Discussions of Mormons and Mormon life, Book of Mormon issues and evidences, and other Latter-day Saint (LDS) topics.

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Troubled by Mormon History?

History can be troubling, for it often challenges the neat views we have of how things are. The reality is that every life is flawed and every hero except the Savior had weaknesses. The problem with history is how easily it can be manipulated. The winners of wars rewrite the history to vilify the losers. Those in power rewrite history to glorify their status and hide their faults. Whether it's the history of mankind, the history of this nation, or the history of the Church, the are several different camps with their own agendas and their own tendency to select what events and data to focus on. All very natural. It's important to understand that what we get from Sunday School might not reflect some of the warts and problems in our own history. But I think it's even more important to understand that "history" in the hands of critics and cynics might completely overlook some of the most important events and data that would be important for someone wondering if there is any merit to the Church and the Restoration.

The possible failings of Joseph Smith in various stages of his life take on less significance if we can determine that he actually had ancient golden plates from an angel of God. Think about that. If the story of the divine origin of the Book of Mormon has actual support, and if the Book of Mormon did have its origins in genuine gold plates received with the help of an angel of God - now stop rolling on the floor, this is a serious question! - would that have any impact on how we should evaluate Joseph Smith in light of, say, the Kirtland Bank disaster or the problem of polygamy? I think it must dramatically affect the perspective we take on Joseph. Prophet of God with some human failings, or con man from the beginning?

A history of the Church written with the assumption that there is no such things as prophets of God will inevitably overlook important elements. A history written by someone whose goal is not to review history but to challenge faith will suffer much more serious distortions and deletions of data. There is good reason to be troubled by that kind of Mormon history.

Scott Gordon recently gave a talk (now available at FAIRblog.com) that addressed the issue of people troubled by our history. He asked a few insightful questions:
For those who claim our history is a problem for the church, I have to ask what they are reading for history.

Does the history they read include the lives, histories, and testimonies of the witnesses who said over and over again that they had seen the plates and they had seen an angel?

Does it include the story of Martin Harris complaining how heavy the plates were as he held them on his lap for an hour and a half?

Does it include Martin Harris saying, "Well as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates"?

Does it include Oliver Cowdery speaking of the Book of Mormon translation from his deathbed and saying, "I know that whereof I testified is true. It was no dream, no vain imagination of the mind--it was real"?

Does it include the story of Katharine, Joseph Smith’s sister hiding the plates in her bed?

Does it include the quote from John Whitmer as he says, "I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides"?

Does the history include the many reports from others who also saw angels? Or the 121 independent eyewitness accounts of the mantel of Joseph Smith being passed on to Brigham Young on August 8, 1844, such as the one from nine-year-old William Van Orden who suddenly turned to his mother and said, "The Prophet [is] not dead, for I [see] him on the stand"?
An understanding of Church history demands that the witnesses of the Angel Moroni and the many more witnesses of the gold plates be accounted for. Different times, different circumstances, with no one - not single person - denying the reality of what they saw, even when some were later excommunicated or upset with Joseph. To their deathbed, they stayed true to this testimony, with no personal gain to be had.

Witnesses, a genuine primary source of information. Understanding the testimony of witnesses, especially the witnesses to the Book of Mormon, is the key to faithful, accurate history.

117 comments:

RWW said...

Great stuff.

NM said...

Hi Jeff,

Can you imagine it if archaeologists suddenly find a Nephite/Lamanite city? If such a thing occured, can you imagine the pandemonium?! Civilisations would be rocked. Archaeology would be turned upside-down, inside out. Such a finding would certainly make people re-think about subjects like spirituality...

Can you imagine that? Cities discovered - lost within the confines of history suddenly comes ALIVE - because of a VISION received by a mere 14 year old boy?

Like the late Mr. Hinkley said, the Mormon faith lies at the heart of Joseph Smith's first vision when he was 14 years old...if it is true, then...

if it is false, then...

=P

Mormanity said...

Yawn. Nahom, Bountiful, the Valley of Lemuel, the River Laman, Shazer, the south-southeast route, the due east path from Nahom to Bountiful, the 7th century BC altar from the ancient area of Nahom/Nehem confirming the that the tribal name Nihm/NHM was present when Lehi passed through that region. All of these recent discoveries from the Arabian Peninsula - where our knowledge is much more advanced than in the New World - confirm previously implausible elements in the Book of Mormon and should cause a little of the excitement you refer to. But, yawn, the response is to look the other way, nitpick over details (Nahom vs Nehem, or, "oh, there are TWO reasonable candidates for Bountiful, eh, almost 100 miles apart? - well, clearly there is no consensus and obvious problems"), and say, "Oh yeah? Well what about polygamy?"

Andrew Miller said...

I always am irritated by comments like "there is no evidence for the Book of Mormon." There is plenty.

No evidence for the Book of Mormon?

RWW said...

The problem is that the evidence must be coincidental, since Joseph Smith's claims as to how he obtained the plates are impossible on their face.

I think if JS had made his translation in a less fantastic way and then lost the original document somehow, as this evidence of the truth of it all came out people would have been looking for the plates in earnest under the obvious assumption that there was something to them.

But there are angels involved, you see, so it must all be coincidence.

Jared said...

I enjoyed this post.

The solution to being disillusioned, or even losing our testimony due to Mormon history is found in fulfilling our baptism covenant by receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

It is our right and privilege to have the manifestations of the Holy Ghost to the extend that we will have a testimony that is built on the rock and not sand.

jayleenb said...

Grrr to Blogger... it ate my post.

Anonymous said...

"Yawn." is right. Even if more is found than what Jeff listed, like NM stated, the world would yawn. Some might stop look and pray and gain a testimony but most would yawn. If the Shroud of Turin was proven to be true the world would yawn then go on living as they are now. Most would not want to make the changes necessary to live the gospel. Great post Jeff.

Mike L. said...

If I had the time and if I didn't fear a backlash, I have sometimes thought it would be interesting to write a book from the angle of an anti-Mormon, that documents the most reasonable explanation for Mormomism (including everything you mentioned in your article, such as the witnesses, not just cherry-picking things to argue about), and then watch it be critiqued to death by the same people who critique Joseph's story. Such as story likely would involve secret oaths between Joseph and his associates to lie about the plates (inexplicably) until their deaths, mass hollucinations, and other such stories that are just about as incredible as Joseph's claims.

I agree with you, Jeff, that those who fight against Mormonism must then give a more reasonable explanation of how all this could have been so, and ultimately things like polygamy, whether right or wrong, have nothing to do with whether Joseph's claims are true.

Anonymous said...

But, yawn, the response is to look the other way, nitpick over details (Nahom vs Nehem, or, "oh, there are TWO reasonable candidates for Bountiful, eh, almost 100 miles apart? - well, clearly there is no consensus and obvious problems"), and say, "Oh yeah? Well what about polygamy?"

Don't be intellectually lazy with this. The fact is, you want these things to be true and this will color your perception of possible evidence. Just as it's not fair for anti-Mormon's to say, "Oh yeah? Well what about polygamy?" it is also unfair to assume that all of these "evidences" are actually supporting your belief when the vast majority of academics and scholars reject them. Could they be wrong? Sure! But don't dismiss legitimate questions about these evidences as "nit-picking." Last I checked, that's what scientists and academics are supposed to be doing. Anything else is just lazy.

If Joseph Smith DID have the golden plates, I think most people would be willing to overlook polygamy, as intellectually honest inquirers. Things would certainly be a lot different. Don't assume everyone would yawn. The fact is, the "evidences" that exist now are shaky, at best, and open to wide interpretation. Plenty of witnesses believe aliens have abducted them, yet without solid evidence, most of us don't believe them. Can you blame us?

I feel that you often assume that all opposing theories are rooted in anti-Mormonism. This simply isn't true. Don't put up a straw man when dismissing claims to the contrary about your faith. Some of us seek only the truth. If we see no evidence for Joseph Smith being the Prophet, so be it. And if we do see evidence, then so be that. Some of us want nothing more than to have a truth like this realized, but we must be honest enough to admit that, as of right now, we simply do not know for sure. You're a scientist, Jeff.

I don't mean to negative in this post. I do enjoy your writing, Jeff, and I can see that you are a very good person. I am not anti-Mormon, but I do have some honest and respectful disagreements. I'm interested to hear what you think (honestly, no condescension intended here - there is much truth in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

Bookslinger said...

Anon at 7:21,

You sir, are the one raising strawmen. Jeff isn't putting forth those evidences as proof of the Book of Mormon, but, as often stated on this blog and his jefflindsay.com web site, those are evidences of _plausibility_.

Those are evidences that "yes, it could be true," not "this definitely means the Book of Mormon is definitely true."

There is evidence, and there is interpretation of evidence. And neither of those equates to proof.

I believe there can be no physical proof of the Book of Mormon, otherwise there would be no room for faith.

There is no proof that Jesus of Nazareth was the begotten son of God, or that he was the Messiah, or that he was resurrected. Yet billions of people believe those things to be true.

The Bible may be a form of evidence, but it is just words. It is just the testimony of men. The fact that those cities and men existed is not proof of the divinit of Jesus. All that's left is testimony. And yet billions of people have believed.

Jeff, and many other church members and leaders have explicitly said, over and over, that they don't want people to believe the LDS gospel based on physical evidence. The church, along with Jeff and many others, asks people to seek a spiritual witness by the power of the Holy Ghost.

You seem to be confused on the difference between evidence and proof, and what the LDS church is asking people to do, namely investigate and pray.

The evidences that Jeff puts forth are to clear away the pseudo-scientific bull-puckey that the church's critics put forth. For almost 200 years, detractors have been pointing to things which they say "prove" the Book of Mormon can't be true. And little by little, the pro-LDS people put forth counter-evidence that illustrates (not proves) that the claims of the critics are false, and that indeed there is "room to believe."

There is indeed, among all the archealogical and historical evidence, pro and con, "room to believe."

I think you're the one being a tad bit dishonest here, and attacking strawmen, not Jeff.

Anonymous said...

*"Don't be intellectually lazy with this. The fact is, you want these things to be true and this will color your perception of possible evidence."

You state the obvious; all people want to confirm what beliefs that they hold, however when you have a testimony it is a added bonus to have assumed evidences that give us a warm and fuzzy.

*"Last I checked, that's what scientists and academics are supposed to be doing. Anything else is just lazy."

