on Joseph Smith's world, thus offers an explanation alternative to Palmer for Joseph's apparent reticence to speak casually about ministering angels. This reading of the evidence is far more compelling than Palmer's exaggerated hermeneutic of suspicion.
Philanthropy is a way for companies to build goodwill in the community, showing a willingness by a company to become involved in community life and helping the firm build a reputation for doing good things. When bad things happen - accidents, lawsuits, plant closings - philanthropic firms can draw on that goodwill to mitigate the anger and punishment some critics would heap on the firm. Thus, philanthropy is a type of insurance. . . .I like the point that Paul Godfrey is making. Maybe Corporate tithes bring some of the blessings that tithe payers experience? Different mechanisms are at play, of course (or so I think).
I have done a large study of more than 150 companies and found solid evidence that, when bad things happen, firms active in philanthropy experience less damage to their stock price than firms that don't give.
The Indians are very dissolute in drinking and becoming intoxicated, and many ills follow their excesses this way. . . . Their wine they make of honey and water and the root of a certain tree they grow for the purpose. . . .(It's just an interesting tidbit given that some anti-Mormons have criticized the Book of Mormon for its references to wine and to honey bees, stating that these things were not known in the Americas before Europeans brought them. While the bees issue is rather silly since the text only mentions them in an Old World context, it is nevertheless interesting to see de Landa providing his first-person observation of a wine made in part from honey as a significant part of Native American culture in Mesoamerica.
Because of time limitations, I can only give a condensed or abbreviated synopsis of the three-hour conversation that followed. I began by asking, "May I proceed, sir, on the assumption that you are a Christian?"The two then discussed the characteristics that one might expect a modern prophet to have, and Elder Brown then explained how those apply to Joseph Smith. Concluding, Elder Brown wrote:
"I am."
"I assume that you believe in the Bible -- the Old and New Testaments?"
"I do!"
"Do you believe in prayer?"
"I do!"
"You say that my belief that God spoke to a man in this age is fantastic and absurd?"
"To me it is."
"Do you believe that God ever did speak to anyone?"
"Certainly, all through the Bible we have evidence of that."
"Did he speak to Adam?"
"Yes."
"To Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jacob, and to others of the prophets?"
"I believe he spoke to each of them."
"Do you believe that contact between God and man ceased when Jesus appeared on the earth?"
"Certainly not. Such communication reached its climax, its apex at that time."
"Do you believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God?"
"He was."
"Do you believe, sir, that after the resurrection of Christ, God ever spoke to any man?"
He thought for a moment and then said, "I remember one Saul of Tarsus who was going down to Damascus to persecute the saints and who had a vision, was stricken blind, in fact, and heard a voice."
"Whose voice did he hear?"
"Well," he said, "the voice said 'I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.'"
"Do you believe that actually took place?"
"I do."
"Then, my Lord" -- that is the way we address judges in the British commonwealth -- "my Lord, I am submitting to you in all seriousness that it was standard procedure in Bible times for God to talk to men."
"I think I will admit that, but it stopped shortly after the first century of the Christian era."
"Why do you think it stopped?"
"I can't say."
"You think that God hasn't spoken since then?"
"Not to my knowledge."
"May I suggest some possible reasons why he has not spoken. Perhaps it is because he cannot. He has lost the power."
He said, "Of course that would be blasphemous."
"Well, then, if you don't accept that, perhaps he doesn't speak to men because he doesn't love us anymore. He is no longer interested in the affairs of men."
"No," he said, "God loves all men, and he is no respecter of persons."
"Well, then, if you don't accept that he loves us, then the only other possible answer as I see it is that we don't need him. We have made such rapid strides in education and science that we don't need God any more."
And then he said, and his voice trembled as he thought of impending war, "Mr. Brown, there never was a time in the history of the world when the voice of God was needed as it is needed now. Perhaps you can tell me why he doesn't speak."
My answer was, "He does speak, he has spoken; but men need faith to hear him."