Many years ago I found that most scientists and academics are not looking for the truth but looking to protect their funding and careers. This is not "lazy" just dishonest. So I am not impressed with the so called experts of science and academia. Are you willing to put your career on the line if you did find something that proved your point and contradicted all the other experts but really was not going to change your life or the world? (ie. Make you rich and famous?) I would say no! But if the Holy Spirit bore witness to you that something is true and you gained a testimony of the Holy Spirit they you may be willing to risk all to obtain the Perl of Great Price.
*"Don't assume everyone would yawn." "If Joseph Smith DID have the golden plates…"
No; you are right! I think they killed The Christ and Joseph Smith. Sometimes they do more than yawn.
*"The fact is, the "evidences" that exist now are shaky, at best, and open to wide interpretation."
Again you state the obvious other wise we would skip the admonition to careful pondering, studying it out in your mind and heart, reading the Book of Mormon, fasting, and prayer and just jump to Jeff's web page or some other fun stuff. As far as I know the missionary lessons don't include studies of professors from BYU that point out possible evidences.
*"Can you blame us?"
I don't blame you we just want people to learn and pray about it, keeping open mind. Most of this evidences is for our enjoyment and to not let the anti-Mormons go unanswered. But my suggestion to you is not to question us but to question God.
*"If we see no evidence for Joseph Smith being the Prophet, so be it."
Most people are not "so be it" about Joseph Smith. They are looking to prove us wrong or as past history has shown to do us harm. This includes religion in general. I haven't seen to many Darwinists being given a hard time in the halls of academia lately.
*"I am not anti-Mormon, but I do have some honest and respectful disagreements."
Most Mormons like respectful. Where we have a problem is the Anti- that turns in to well you know (hate speech). Most of those that disagree with us would not dare say "there is much truth in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." Be careful to whom you make this statement to.

Sherry said...

Yay Bookslinger!

bassooner said...

The posts from Bookslinger and the one following are correct. There is no known physical evidence of the Book of Mormon nor, do I think, will any ever be found at least until the time of the coming of the Savior.

Don't go asserting that since there is no physical or historical evidence proving the existence of the Nephite civilization, the Book of Mormon is not a true record. Where are the physical and historical evidences (outside the Bible and testimonies -- there's that word again -- of the early Christians) of the existence of Jesus Christ (oh yea, Jesus is mentioned in one third party, namely Josephus which amounts to a short sentence)? As far as I know, there are none. Where (outside the Bible) are the physical and historical evidences of the Patriarchs, Moses, David, Solomon, the Israelites in Babylon (I'm going out on a limb on that one (Babylon) -- if I am wrong here please just let me know and move on), and so forth? Again, there are none.

As mentioned above, we can only show that the theories of the Bible and Book of Mormon are plausible. The rest must come from our own investigation, pondering, and deep searching. Anything else is just "easy virtue."

Teranno4x4 said...

All of the above comments bar "7:21 PM, March 09, 2008, Anonymous" are very noble and gallant supporters of the 'Mormon History' but there are a number of presumptions that are being made that are left unanswered.

1. Who can confirm any evidence that the Angel Moroni was an angel of Truth sent by errand from God ?

In this instance of course even I could look at the witnesses, their accounts, their testimonies and their translations and agree that yes, indeed - it is too incredible for it to be untrue! Also who can provide reasons why they should not be accurately believed ?

Except for one Bible verse that clearly gives warning about an angel of God ! 2 Cor 11:14 - "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."

Would satan approach Josph Smuith and introduce himself as satan the deceiver of many and through his own choices, the enemy of God ? He is the arch-deceiver, the spinner of lies, the mixer of truth with a huge spoonful of error. One that knows the Bible inside out and back to front, but one who does not acknowledge or comprehend the Truth as it is truly represented in it's divine Love.

Joseph Smith indeed in his lifetime testified of a force of darkness come over him, then that was lifted and he witnessed his 'vision'. Light masquerading over darkness ? Is God in the business of showing himself after satan has been sent packing ? Or maybe the manifestation was both dark and light from the same master of the masquerade and impersonation ... ?


2. Physical proof has been found for supporting Biblical accounts :

a. The plight of the Israelite slaves under Egyptian rule.
b. The Hittite civilisation.
c. The exile of Israel in Babylon.
d. The verification acceptance of a stone tablet bearing the inscription "House of David".
e. A battered limestone slab found at Caesarea is the only known inscription from his lifetime naming Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea who ordered the crucifixion of Jesus.
f.Rylands Papyrus (about A.D. 130) A fragment of John’s Gospel, discovered in Egypt, contains verses from chapter 18. This is the earliest surviving copy of a New Testament book and is now kept in the John Rylands Library in Manchester, England.

You see the Bible is far more than plausible - it is fully believable.

3. In the BoM there is the account of a great and immense battle (Ether 14 & 15). If such fierce battles have taken place causing millions (note millions) to die, where are the arrowheads, the spear tips, the swords, the shields, the armour, the bone remains, the other archaelogical treasure trove that would be unanimously correlated with this account?


You see in summary, it is not the anti's with their spite tipped comments that you need to fear. It is not the evidence or lack of it, it is not the witnesses or their testimony. It is ultimately the true nature and identity of the angel moroni, who would have you believe that man can transfer to the angelic realm after death. When considered deeply, this concept distresses me as I have found no other 'religio' ideas where this concept is introduced. The nature of man is man and the nature of the angelic is angelic. there are holy angels and there are holy men. There are evil angels and there are evil men, but they are not and do not interlink in any way shape or form at any chronological time or dimension. The fear that you need to beware is in the form of your personal belief, should the moroni 'character' have fed the very willing Joseph Smith a huge spoonful of deceit.

NM said...

Bassooner,

You said, "...we can only show that the theories of the Bible and Book of Mormon are plausible. The rest must come from our own investigation, pondering, and deep searching. Anything else is just "easy virtue."
"


Are you saying that the Bible and the Book of Mormon are on par in terms of plausibility?

Assuming then that the Bible shared the same level of plausability as the Book of Mormon, what I was merely saying that the Book of Mormon - if found to be TRUE, ie. major cities uncovered through archaeology etc. - it would be the MOST AMAZING FIND in all of history.

I think maybe we take for granted that the Bible speaks congruently with history. So, we know with a good amount of certainty that the Babylonians existed when Daniel was around because we can see through archaeological evidence, through traditions in modern Iraq etc. that Babylon was there.

What we DON'T HAVE for the Book of Mormon that we do for the Bible are the small things - like musuems (and not Christian-based) which showcase archaeological artifacts to show that the life and times of ancient Egypt or Macedonia or Babylon or whatever. We even have tourist attractions (again, not Christian-based) to go and visit; places like Ephesus to see colisiums and what not...

Apart from Mormon-based establishments, are there ANY musuems that exist to showcase a single Lamanite/Nephite artifact? I don't know but I don't think there are?

Do we have any tourist boards (except Mormon-based establishments) that provide a couple with a romantic holiday for two with a hotel overlooking Zarahimla?

Do we see degrees offered by Cambridge or Oxford University or ANY university in Ancient Lamanite Studies? Bassooner, do you see what I mean?

Again, IF we ever find say, a CITY...it would be the most AMAZING FIND EVER. Because unlike the Bible, which takes such places for granted, we have with the Book of Mormon places which time has FORGOTTEN - except, of course, through this revelation that Mr. Smith received...

Do you see?

Dan and Wendy said...

There are more than ample "first person" witnesses to the golden plates, and angelic visitations surrounding them, that any reasonable court of law would have to conclude that the evidence supports those they claim its veracity.

Anonymous said...

...any reasonable court of law would have to conclude that the evidence supports those they claim its veracity.

I've heard that statement frequently. No court would be able to conclude anything without first providing the opportunity to cross-examine any witnesses. I'd sure like a shot, but we'll never have that opportunity. I respectfully suggest you overstate your case.

bassooner said...

Terrano,

A couple of things.

You seem to imply that the vision of Moroni was preceded by "a force of darkness come over him." Joseph did not say this. In fact his vision of Moroni was strictly a manifestation of light.

Now Joseph did indeed testify of that force of darkness but that was just preceding the "First Vision" of the Father and the Son. Now lest you say this too is "Light masquerading over darkness," let me remind you of the occasion in which Satan appeared to Jesus and tempted him after the fasting in the wilderness. After rejecting Satan: "Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him" (Matt 4:11). Is this, too, an example of "Light masquerading over darkness?"

In you list of physical evidences: I did some inet research, though cursory, on some of them. There are some inscriptions and artwork that can be interpreted as referring to the israelites but the timing does not agree with the Bible. If the Bible is infallible then the Bible's timing is wrong, if it is fallible (but of course it isn't) then there is still no irrefutable (however convinving or not) physical evidenct that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. I do not see that the existence of the Hittite civilization is relevant. I said the captivity of Judah in Babylon was going on a limb, but if what we have as the Old Testament was written after the captivity, it doesn't prove anything. Pontius Pilates inscription does not mention Jesus, just Pilate, still no physical evidence of the existence of Christ. Anyway, all of these still are not evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ, for which you will still find none unless you want to consider the recent hoopla over the controversial ossuaries are supposedly of Jesus and his wife and children...

Chris said...

Teranno4x4, you said there was evidence for the plight of the Israelite slaves under Egyptian rule. Could you post links to that here? I is my understanding that there is considerable debate about this, and little, if no evidence of "Joseph" bringing the Israeilites into Egypt, let alone their escape and time there...(and then there is the debate on whether or not David and Solomon existed)

There is very little evidence of the Bible from an archaeological standpoint. Take away locations and you have very little biblical support archaeologically speaking.

You also wrote In the BoM there is the account of a great and immense battle...causing millions (note millions) to die, where are the arrowheads, the spear tips, the swords, the shields, the armour, the bone remains, the other archaelogical treasure trove that would be unanimously correlated with this account?

I wonder the same thing about the Battles the Anasazi supposedly went through that made them mass-migrate. No weapon remains. No evidence of climate change during the specified time period. I wonder the same thing about the Hohokam tribes where my home is. And where are the billions of bones and battle gear for them. In fact, if we accept the evolutionist theories of the day, where are the bones, etc. of the hundred billions of varying homo species that have lived, let alone the remains of 200 billion humans that have walked on the earth? I'm thinking we should be able to find such bones or remains on our right and left.

I'm amazed at what is available as Book of Mormon "evidences," and I've accepted on faith. However, at some point someone has to ask, "at what point do so many "coincidences" add up to become evidence?

RWW said...

It's a bit weird to talk about the Bible being more (or less) believable than the Book of Mormon. The Bible is a somewhat arbitrary collection of writings that were judged, by a group of men who lived long after the fact, to be true enough to be included. The truthfulness of any one of those writings has little to no bearing on the truthfulness of another by a different author. So no piece of evidence could ever really speak to the truth of the entire volume.

The Book of Mormon is another matter. Since it was brought forth by a single man, it is fair to speak of the truth or falsehood of the entire work. Of course, if Joseph Smith's claims are true, there is room to doubt the honesty of its original authors, to some extent.

RWW said...

Let me put that another way: If the historical parts of the Bible were proven accurate, what would it tell us about the whole book? It would mean little more than the fact that the historical parts of Johnny Tremain are accurate. It is not surprising that the author(s) of each book had access to accurate historical information.

Now, if the historical parts of the Book of Mormon were proven accurate, what would it tell us?

bassooner said...

RWW,

If the historical parts of the Book of Mormon were proven true, it would indeed cause quite a stir. But we must be careful when we say "seeing is believing." If you want a good example of what I mean look at 3 Nephi ch 1. Here the glorious sign of the Saviors birth is given and all the people (righteous and wicked) are caused to believe because of this "incontrovertible" proof; but soon the signs become reasoned away and within a very few years most of the people have returned to wickedness.

It is a sad fact of human nature that we forget physical events all too easily (remember NYC 11 Sep 2001 -- well some have forgotten, or how about the Holocaust, there are those liars who insist it never happened and there are those who believe them). In the LDS Doctrine, the only sin that is called "unpardonable" is that against the Holy Ghost. That is, once the Holy Ghost has given us His unmistakable witness and we turn from that testimony, we cannot be forgiven -- it is akin to saying I know that Jesus Christ is the Savior but I choose to join the Devil and fight against Him: for whatever stupid reason "I knowingly choose Evil over Good." If we sin against the greater light we receive the greater condemnation.

It is for this reason that God in his infinite wisdom and mercy will not prove the historical parts of the Book of Mormon, or the Bible for that matter, to be true. In this life we must walk by faith -- it is the only way. Even science requires that we leave logic and reason somewhere and make a "leap of faith."

Anonymous said...

The Levant is defined as the geographical region bordering the Mediterranean, roughly between Egypt and Anatolia (modern Turkey). The southern Levant is therefore roughly the same area as that occupied by the modern states of Israel (including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) and Jordan. These terms are used by archaeologists, to avoid taking a modern geo-political or biblical stance in a region rife with border disputes.

Mousterian Neanderthals appear as the earliest human species to inhabit the region. They have been estimated to date to about 200,000 BCE. The first anatomically-modern humans, Homo sapiens sapiens, to live in the area are called the Kebarans. They have been conventionally dated to about 18,000 - 10,500 BCE, but recent paleoanthropological evidence suggests that Kebarans may have arrived as early as 75,000 BCE and shared the region with the Neanderthals for millennia before the latter died out. They were followed by the Natufian culture (c. 10,500 BCE - 8500 BCE), the Yarmukians (c. 8500 - 4300 BCE) and the Ghassulians (carbon dated c. 4300 - 3300 BCE). None of these names appears in any pre-modern source; they were all devised as conventions in recent times by archaeologists to refer to the various cultures found in archaeological strata.

I don't recall any of this in T4x4's bible. Is there a disconnect?

Roxy said...

Wow, you guys know your stuff! I should come here more often.

Darion Alexander said...

Bassooner and others,

I have to ask, how is that the "unpardonable" sin is to turn away from the Holy Ghost and our testimony? Isn't sin, in essence to turn away from Him and Christ and to choose to do wrong? Wouldn't that make all of us guilty of this sin? I wouldn't mind some clarification from anyone.

bassooner said...

Darion,

Yes, any time we sin we turn ourselves away from God, I guess this is why sin separates us from Him and why we need the atonement so that by repentance we can be forgiven of our sins through the atonement.

In the case of the "unpardonable" sin, it would be impossible to be forgiven because it would be impossible to repent -- we have put ourselves on a path for which there is nor repentance because we have literally rejected that path. It should be reassuring to know that there are extremely very few who are possible of commiting this ultimate sin.

It really boils down to that we cannot dwell with Christ if we have rejected Him. When we sin we may have turned away from Christ in some degree but not completely and we can, therefore, be turned around.

I hope this helps.

ps. remember that I merely express my opinions and feelings here and my, hopefully correct, understanding of the Gospel.

GB said...

Tx4: Who can confirm any evidence that the Angel Moroni was an angel of Truth sent by errand from God ?

GB: That would be the Holy Ghost, who can lead the sincere and willing to the truth.

Amy & Austin Sorensen said...

I think the posts are falling into the same error that Jeff is warning against. Yes, the physical evidences are beside the point specifically because you can debate them all day. You can debate anything you want, but it comes down to whether you choose to believe the evidences presented to you (i.e. faith).

An error I see is the idea that we Mormons have to be right about everything and anyone who says anything against us is going to the hot place. We should be secure enough in our testimonies of Jesus Christ, His church, Joseph Smith, and the Book of Mormon that we can analytically look at the arguments against our church and its history, secure in the knowledge of what we know in our hearts to be true. There are questions out there, the truth of which may never be known, which is why we have to rely on faith. Incidentally, I think we should be humbled by the knowledge we have, not proud.

As for Anon, I found his remarks to be of the inquiring nature, not attacking. Any person who is continually learning about the gospel and the church should have things that challenge their faith. This shouldn’t happen just with those who haven’t chosen to join our church yet. If there aren’t questions being raised in your mind as you learn, you might be following blindly, which isn’t the healthiest course in my mind.

Anonymous said...

It has been argued that the Israelites were themselves Canaanites, and that "historical Israel", as distinct from "literary" or "Biblical Israel" was a subset of Canaanite culture. "Canaan" when used in this sense refers to the entire ancient Levant down to about 100 AD, including the kingdoms of Israel and Judah[3]. For example, Mark Smith [4] states "Despite the long regnant model that the 'Canaanites' and Israelites were people of fundamentally different culture, archaeological data now casts doubt on this view. The material culture of the region exhibits numerous common points between Israelites and 'Canaanites' in the Iron I period (ca. 1200-1000). The record would suggest that the Israelite culture largely overlapped with and derived from 'Canaanite' culture... In short, Israelite culture was largely Canaanite in nature. Given the information available, one cannot maintain a radical cultural separation between Canaanites and Israelites for the Iron I period." (pp6-7).
The reason to post this is not to prove T4x4 wrong or the Bible because I know the Bible is true as it testifies of the one true God, but to show that science cuts both ways. Some times it proves us right and some times wrong. Most of the time not all the facts are in so science proves nothing. So it is with the BofM. The above findings are that the Israelites move into Canan but absorbed much of the Canaanite culture so much so that honest archeologists have a hard time telling the cultures apart. The bible on the other hand would lead one to believe that the Israelites completely displaced or destroyed the Canaanites and set up only unique Israelite culture. I have (after years of study by those that advocate the limited geographical area of the BofM) concluded that the Lehites were quickly absorbed into the indigenous people and we may never be totally discovered from the BofM - LDS view. However, I know this BofM and the Bible are true. When Jeff posted the "Bountiful: Why Not Check It Out?" and Roxy posted about her trip to sacred grove I again was filled with the spirit that confirmed that the first vision of Joseph Smith is true. I love science of archeology and know it may be true but when the Holy Spirit testifies to me of Joseph Smith and of Jesus Christ I know of in the Bible and BofM are true regardless of what the scientists find. The church is filled with many witnesses of angels, visions and physical events of the gold plates that any serious study of the history of the church must include or they are just showing their prejudices.

Anonymous said...

Matthew 12:31-32 says, "And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

Luke 12:10 says, "And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven."

To me to "speak(s) a wore against the Holy Spirit" it that if the Holy Spirit has testified to you that some thing is true and you have come to a knowledge that this was the Holy Spirit and then you turn against this and denied it then you would be speaking against the Holy Spirit. Now there are those that have lost their testimonies and have felt they were deceived or confused and turn away to sin again and even fight against the church this is not necessarily sinning against the Holy Spirit. The higher level would be to obtain a sure witness such as Joseph Smith and Paul having seeing the Savior and having the Holy Spirit testify that Jesus Christ is the Son of our Heavenly Father then you deny it and fight against God or His Church then your have started down the road to unforgiveness. Can you turn this around? We would hope so. Once you start to fight against God you are trying to do as Satan is trying to do and that is take over God place and power and become Him. Once someone has arrived at this point normally they have driven out all the light of Christ and replaced it with the spirit of Satan and it would almost be impossible to recover.

Darion Alexander said...

So in essence it's a "much given, much required" type of sin. Joseph did mention that this sin could only come about after receiving a sure witness from God and then turning against Him and His Church. I don't mean to take this topic out of the context Jeff, but I think sometimes we are all too quick to judge that someone is in danger of the unpardonable sin, and therefore we warn them, without any real basis or in reality any kind of authority, that they better be careful or else.

As for proofs of the Book of Mormon, let me ask, can you prove to me that Christ was baptized in the River Jordan? And where in the river? Can you prove to me that Moses parted the Red Sea or that the Ark of the Covenant even exists? Or did Judas really sell out Christ for some pieces of silver...where is the bill of sale or the receipt...I mean after all he was the Treasurer? I mean we could go on and on with this. The fact still remains, to accept Christ takes faith and to accept His works takes faith. To truly find out if the Book of Mormon is true also takes faith in Christ..evidences or no evidences.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Bassooner,

I was not insinuating anything. In fact I was talking about the events as two seperate incidents exactly as you described. My comment was exactly :
"Joseph Smith indeed in his lifetime testified of a force of darkness" .
This text does not indicate that it is the same event as the Angel Moroni handing him golden plates. I just wanted to clear that point up.

From Biblical history one can determine that satan can not reside where God is. Sin can not exist with Righteousness. All through the Bible one can see accounts of light overcoming darkness, good overcoming evil - but this was not my point. I stated and I will say it again. Whenever there has been the account of the manifestation of God in all His glory it has never come after a precedence of spiritual darkness. It has always been on God's terms, not satan's.

Also it can be noted on this point that whenever man has been in the presence of God - the radiance of His Glory has been transferred to the human face so that the Glory is reflected accordingly. This happened with Moses and it manifested itself upon the whole being of Jesus, declaring Himself to His disciples who were present, that He was demonstrating to them about His nature and identity, whilst at the same time receiving encouragement from representation of the Law and the prophets of the completion of His Mission.
I don't see any representation that after Joseph Smith supposedly met with God the Father and Jesus that any of their Glory was reflected in his face ? Why could that be ? Because it was impersonation maybe ? satan always wanted to be God - so why is this such a strange notion ?

It seems to me that it is very easy to side-step the true nature of my questions regarding the authenticity of evidences of the angel moroni, yet even easier to start up by defense an attack on the fallibility of the Bible. You either believe that the instruction that God gave to mankind was divine and holy in it's representation or you don't. To believe in that from Genesis to Revelation does not automatically mean that the Bible is infallible. Why - because it also incorporates history, genealogy, wisdom, parables, symbolisms, prophecy, Faith and many lessons from sin, all inspired by God and recorded by man. Is it possible that man could have diluted or corrupted the intended texts as 'inspired by God' throughout the ages ? Of course it is and even the words of satan are included for our benefit to dissect good from evil and still turn back to our loving Creator! However the message of redemption and salvation remains consistent throughout and that is where the 'True' Inspiration resides. Fallible words or infallible message - yours is the choice to criticise God's Word how you prefer.