I said to my friend, "My Lord, I cannot understand your saying to me that my claims are fantastic. Nor can I understand why Christians who claim to believe in Christ would persecute and put to death a man whose whole purpose was to prove the truth of the things they themselves were teaching, namely, that Jesus is the Christ. I could understand their persecuting Joseph if he had said, 'I am Christ,' or if he had said, 'There is no Christ,' or if he had said someone else is Christ; then Christians believing in Christ would be justified in opposing him. . . . Joseph said to the Christians of his day, 'You claim to believe in Jesus Christ. I testify that I saw him and I talked with him. He is the Son of God, the Redeemer of the world. Why persecute me for that?'The role of prophets and apostles was clearly meant to endure in the Church of Jesus Christ (see Ephesians 4:11-14), as well as prophetic gifts. When mainstream churches today declare that there is no longer a need for prophets, I can understand their desire to justify themselves, but such a statement flies in the face of the Bible and utterly defies logic. How great is our need to hear the voice of the Lord, to receive divine counsel through His prophets in our day. Prophets have been called, God does speak, but as in days of old, faith is required on our part to hear the word of the Lord. Ignore it if you will, but God's work has not stopped, His means of speaking has not changed, and His words have not ceased. How grateful I am for the Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, including the ancient offices of prophets and apostles appointed by God and divinely authorized to lead His Church.
"When Joseph came out of the woods where he had this vision, he had learned at least four fundamental truths, and he announced them to the world: first, that the Father and the Son are separate and distinct individuals; second, that the canon of scripture is not complete; third, that man was actually created in the image of God; and fourth, that the channel of communication between earth and heaven is open, and revelation is continuous."
The judge sat and listened intently. He asked some very pointed and searching questions, and at the end of the interview he said, "Mr. Brown, I wonder if your people appreciate the import of your message. Do you?" He said, "If what you have told me is true, it is the greatest message that has come to earth since the angels announced the birth of Christ."
This was a learned judge speaking, a great statesman, an intelligent man. He threw out the challenge, "Do you appreciate the import of what you say?" He added: "I wish it were true. I hope it may be true. God knows it ought to be true. I would to God," he said, his voice trembling, "that some man would appear on the earth and authoritatively say, 'Thus saith the Lord.'"
I have trouble understanding why people drift away from the Church. . . . There are all kinds of contradictions that I don't understand, but I find the same kind of contradictions in science, and I haven't decided to apostatize from science.Here is Parr's conclusion:
Nothing within the Book of Mormon precludes an Asian ancestry for Native Americans, nor is there any reason to believe that these same people, given geographic constraints, were not part of the events described therein. There are no "chapter-and-verse" genetic requirements for any of these groups, nor should we expect any. This does not mean that genetic markers of an ancient Near Eastern origin will never be found in the genetic record of Native Americans; however, there are compelling reasons to accept their absence. There will always be those who must have every detail before them prior to any acceptance of truth. This view always generates a cascade of doubt that ends in an appeal to the secular judge of science; however, in this particular instance, the insistence that the presence of small groups from the ancient Near East must absolutely be present in the current genetic record of Native Americans, as a means of testing the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, is an unrealistic expectation.
The present invention provides a technique for enhancing the emotion, consciousness and volition of demented elders more simply and safely and improving their behavior. A perfume for improving the behavior of demented elders is disclosed which contains an essential oil(s) derived from one or more plants selected from the group consisting of cinnamon (Cinnamomum zeylanicum), grapefruit (Citrus paradisi), jasmine (Jasminum officinale var. grandiflorum) and peppermint (Mentha piperita var. vulgaris).Well, I'm willing to try this. Many thanks to the fine inventors at Takasago International of Japan. Just one more example of what can be achieved by cultural alliances that transcend religious and national boundaries.
It will be important to make cultural alliances across religious lines. Orthodox Mormons, Catholics, Protestants, and Jews have more in common on cultural matters than they do with liberal members of their own faiths. Such alliances do not require joining into one organization; they do require close cooperation between cultural conservatives of all faiths and persons of no faith in the battles that lie ahead.When it comes to defending the Constitution, I dare say that religious bigotry among conservatives will only help our surrender to the revolution of the Left. In one dramatic example, I am aware of one significant organization fighting to support the Constitution that is about to fall about at the seems due to internal religious bigotry. I may have some interesting information to share about the details in the near future.
Jeff Lindsay is just another LDS guy in Shanghai. Formerly of Appleton, Wisconsin, Jeff writes about the Mormon experience, life in China, and the joys of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