If a 'truth' is provided from an evil source, can testimonies and witnesses still be considered sound evidences. Well - yes they can - but is the 'truth' really Truth ? If satan knows the history of mankind from Genesis onward, is it not possible for him to fabricate some lesser known history with a little of his own magnification ? Even if physical evidences are found in support of the BoM, wouldn't that just show how much influence he has ?

You see for all the testimonies and witnesses that account for what they have seen and experienced - it still all starts with Joseph Smith and an 'angel of light' that points to some golden tablets and not to God. Have angels of God ever given anything like golden tablets to man previously ?

--------------------------------
Dear Chris,

You may enjoy looking at the website of a certain professor that has researched Biblical history and archaeology in much depth : Archaeology confirms the Bible

-------------------
Dear Anon,

I don't recall any of this in T4x4's bible. Is there a disconnect?

You obviously place your trust more in carbon dating than the records to be found in the Bible. Critics of the Bible always stated that the Bible was false because of the archaeological absences from some of the ancient civilisations mentioned. Then - guess what - they found a city and writings from the Hittites. but still there is criticism (just one example from many many).

Carbon dating is known to throw out spurious results. One can date a fossilised bone structure and come up with a marvellous date of 210 million years ago placing it in the Jurassic Period. OK - so smoke a cigarette, keep the ash, take it to a carbon dating machine and it will undoubtedly give out a similar obscene date for the age of the ash that you have only just created. So just how infallible / accurate is the carbon dating process? Should we base all history on this methodology ? You see this is why many scholars and scientists are quickly backtracking on previously held viewpoints, because science is in turmoil. Evolutionists are desperate to cling to the Darwinian theories, but modern science is starting to favour Intelligent design (even though the seven day Creation from the Bible is not accepted). So where must we as Christians draw the line ?

------------------------

Dear GB,

What is temptation ? Are there similarities in the choices that we make in life that are fine lines between good and evil ? Can the devil also lead one into an alternative 'truth' ? If yes - do you believe that other religions are walking in darkness following the devil's instructions because they are not walking in he same way as the LDS?

Remember - there is only One Truth.

You see Spiritual discernment can slip off the tongue very easily with a lot riding on the shoulders of the Holy Spirit in the way that He leads. You see the answer is that He leads to Jesus. That is His sole function for us, whether as Comforter, or carrier of our prayers - He points us to Jesus as our Saviour.

When I see comments above that criticise the Bible and insinuate that it is fallible in it's account, I remember the many many prophecies of our Saviour that actually were fulfilled with hindsight in Jesus Christ. Then I see the actual words of Jesus and I think to myself - why would criticism be levied here about the words of the Son of God ? Then I see the BoM raised as a book to similar heights as futher testimony of Jesus Christ. But I read no words in red print, I see no teaching, no healing - only an appearance - a manifestation. Impersonation or reality again. So it really does come back to the authenticity of the 'angel of light'.

GB said...

Tx4: What is temptation ?

GB: The devil or one of his minions whispering in your ear telling you to do something wrong.

Tx4: Are there similarities in the choices that we make in life that are fine lines between good and evil ?

GB: I don’t think the line between good and evil is all that fine.

Tx4: Can the devil also lead one into an alternative 'truth' ?

GB: The devil will use any tool available lead people away from the whole truth. There is no “alternate” truth.

Tx4: If yes - do you believe that other religions are walking in darkness following the devil's instructions because they are not walking in he same way as the LDS?

GB: Other religions have some truth. What they don’t have is God’s authority nor His true gospel.

Tx4: You see Spiritual discernment can slip off the tongue very easily with a lot riding on the shoulders of the Holy Spirit in the way that He leads. You see the answer is that He leads to Jesus. That is His sole function for us, whether as Comforter, or carrier of our prayers - He points us to Jesus as our Saviour.

GB: As I said before “the Holy Ghost, who can lead the sincere and willing to the truth.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Tx4: When I see comments above that criticise the Bible and insinuate that it is fallible in it's account, I remember the many many prophecies of our Saviour that actually were fulfilled with hindsight in Jesus Christ.

GB: Are you saying that we should believe that the Book of Mormon is infallible because “many many prophecies of our Savior (contained in it) that actually were fulfilled with hindsight in Jesus Christ”?

Tx4: Then I see the actual words of Jesus and I think to myself - why would criticism be levied here about the words of the Son of God ?

GB: Strawman!!!!!

Tx4: Then I see the BoM raised as a book to similar heights as futher testimony of Jesus Christ.

GB: Only telling the truth about it.

Tx4: But I read no words in red print,

GB: My KJV doesn’t have any “red print” in it.

Tx4: I see no teaching, no healing - only an appearance - a manifestation.

GB: So you haven’t read it then?

Tx4: Impersonation or reality again.

GB: The Holy Ghost testifies of its reality.

Tx4: So it really does come back to the authenticity of the 'angel of light'.

GB: And the Holy Ghost testifies of the authenticity of the angel Moroni and the Book of Mormon?

You sound like you are still sore at me because of our last exchange.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear GB,

Don't take anything personally. I am not sore at anyone. I communicate what I know to be true.

If you knew me - you would know this to be true. :-)

However you do appear to be grasping at pedantics like "my KJV doesn't have any red print" - I think that you could read my meaning. I wasn't implying that all Bibles have red print!

Also you have contradicted yourself - I know that there is only one Truth :

GB: I don’t think the line between good and evil is all that fine.

GB: The devil will use any tool available lead people away from the whole truth. There is no “alternate” truth.

GB: Other religions have some truth. What they don’t have is God’s authority nor His true gospel.


If I have pure 100% apple juice it is complete purity in it's own respect.

Now take some of that juice and dilute it with water by 50%. Is it still pure ? Does it contain impurities? Can it be said that there is some purity ?

Now using this symbolism, this is like the Gospel - it is 100% pure Truth.

Some truth is not Truth - why because it is either diluted or corrupted. Even a 0.1% change in purity means that it is impure.

That is why Truth is Truth. And also why I deliberately used apostrophes around the devil's alternate 'truth' - why because they are fabricated, diluted or lies.

Concentrate on proving the authority of the 'angel of light' rather than burning the straw-man. I have offered potential reasons why the question deserves to be asked above - but there are no suitable tangible responses as yet.

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - Concerning the comment about the darkness.

Joseph clearly writes of a power of darkness coming against him that felt destructive and that God delivered him from the being and then spoke with him. It makes perfect sense to me that Satan would attempt to prevent the resoration of the Gospel.

BUT - when I was praying and searching the scriptures for answers I found these interesting passages. Keep in mind I had just read about the above and then began studying my scriptures.

Genesis 15:12 - And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.

God then spoke to him in the dream.

Exodus 20:21 - And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.

1 Kings 8:12 - Then spake Solomon, The LORD said that he would dwell in the thick darkness.

I am not saying that the darkness Joseph saw and felt was of God. I am simply pointing out that darkness does not always equal satan.

You also said, "The nature of man is man and the nature of the angelic is angelic. there are holy angels and there are holy men. There are evil angels and there are evil men, but they are not and do not interlink in any way shape or form at any chronological time or dimension."

Job 1:6 - Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (See also Job 2:1)

Clearly they do indeed mix from time to time. I'm not going to look for it right now, but we also read in the scriptures of a war in heaven and satan's angels fighting against God's angels.

And just something else to ponder... just who are the 'sons of God' referred to? The same sons of God who shouted for joy after the earth and the Universe was created in Job 38:4-7

You also pose that Satan (and I suppose one of his buddies) could have been the ones who appeared to Joseph Smith.

The Bible tells us in several places that it is the Holy Ghost who will lead and guide into all truth. Jesus also said that 'who, asking for an egg, would be given a scorpion?' (Luke 11:12)

I know that my heart could not have been more sincere than the night I prayed and asked my Father in Heaven if the Book of Mormon was true and if the Church was indeed His restored Gospel. I had been in torment for a few months being torn between not wanting to accept a false prophet and not wanting to reject a true one. When I prayed I told Him I would follow whatever path He told me to without question, I got an answer. He knows my heart and knew I needed an answer. Within moments of my prayer I got the same witness as I had gotten 20 years prior when I came to know I had a Father in Heaven and that His Son Jesus Christ had died for me and atoned for my sins.

The answer was unmistakeable that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was indeed His restored Church through the Prophet Joseph Smith. Please also realize that I really didn't WANT it to be so. I couldn't imagine in my wildest imagings me becoming a 'Mormon.' BUT, I was willing to follow God anywhere and accept truth even if I didn't much like it. My desire has always been to be molded into His likeness and not to mold Him into mine.

My Father would not have given me a scorpion in answer to my sincere prayer. And I didn't just get a 'feeling' as one would listening to a good symphony or even singing beautiful hymns in church. I know what happened and I know it was the Holy Spirit. I've come to know the love my Father has for me in a way I never did in any of the other churches I attended. Although I had many spiritual and wonderful experiences in them.

The Holy Ghost will lead and guide you into all truth. But only if you're willing to follow Him and only when you're ready. Each of us grows as we prepare ourselves for that growth.

bassooner said...

I see a lot of going back and forth about the nature of truth in this thread. I have some comments on this in the thread about Mandi's Letter. You might want to see it.

GB said...

Tx4: Also you have contradicted yourself - I know that there is only one Truth :

(GB: I don’t think the line between good and evil is all that fine.
GB: The devil will use any tool available lead people away from the whole truth. There is no “alternate” truth.
GB: Other religions have some truth. What they don’t have is God’s authority nor His true gospel.)

GB: You are going to have to do more than claim a contradiction; you are going to have to point it out.

Tx4: The nature of man is man and the nature of the angelic is angelic. there are holy angels and there are holy men. There are evil angels and there are evil men, but they are not and do not interlink in any way shape or form at any chronological time or dimension.

GB: You must have forgotten the angel that appeared to John the beloved.
Rev 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Jayleenb,

I really appreciate reading your testimony and the faith that you clearly demonstrate. I admire you for your honesty.

Regarding the comment that I made that you picked up on, maybe I was not precise enough in my depiction.

T4x4 said, "The nature of man is man and the nature of the angelic is angelic. there are holy angels and there are holy men. There are evil angels and there are evil men, but they are not and do not interlink in any way shape or form at any chronological time or dimension."

J said : Job 1:6 - Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (See also Job 2:1)

Clearly they do indeed mix from time to time. I'm not going to look for it right now, but we also read in the scriptures of a war in heaven and satan's angels fighting against God's angels.

And just something else to ponder... just who are the 'sons of God' referred to? The same sons of God who shouted for joy after the earth and the Universe was created in Job 38:4-7


When I said that there are 'holy angels and holy men, evil angels and evil men', I meant that angels don't become fully human and men will never become angels - like the angels, yes - but not angelic in being (Luke20:36).

I understand that the celestial can take on a temporary human form as in the three visitors who came to Abraham, but this is not the norm. They were still celestial beings and not human even though they were physical by appearance.

In terms of mixing, I believe that all men and angels are in dimensional connection on a daily basis. Unless the angels choose to come into our known human dimension, we will never see them in their work for evil or for good.

The verse that you refer to for the war in heaven is found in Revelation 12:7 . However, seeing as this refers to before this earth's existence, son's of God refers only to the angels. Seeing as satan represented the ruler over this earth's dominion (in Job's time) of course he would be accepted into the council of God together with the rest of the angels. Since calvary, satan has lost this authority and now it is back in the hands of Jesus who created this earth.

What about when our Saviour died and the earth lost it's light for about 3 hours from the sixth hour to the ninth hour. Was this a demonstration of the presence or absence of God ?

You see I accept the Bible verses that you offer, but to throw a spanner in the works, did the authors of these books fully understand the 'supernatural' battle for human souls that was going on behind the scenes? Was God really in the business of darkness ?

Any thoughts regarding the authenticity of the angel moroni ?

Teranno4x4 said...

Maybe I can state it simpler as some are misreading 'mixing' as 'intercommunication'.

I mean to state a permanent metamorphosis between the human form and the angelic form, or vice-versa, not intercommunication.

Darion Alexander said...

I am not saying that I agree with Terrano, but he does make an interesting point. Was the Angel Moroni a servant of the Son of the Morning? (I mean there is no reason to beat around the bush Terrano) Is Joseph Smith a false prophet, such that we were warned about in the Bible? Whether or not darkness came upon him right before the First Vision, has no bearing really, I mean really on the actual First Vision. (An interesting note, is that while visiting the Sacred Grove...the guide mentioned to me that the site is rotated between several other sites...so where exactly is it?)

Highly plausible Terrano, but your view on celestial beings and metamorphysis is just a little too out there and not even Biblically accurate or correct. A verse in Luke doesn't justify as an explanation, nor do the verses in Corinthians, since those talk about Resurrected beings. Maybe you could explain the "chariot of fire" that Elijah was caught up in? I'd sure like to know what people think about that one.

But where this gets sticky, is the "what if" factor. Because as you mentioned there is only One Truth, as Paul explained. So which is it? Because there can't be one here and one there, and one over there...it can't be the Presbyterians and the Methodists and the Quakers and the Catholics, because if one of them is correct, then everyone else is incorrect. So which is it? A "I don't believe in organized religion" view? Well that has no basis according to Biblical outlines. The Israelites were organized even down to tribe. The Apostles were organized and sent to preach and to help the Saints come close to Christ and obviously there were different "churches" of the Saints scattered through the Old World. Hence Acts, Letters of Paul to the Saints in...(insert region here) and Revelation with the Letters to the Angels (servants) of the Church. There was an organization and to dispute it just wastes time and valuable time at that.

So which is it then? The Mormons or somebody else, because since there is only one Faith, One God, and One Baptism, you can't say that they are all correct, because there isn't any unity of faith....but I will say you do bring up an interesting point about Angel Moroni, not that I agree.

Anonymous said...

T4x4,

Just a quick comment. You said -

Carbon dating is known to throw out spurious results. One can date a fossilised bone structure and come up with a marvellous date of 210 million years ago placing it in the Jurassic Period. OK - so smoke a cigarette, keep the ash, take it to a carbon dating machine and it will undoubtedly give out a similar obscene date for the age of the ash that you have only just created. So just how infallible / accurate is the carbon dating process? Should we base all history on this methodology ? You see this is why many scholars and scientists are quickly backtracking on previously held viewpoints, because science is in turmoil. Evolutionists are desperate to cling to the Darwinian theories, but modern science is starting to favour Intelligent design (even though the seven day Creation from the Bible is not accepted). So where must we as Christians draw the line ?

A) Science is NOT in turmoil because carbon dating can be fooled. Any scientific technique can be fooled, but the point is, this particular technique can be used multiple times independently and show similar results. Of course there are going to be problems, but that's why new techniques are developed (like molecular techniques that might be able to look at strands of nucleic acids), that are still being worked out. At most, science is just going to do what it does best - re-evaluate itself in the light of new knowledge.

B) Evolutionsits aren't "desperately" clinging to anything. Much of evolutionary theory has "strong" evidence and documentation to support it. Modern science isn't favoring Intelligent Design, specifically because you can't "test" Intelligent Design. Hence why faith is still a necessity when concerning things spiritual.

Sorry this is a little off-topic, but just had to say something about these type of false notions.

Anonymous said...

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

This single scripture is practically the key stone for Mormonism. I find it interesting that in no other church have I been encouraged to seek truth by someone basically saying to me "Dont take my word for it, ask God yourself". Far from the brainwashing cult so many would have you believe it to be, the church actually directs its members and investigators to the biblical litmus test found in James 1:5 and is proud to openly and frequently do so. Is the angel moroni really just satan in disquise? I can tell you what i think, but dont take my word for it, ask God yourself.

I just find it to be so interesting and even a little telling that the whole entire oddball, culturally backward, off the wall, seemingly crazy church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints, with all its funny underwear, and teenagers on tenspeeds, actually ENCOURAGES people to ask God whether or not a 14 year old boy found a golden book and translated it by looking into a hat. Are you freakin kidding me?
I would'nt be a member of any church that tried to get me to buy that load of crap, and neither would millions of other people. Oh wait.

Anonymous said...

Tx4,

Still waiting for a resonse to my last post.


Anon of 4:46 PM, March 12, 2008,

LOL. That was great.

GB said...

Sorry,

That last post was mine

Anonymous said...

T4x4: said:

"Also it can be noted on this point that whenever man has been in the presence of God - the radiance of His Glory has been transferred to the human face so that the Glory is reflected accordingly. This happened with Moses and it manifested itself upon the whole being of Jesus, declaring Himself to His disciples who were present, that He was demonstrating to them about His nature and identity, whilst at the same time receiving encouragement from representation of the Law and the prophets of the completion of His Mission.
I don't see any representation that after Joseph Smith supposedly met with God the Father and Jesus that any of their Glory was reflected in his face ? Why could that be ? Because it was impersonation maybe ? Satan always wanted to be God - so why is this such a strange notion ?"

As usual not every event in the Bible where God was present with man was His radiance of His Glory been transferred to the human face. Again as usual you do not know Mormon history where there is this and other examples where this has happened but it is not always something that is always talked about as general information. So you are just not very well informed or you a purposely being deceptive.



Martin Harris sat on a little box at Joseph's feet. They sang and prayed. Joseph got up and began to speak to us. As he began to speak very solemnly and very earnestly, all at once his countenance changed and he stood mute. Those who looked at him that day said there was a search light within him, over every part of his body. I never saw anything like it on the earth. I could not take my eyes off him; he got so white that anyone who saw him would have thought he was transparent. I remember I thought I could almost see the cheek bones through the flesh. I have been through many changes since but that is photographed on my brain. I shall remember it and see in my mind's eye as long as I remain upon the earth.

He stood some moments. He looked over the congregation as if to pierce every heart. He said, "Do you know who has been in your midst?" One of the Smiths said an angel of the Lord. Martin Harris said, "It was our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ." Joseph put his hand down on Martin and said: "God revealed that to you. Brethren and sisters, the Spirit of God has been here. The Savior has been in your midst this night and I want you to remember it. There is a veil over your eyes for you could not endure to look upon Him.

Anonymous said...

"You either believe that the instruction that God gave to mankind was divine and holy in it's representation or you don't."

We have already gone over this. Have you plucked your eye out today? The Bible is wide open for discussion and disagreement and just because people point out problems with it does not they do not feel it is a representation of God's instructions to man or that is not divinely inspired. Unlike you, that think the Bible is perfect, there are people that understand that there are problems with the Bible as it relates to angels and as usual anyone can use the same arguments against the "angel Moroni" event as they can the Bible. This is the same old tired argument, you condemn us for the very same thing found in the Bible.



"You obviously place your trust more in carbon dating than the records to be found in the Bible."

You need to get out more. You show your lack of sophistication about how science works. The very same carbon dating that proves one event in the Bible can also disprove another event using the same method. If you think it is inaccurate then those that use it to prove events in the scriptures must throw out their work. If they do this then you would not have a very good case for historical evidence of the Bible.



"Can the devil also lead one into an alternative 'truth' ? If yes - do you believe that other religions are walking in darkness following the devil's instructions because they are not walking in he same way as the LDS?"

Yes T4x4 you are walking in an alternative truth. We have tried to be nice and break it to you softly but now it out. Sorry to break it to you this way.


"Remember - there is only One Truth."

There is not just one truth. There is a building of the truth. Just like you have the Bible which is some truth but God has more for you but you refuse to except it. Sorry there is the Whole Truth we are all working toward this and you are lagging way behind.



"why would criticism be levied here about the words of the Son of God ?"


Again you try to distort what people are saying. The same logic you use to try to destroy the BofM can be used against the Bible. It just show how weak you logic is and how unsophisticated such arguments are.

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at re the angel Moroni.

The Greek word angelos simply means 'messenger' and is a transliteration.

I assume because you don't believe in a pre-existance that you think angels are completely different beings than mortals... is this correct?

I believe in the pre-existance and that we are the 'sons (and daughters) of God' spoken of in Job. Simply, we are spirit sons and daughters of our Father in Heaven and we lived with Him before we were born into mortality and aquired bodies which make us mortal.

Therefore, I have no trouble with the concept that after we die, God can send us back here if needed to deliver a message (since angelos means messenger).

I'm not taking the time to re-read all the posts since it's late. I'm trying to answer what I think is your question to me concerning Moroni. But maybe I'm not quite getting what you're asking. Let me know if this helps answer your question.

Anonymous said...

"So which is it then? The Mormons or somebody else, because since there is only one Faith, One God, and One Baptism, you can't say that they are all correct, because there isn't any unity of faith....but I will say you do bring up an interesting point about Angel Moroni, not that I agree."

So which is it then? It is the restored church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you really want to know the answer but some how I dought it. If you are like T4x4 you just like arguing about the scriptures. The only interesting point about the Angle Moroni is that you can only tell if he is from God is to ask God. If you have and your answer that he is not from God then you should go live your life the best you can or spend your spare time like T4x4 misusing the Bible scriptures and blogging your life away.

Anonymous said...

"I am not saying that I agree with Terrano, but he does make an interesting point. Was the Angel Moroni a servant of the Son of the Morning? (I mean there is no reason to beat around the bush Terrano) Is Joseph Smith a false prophet, such that we were warned about in the Bible? Whether or not darkness came upon him right before the First Vision, has no bearing really, I mean really on the actual First Vision. (An interesting note, is that while visiting the Sacred Grove...the guide mentioned to me that the site is rotated between several other sites...so where exactly is it?)"


I am always amazed at how many times the same question needs to be answered from the Bible and you will still not except the answer. Then the only true way is to gain a witness from the Holy Spirit. If you can't or will not then you must live with just the amount of truth or lack of truth that God gives you. You must like playing around in mindless speculation as to how false a prophet Joseph Smith was or was the Angel Moroni really from God or did the First Vision happen 10 feet to your left. So where is it exactly? The last time I prayed the Holy Spirit testified to me that it happened just a Joseph Smith stated it did the place is unimportant but keep playing games with it and you will miss out as many are because they are like T4x4 just looking for a good biblical debate.

Anonymous said...

"I understand that the celestial can take on a temporary human form as in the three visitors who came to Abraham, but this is not the norm. They were still celestial beings and not human even though they were physical by appearance."


"In terms of mixing, I believe that all men and angels are in dimensional connection on a daily basis. Unless the angels choose to come into our known human dimension, we will never see them in their work for evil or for good."

"You see I accept the Bible verses that you offer, but to throw a spanner in the works, did the authors of these books fully understand the 'supernatural' battle for human souls that was going on behind the scenes? Was God really in the business of darkness ?"


You really need to watch T4x4, if his Bible does not say it he will just make it up on the fly.

Anonymous said...

Stop talking and start praying.
Well," said I, "don't you think it was an angel of the devil that told you these things?" Said he, "No, it was an angel of God. God Almighty showed me the difference between an angel of light and Satan's angels. The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me. "But," said he, "they called me a false and fallen prophet but I am more in favor with my God this day than I ever was in all my life before. I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie; all that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me."
Well, I talked with him for a long time and finally I told him I would never be sealed to him until I had a witness. Said he, "You shall have a witness." Said I, "If God told you that, why does he not tell me?" He asked me if I was going to be a traitor. "I have never told a mortal and shall never tell a mortal I had such a talk from a married man," said I. "Well," said he, "pray earnestly for the angel said to me you should have a witness." Well, Brigham Young was with me. He said if I had a witness he wanted to know it. "Why should I tell you?" said I. "Well," said he, "I want to know for myself." Said he, "Do you know what Joseph said? Since we left the office the angel appeared to him and told him he was well pleased with him and that you should have a witness."
I made it a subject of prayer and I worried about it because I did not dare to speak to a living being except Brigham Young. I went out and got between three haystacks where no one could see me. As I knelt down I thought, why not pray as Moses did? He prayed with his hands raised. When his hands were raised, Israel was victorious, but when they were not raised, the Philistines were victorious. I lifted my hands and I have heard Joseph say the angels covered their faces. I knelt down and if ever a poor mortal prayed, I did. A few nights after that an angel of the Lord came to me and if ever a thrill went through a mortal, it went through me. I gazed upon the clothes and figure but the eyes were like lightning. They pierced me from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet. I was frightened almost to death for a moment. I tried to waken my aunt, but I could not. The angel leaned over me and the light was very great, although it was night. When my aunt woke up she said she had seen a figure in white robes pass from our bed to my mother's bed and pass out of the window.
Here we have Joseph and others tell of angels talking with them many times. Testimony after testimony but you are still worrying about the Angel Moroni. You need to get with the program or you are going to be part of the left behind.

Darion Alexander said...

Heh, Anon,

I appreciate your openness and your willingness to blog several times towards those who you feel don't have a testimony of the Church. Very zealous of you. It is a black and white issue. But in the words of the famous rapper Ice Cube, "yo betta check yoself, before yo wreck yoself."

This site is a place for debate among non-members and us members of the Church. But as circumstance would have it, I don't need to explain that to you, regardless of your words. But it's nice to see another straight forward, Commitment pattern member telling it like it is to Terrano and I guess to me as well.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Darion,

Seeing as you are first to respond to me, I will comment to you first. I appreciate the empathy that you choose to show in understanding my line of genuine questioning. To blindly follow the masses doesn't do justice to intelligence. Don't understand - just ask a question and be discening about the answer.

Chariot of fire that Elijah was caught up in - well it could easily be a heavenly horse drawn chariot, or it could just as easily be an angelic escort that took him into the clouds. To me, the 'vehicular' transport is not the important point, the translation of a human being to eternal life is. Pre-Jesus as redemptive Saviour (as was Enoch's translation) this is highly significant. If Jesus had not succeeded in His Mission - what then for Enoch, Moses (special resurrection to go to the real Promised Land) and Elijah ?

Can you please explain why I am 'way out there' or why my thoughts are not Biblically supported - is there evidence that you can share to prove your criticisms over the concept of human-angelic permanent metamorphosis ?

---------------

Dear 1:29 PM, March 12, 2008, Anonymous (off topic),
Why do you make the presumption that carbon dating needs to be used in Biblical archaeology? Don't you think that certain murals, artifacts, inscriptions and hieroglyphics have codes and declarations to which dynasties or ruler they belong ? There are many clues that mean that carbon dating is not necessary and not a usual accepted way of accurately dating an item. If carbon dating can be used independently and show similar results, then either the process is in question of error or the subject matter has been exposed and aged in such a way that modern science is unable to explain. Like for example, the evolution of the human eye, or let's say creation in general ! You see I understand science a little more than you give credit for.

Don't you also think that the catastrophic sea pressure over the tip of the highest mountain would automatically petrify certain flora and fauna into automatic fossil structure? Coal and oil seams created almost instantaneously as a result of the pressure from the water of the global flood! Possible - yes, plausible - more than likely, yet science pooh poohs the Biblical records and global evidences of the current land structures.

---------------

Dear GB,

I have already answered your question in my comment from 7:49 AM, March 12, 2008.

In it I described a pure and impure analogy for you in that when you describe 'some truth' for other religions, this equals in reality impure truth / deception, since it is not 100% Truth or absolute. So even 99.9% so named 'truth' is still impure.

One gospel - one Truth and His name is Jesus. So when the Spirit guides you into all truth - where is he leading ? To a church, to a religion, to a building, to some funny underwear ? No - only to Jesus. The rest is man-made doctrinal fabrication. People make up the church and it is we who are the temples of God. Collectively we have Spiritual gifs and contributions to make to the furthering of the Gospel (Biblical, not made up on the fly - Anon).

----------------

Dear Jayleen,

You are right that I don't believe in pre-existence, but lets look at this some more, since it does explore the origins of 'angel moroni'.

You see - from spiritual (sons and daughters of God), to mortal man / human being to dying and becoming spirits again caught in a weigh weigh station waiting for a final judgement going to eternal life or eternal doom, from this do I take it that you believe that the 'Angelos' (Greek for messenger) are the ones who fill the physical human body in order to progress to something better ?

You see I have some small Biblical issues with this concept:

If you were one of the sons of God described in the first chapter of Job, and you could see some of the dreadful events taking place on planet earth because of the effect of satan and sin - woud you really want to exchange your status with God and swap it for a place as a mortal human being here ? (Think about Job's live witness in front of the watching universe and thinking that if you became human - then that could be you next....)

Heb 2:6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? 7Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: (discussing man's role in the created world)
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Why would man be made lower than the angels (Greek - messenger) ?

You see here there is clearly a difference in either order. Or maybe one could just say different created beings.

The teachings of Jesus often referred to angels (Mt 13:41; 18:10; 22:30; 25:41; Lk 15:10). Jesus made clear that angels are a higher and different order of being from man (Mt 22:30; Mk 12:25). He also taught the existence of evil angels (Mt 25:41).

Perhaps the most definitive text regarding angels is Heb 1:14. From man’s standpoint, angels’ ministry to man is most significant. Eternity will reveal the breadth of the functions of these beings in relation to the universe. The righteous saints will in eternity be “equal unto the angels” (Lk 20:36; cf. Mt 22:30). The relationship between angels and men in the plan of redemption indicates the possibility of a unique relationship throughout eternity.

Looking at the predicament of your pre-existent angel / spirit being, there will be a time when Jesus comes to end this world from it's sinful state. From your perspective what happens to those angels that have not descended to mortal bodies on earth ? Are they resigned to eternity in spirit form only ?

You see from the Biblical perspective the righteous angels worked with God to bring information in temporary physical form to Abraham. Why would they change that to become human in any way which is obviously a lower order? What would that acheive ?

he Bible accounts are awash with demonic (evil angelic) forces at work in human body possession. Jesus battled with these forces in many miraculous healings. These spirits / angels / demons were not from God, but forcing the human body into submission of suffering and pain and more often than not in those times, death.

What angels come to minister to us today as has been promised in Heb 1:14? One like Gabriel that is performing the will of God, or maybe a great Grandmother / man-moroni paying you a timely visit and a quiet word ? I know who I would prefer to be hearing from ....!

Teranno4x4 said...

Anon,

I am pleased that Darion has attempted to liase with you to bring you back down to earth.

I am simply trying to communicate that which I have a difficulty with. I have never claimed that the Bible is 'perfect' or 'infallible' as you consistently try to write. I am not being deceptive, nor confrontational. I also apologise for being unsophisticated, weak in logic and lagging way behind such enigmatic skolars (thanks Jeff for this word). Or for you Anon, why the vilification and rudeness that you offer in your own brand of LDS love and caring, towards genuine conceptual questioning ...!?

-------------

Darion, getting back to my question of the authenticity of 'angel moroni', our friend Anon seems to have opened up an answer as to the rightful identification of 'the angel visitor' :

"The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me."

I guess that this is a testimony from Joseph Smith? You see if Joseph had real knowledge of God and His divine ways, Joseph would have realised that God does not use coercive force to achieve an objective. Reasoning and communication - yes; ..... force, no.

Ex 12:23 "the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you."

Job 2 : 5 - 7 "5But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.
7So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. "

Heb 2 : 14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;


Here we have a clear indication of who the destroying angel is. Going back to the account in Exodus - where was God in the whole account of the Passover? God was at the door of those faithful who had used the blood of the lamb (symbolic of the coming Saviour) on their doorposts and lintel, to prevent Satan - the destroying angel any access to that particular home.

So who has been granted the authority to slay at will - Satan, but sometimes it is with divine restrictions as wehave read.

But it is one thing to operate under a divine restriction and another to blatantly and openly brag about slaying rights - and it is this that gives the game away.

God in His mercy for His erring children, nearly if not always opens a direct Biblical communication with 'Fear not' or words to that effect.

Coercive words to the contrary that warn of a impending slaying from lack of obedience suggest coming from the enemy as God does not operate under such tactics.

So ... if the testimonies and the witness are all bearing truth according to their knowledge and experiences, but the angelic being has based his own agenda that he has sent in to confuse and distort God's Truth - is it still truth or a lie?

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - I spent 20 years in churches who wrangle and twist scripture the way you do and have no desire to revisit that way of approaching the Gospel. You don't seem at all interested in listening to answers to questions you ask, but only seem interested in arguing and tearing down the testimonies of those you don't agree with.

I know who God is and therefore I know who I am and why I did indeed choose to come here even after watching the goings-on down here on dear old earth. And I know where I'm going. I typed out a more thorough testimony and if you'd like to read it, I'd be happy to email it to you.

Otherwise, I'm in agreement with the person who told you to stop talking and start praying. Your question has been answered by many, you simply refuse our answer.

Peace.

Anonymous said...

"I appreciate your openness and your willingness to blog several times towards those who you feel don't have a testimony of the Church. Very zealous of you. It is a black and white issue."


Just to let you know that I am just having fun with yu' all. I have to laugh at the zealot, black and white line. I am not a member but have been going around and around with T4x4 for some time. At times he has some well thought out views but other times he is so far off the mark and unrelenting on showing how he is willing to twist topics out of all reason that I feel I need to correct them. Not that I think I am very good at it or correct or that it will change his mind but I just want anyone that just reads a little about the Mormons don't take what he says and thinks it is correct. Other people have given 5, 10, 15 scriptures to one of his and he does not responds but just keeps arguing on.

Anonymous said...

*"Why do you make the presumption that carbon dating needs to be used in Biblical archaeology? Don't you think that certain murals, artifacts, inscriptions and hieroglyphics have codes and declarations to which dynasties or ruler they belong ? There are many clues that mean that carbon dating is not necessary and not a usual accepted way of accurately dating an item."


Typical, carbon dating is just one of the tools archaeology uses to establish the dating of history. Other of your so called artifacts can be forged to fool the unsuspected. Many times only carbon dating is use to establish Biblical events and this is excepted as fact to prove the Christians case but when it is in contradiction they you stick you head in the carbon dating sand pile and cry foul.

*"If carbon dating can be used independently and show similar results, then either the process is in question of error or the subject matter has been exposed and aged in such a way that modern science is unable to explain."


Not all carbon dating give different results or they would not use it. I know that you think there is a vast scientific conspiracy to destroy Christianity by using a incorrect scientific method in both regular archaeology and biblical archaeology.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Jayleenb,

My comments are peacefully written to you. You seem to be either getting hot under the collar or exasperated that I have opened up something that you can not answer. Why is it that my original question still has not purposefully been addressed yet? Who can 'prove' that moroni is genuinely from God?

You see it is all very well to answer - "well ask God and God will show you". However if satan really is moroni and you have already believed in the first instance to ask the question reagarding his requirements of Joseph Smith etc.... will he let a human being go without a fight when they have come into his jurisdiction ?

This is a logical Spiritual observation, not something that should be ignored in the comment of me "wrangling and twisting scripture".

I have done no such thing - I have deceived no-one. I have asked a question and no-one yet has answered it with any conviction.

teranno4x4@yahoo.com
-----------------

Anon,

As for your latest comments - I would have expected better. You are not the blog administrator as far as I can make out. I try and write from a Biblical perspective and never have I faced a scriptural reply with 5, 10 or 15 uses of scripture to respond to a comment.

You see if you actually took the time to read my commnets you would notice that I never build up my evidence with the use of only one scripture. I fully believe that the Bible supports itself, and as such I will always use minimum two but generally more texts to support my belief. Also I try and understand the original language, typology, history, symbolisms and meanings. I don't just take the print in black and white 2D.

If the Bible says it in colourful 3D - how can it be wrong ?

If you don't like the comments on Biblical matters, don't approve - then maybe play elsewhere with someone else's feelings, leaving us to communicate and debate in topic.

Anonymous said...

*"Darion, getting back to my question of the authenticity of 'angel moroni', our friend Anon seems to have opened up an answer as to the rightful identification of 'the angel visitor' :"

"The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me."

This angel described in the above story is not necessarily the Angel Moroni.


"I guess that this is a testimony from Joseph Smith? You see if Joseph had real knowledge of God and His divine ways, Joseph would have realized that God does not use coercive force to achieve an objective. Reasoning and communication - yes; ..... force, no."

Again T4x4, this is where I am trying not to be rude or accuse you of be deceptive or using another Bible. Where in the Bible did God not use coercive force to achieve an objective? Adam, Abraham, Moses, Egyptians ,….I don't have time or space to list….please just read your Bible again. Then the angel took the censer, filled it with fire from the altar, and hurled it on the earth; and there came peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning and an earthquake. (Revelation 8:3-5 NIV)
The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up. (Revelation 8:7 NIV)




*"Ex 12:23 "the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you."

Job 2 : 5 - 7 "5But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.
7So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. "

Heb 2 : 14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;"


I have no idea what this above scripture has to do with the Angel Moroni or other angels appearing to Joseph Smith or other members of the early LDS church?


*"Here we have a clear indication of who the destroying angel is. Going back to the account in Exodus - where was God in the whole account of the Passover? God was at the door of those faithful who had used the blood of the lamb (symbolic of the coming Saviour) on their doorposts and lintel, to prevent Satan - the destroying angel any access to that particular home. "

*"So who has been granted the authority to slay at will - Satan, but sometimes it is with divine restrictions as we have read."

And here we see how far Anti-Mormons are willing to go to disparage Joseph Smith.


*("But it is one thing to operate under a divine restriction and another to blatantly and openly brag about slaying rights - and it is this that gives the game away.

God in His mercy for His erring children, nearly if not always opens a direct Biblical communication with 'Fear not' or words to that effect.

Coercive words to the contrary that warn of a impending slaying from lack of obedience suggest coming from the enemy as God does not operate under such tactics.

"So ... if the testimonies and the witness are all bearing truth according to their knowledge and experiences, but the angelic being has based his own agenda that he has sent in to confuse and distort God's Truth - is it still truth or a lie?")

This above dribble is normally why I would start getting rude but I will for go because if I were allowed to twist and say any thing based on nothing I could make even T4x4 look like he knows what he is talking about.
The point of other angels appearing to Joseph Smith and other members of the early LDS church was to show that not just Angel Moroni played a part in the restoration. It would not matter to T4x4 how many or what type of angels appeared he would just start an argument about whether they were Biblical or not.

Anonymous said...

*"Darion, getting back to my question of the authenticity of 'angel moroni', our friend Anon seems to have opened up an answer as to the rightful identification of 'the angel visitor' :"

"The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me."

This angel described in the above story is not necessarily the Angel Moroni.


"I guess that this is a testimony from Joseph Smith? You see if Joseph had real knowledge of God and His divine ways, Joseph would have realized that God does not use coercive force to achieve an objective. Reasoning and communication - yes; ..... force, no."

Again T4x4, this is where I am trying not to be rude or accuse you of be deceptive or using another Bible. Where in the Bible did God not use coercive force to achieve an objective? Adam, Abraham, Moses, Egyptians ,….I don't have time or space to list….please just read your Bible again. Then the angel took the censer, filled it with fire from the altar, and hurled it on the earth; and there came peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning and an earthquake. (Revelation 8:3-5 NIV)
The first angel sounded his trumpet, and there came hail and fire mixed with blood, and it was hurled down upon the earth. A third of the earth was burned up, a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up. (Revelation 8:7 NIV)




*"Ex 12:23 "the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you."

Job 2 : 5 - 7 "5But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.
7So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown. "

Heb 2 : 14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;"


I have no idea what this above scripture has to do with the Angel Moroni or other angels appearing to Joseph Smith or other members of the early LDS church?


*"Here we have a clear indication of who the destroying angel is. Going back to the account in Exodus - where was God in the whole account of the Passover? God was at the door of those faithful who had used the blood of the lamb (symbolic of the coming Saviour) on their doorposts and lintel, to prevent Satan - the destroying angel any access to that particular home. "

*"So who has been granted the authority to slay at will - Satan, but sometimes it is with divine restrictions as we have read."

And here we see how far Anti-Mormons are willing to go to disparage Joseph Smith.


*("But it is one thing to operate under a divine restriction and another to blatantly and openly brag about slaying rights - and it is this that gives the game away.

God in His mercy for His erring children, nearly if not always opens a direct Biblical communication with 'Fear not' or words to that effect.

Coercive words to the contrary that warn of a impending slaying from lack of obedience suggest coming from the enemy as God does not operate under such tactics.

"So ... if the testimonies and the witness are all bearing truth according to their knowledge and experiences, but the angelic being has based his own agenda that he has sent in to confuse and distort God's Truth - is it still truth or a lie?")

This above dribble is normally why I would start getting rude but I will for go because if I were allowed to twist and say any thing based on nothing I could make even T4x4 look like he knows what he is talking about.
The point of other angels appearing to Joseph Smith and other members of the early LDS church was to show that not just Angel Moroni played a part in the restoration. It would not matter to T4x4 how many or what type of angels appeared he would just start an argument about whether they were Biblical or not.

Anonymous said...

*"From your perspective what happens to those angels that have not descended to mortal bodies on earth ? Are they resigned to eternity in spirit form only ?"

Every creation under God's hands has a purpose and will be assigned to the position He directs.




*"Why would they change that to become human in any way which is obviously a lower order? What would that achieve ?"

Why would Christ? Although we do not fulfill the same role as He did God has plans of all His creations and we have covered various reasons for then to become in human.


* "These spirits / angels / demons were not from God, "

God created all things so I would say they are from God.



*"I know who I would prefer to be hearing from ....!"


You would hear from who ever God sent, but in your case if it was Angel Moroni you would just miss out because you would not except that he is from God.

Anonymous said...

"Who can 'prove' that moroni is genuinely from God?"

What will you except as proof?

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Anon,

In order to understand Revelation 8, one needs to fully appreciate and understand the meaning of the seven seals and what is happening in context here.

The sixth seal that preludes the verses that you quoted refers to the salvation of the saints, those who have had their sins forgiven by the blood of the Lamb. This clearly indicates the end of this earth's history, when Jesus has made His decision as to who is saved and who is not.

Clearly this is still in the future, since the last time I checked life goes on and mankind is still sinning.

Then come the verses that you claim with the opening of the seventh seal.

The keypoint in all of this is that in the life that we know it (analogy following), God is suggesting that we come to tea with Him in order to get to know Him and His heavenly family, fully. It is by invitation and we have the individual choice to accept or decline.

The devil on the other hand is taking a gun to our head and demanding that we go to tea with him, or else we will die. It is fine that we decline when we are under the protection of God's mercy, but if that has not been accepted then we are completely at the mercy of the devil and how he will treat us.

There is a difference in owning authority and attempting to demonstrate authority (falsely) by using coercive force. It is this that I refer to with your J.S. testimony.

The verses in Revelation show no demonstration of cercing anybody with the actions described - why because the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the chaff are already separated and have no opportunity to switch sides. The eternal decision is already made.

I agree with you that all angels are originally from God, but one third made their own decision not to follow him, created war and were thrown out from the presence of God (Rev 12:7-9). This action was pre-creation. You can also find out that the power of God is held in the divine Love of Jesus.

It is not represented and coercive in any way, so it is you that is mixed up, twisted and deceived in your Biblical view. Prove me wrong if you disagree - you will not find any coercive uses of force from God the Father, Jesus or the Holy Spirit. On the contrary you will read "Fear not....." many times over.

I have many years study into this very matter, so bring it on if you want to delve deeper into a Biblical understanding of angels and the Book of Revelation and you believe that you can prove me wrong in God's 'non-coercive force'.

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - You read my words with anger where there is none. I simply refuse to wrangle over Scripture with you, because no matter what Scriptures you are shown, you simply disregard them. I don't have time, or the physical capability to type at you all day. I am disabled and my hands don't work very well and it is difficult to type. And my life is more like Job's than you can imagine. I still chose to come here, and I know why.

Concerning coersion, your brand of religion uses the worst coersion of all... believe on Jesus (which Jesus?) or be damned to a lake of fire to burn and scorch for E-T-E-R-N-I-T-Y. Never heard of Jesus? Oh well, you burn anyhoo. Child without baptism? Burn baby, burn.

See, with every Church teaching a different version of Jesus, some with hellfire and brimstone and others with "believe you recieve a Mercedes and you will have it brutha", and some, 'live like the devil, but just say His name (Jesus) and you will be SA-VED.' Just which Jesus is one supposed to follow? Don't tell me the one of the Bible, because all these churches claim they are teaching from the Bible. Just as you think you are. But you are all preaching a different Jesus and the precepts of men as doctrine.

Most churches seem to act as if Satan gets to make the rules and God has to follow them and in the process, 90% of His children are going to BURN and not just for a few minutes... for eternity.

The Holy Ghost leads and guides into ALL truth, not just the one truth that Jesus is the Savior. Father did not hand me a serpent, when I requested an egg.

I'm sorry that at this time you refuse to understand that.

Latter-Day James said...

Hi Jayleen, I appreciate your posts and honest and open testimony. This can sometimes be a very personal thing but you have chosen to share anyway. Thanks.

Teranno, something bugs me about your line of criticism and questioning. There is the ignorance of answers given and accusations of questions not answered. March 14 2:33 AM you said:

"Why is it that my original question still has not purposefully been addressed yet? Who can 'prove' that moroni is genuinely from God?"

LOL! Are you serious? If anyone could prove that then we wouldn't need the teenagers on ten speeds previously mentioned. We would all be commenting on Jeff's blog about a new chiasmus found or something else. Or would we? Would we still be arguing/discussing whether Moroni was Satan or if Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were in creative writing class together in elementary school? Sometimes people argue just to argue.

We could ask you to prove that Moroni didn't appear to Joseph Smith. Can you prove that Joseph Smith didn't see our Heavenly Father and His Son? A tall order isn't it? Well since we didn't have our camcorders setup in the woods then and Joseph forgot his cell phone with built in camera he couldn't prove it either. Dangit.

But I suppose that if we had it there all setup and could show you a sweet video of it then you would just say it was the Angel of Light anyway so what is the point? The only way to prove anything is to pray and have a witness ourselves from the Holy Ghost. Cameras just don't capture that type of thing anyway.

Anonymous said...

What an interesting and thoughtful discussion.

As a former archaeologist who has dug at some key Israeli sites -- while excavations certainly can confirm overall biblical chronology (certainly from the Iron Age on) -- there's much less evidence for religious practice. Indeed, there are dwellings in areas like the City of David, within a stone's throw of what would have been the First Temple, that not only show little evidence of Jewish practice, but contain numerous Caananite religious insignia -- statues of Baal and various affiliated fertility goddesses.

We're talking about what should have been the holiest, most religious neighborhood at the height of the unified Kingdom of Israel basically being a center of idolatry with little evidence of any comparable Jewish practice.


From a historical point of view, we need to recognize that the claims and assessments that were central to the narrative of the Bible writers may have been comparatively insignificant in the broader reality of the Bronze and Iron Age Levant.

We probably need to be careful about treating the Bible as an accurate book about religious history. That's still the realm of personal belief.

Jeff said...

Latter-day James said: We could ask you to prove that Moroni didn't appear to Joseph Smith. Can you prove that Joseph Smith didn't see our Heavenly Father and His Son?

Hah - it's easy to prove that no divine beings ever appeared to Joseph Smith. How? DNA analysis, of course! Not a trace of eternal or supernatural DNA has been found among all the millions of samples that have been tested over the years. Therefore, no divine or angelic beings were ever in North America or anywhere else.

Anonymous said...

"God does not use coercive force to achieve an objective. Reasoning and communication - yes; ..... force, no."
"In order to understand Revelation 8, one needs to fully appreciate and understand the meaning of the seven seals and what is happening in context here."

The one thing we know as fact is that T4x4 can't except when he is wrong. I could find many other examples of when God used angels in a coercive manner but I am sure you could find them in your Bible if you were using the same Bible as the rest of the Christian world is using.

Anonymous said...

Numbers 22:21-33 is just one that pops into my mind. '...surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive.'

And what about Jonah? In the belly of a whale until he decided to do as the Lord asked. So, so many more.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Jayleenb,

Firstly thank you for your personal testimony and I am truly sorry that you have a difficult time physically. I will pray for you and your condition as described.

Hopefully this message will successfully convey that I harbour no sentiments of anger, especially when I wrote inside my last message that I was writing peacefully. I also included my e-mail address if you did want to send me your full personal testimony, I would be more than pleased to read it. If you like I can reply with my own.

However, I do not wrangle over scripture or mis-represent it. I firmly believe that Biblical scripture can be the key to understanding. It is not down to personal interpretation, since even the Bible warns against this. So in this instance the Bible must answer the Bible, even when a topic is a difficult one to comprehend.

I would urge you to read Daniel Chapter 10. There are many great verses in this chapter, but of special importance I see verses 12 and 21. Along with verse 12 you may like to read Luke chapter 1 paying special attention to verses 13 and 30. No coercive force is used. In actual fact the angelic being pays special attention to put the personages of receiving the message at total ease, also uplifting and strengthening them with great encouragement. Building up, not breaking down. Guiding not slaying.

Another observation is that for these special messages it is Gabriel that is identified as the special messenger for this cause. Why would he be overlooked for 'another' important message (BoM) for God's people - has he been demoted from the position of beside the throne of God ?

I do have concerns that you make many presumptions over my Christian beliefs, which I am pleased to be able to correct.

The Bible and Jesus Himself tells us to believe in Him (John 20:29), so what part of this is wrong ?

Burning for eternity? Well there will be a punishment and the punishment will be for eternity, but not the burning.... please see Jude 7 . "Suffering the vengeance of eternal fire".... Where are Sodom and Gomorrah as cities today - can you take me there ? Are the cities rebuilt? Will they ever return ? No - you see the punishment is eternal, but the 'eternal' fire that you refer to was extinguished long ago. The same will apply in the eradication of sin and will be used to cleanse and prepare for the earth made new. Do you want an eternally raging inferno at the bottom of your garden of paradise - I don't!

Child baptism - not Biblical, so I don't believe in it.

Hellfire and damnation preaching and using theology to support is also not something that I personally support or ascribe to.

Neither is the 'Christianity in riches' nor the 'once saved, always saved theology'. Preaching a different Jesus together with the doctrines of men is also not something that I am guilty of. If you think I am - please explain....

You see - your presumptions were unfounded as I am in agreement on all your concerns for today's mainstream Christianity - and I am not part of it. But neither am I LDS, so this brings us full circle back to 'moroni'.

To answer LDS James and Jeff's comments also in this current comment, your farcical and facetious retorts to 'physical proof and DNA' didn't go unnoticed, but I would have presumed that you would have at least engaged in some light theological / angelic history to whet my appitite!

You see, I believe that God gives us enough clues, one just must be discerning and look for the clues that He has already provided throughout Biblical history.

God made the rules, but satan attacks them stating that they impossible for any created beings to keep. God's angels are successfully acheiving the seemingly impossible and 'rejoice over every sinner that repents'. That is why satan is named as only the accuser because not everyone will be condemned! Why because we have the Jesus that ultimately saves. This is the Jesus who has overcome and who I persoanlly believe in.

I also finally agree that the Holy Spirit does lead one into 'all Truth', however maybe when you asked your Heavenly Father for the egg you shouldn't necessarily sit still on your laurels as the egg may hatch into the snake!

The path to salvation is a progressive one and not terminated in a station.

Anonymous said...

" Gabriel that is identified as the special messenger for this cause."

"Why would he be overlooked for 'another' important message (BoM) for God's people - has he been demoted from the position of beside the throne of God ?"


Typical, that you miss state our position about Gabriel.

Anonymous said...

"You see - your presumptions were unfounded as I am in agreement on all your concerns for today's mainstream Christianity - and I am not part of it. But neither am I LDS."

Sounds like a dry Mormon to me.

Anonymous said...

He unleashed against them his hot anger,
his wrath, indignation and hostility—
a band of destroying angels.

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - You did not understand my point. I didn't say *you* believed all those things. I simply pointed out that those are many of the teachings being presented as *proven* by scripture by the various sects of Christianity.

Someone else stated the problem better than I can. He said:

"the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible." Joseph Smith

Trust me T... there is NOTHING, no scripture, no verse, no words, no thing... nothing you can say that will shake my testimony even the tiniest bit.

Reading the Book of Mormon brings me closer to both my Heavenly Father and to Jesus and also makes me love and *understand* the Bible more than ever before.

I KNOW this is His Church (by the testimony of the Holy Ghost) and I can no more deny His Church than I can deny Him. They are inseparable.

Email will be sent tomorrow.

Peace.

Latter-Day James said...

Hello Terrano. Please don't take offense by my facetious remarks. I apologize for that. You see I am a facetious person at times. I am a 34 year old male though my wife says I am still immature and act no better than my 10, 9 and 7 year old boys. :-) I communicate sometimes with humor more than I should at times. Many times I do so because there is nothing else to say. Such as with this demand/question.

"Who can 'prove' that moroni is genuinely from God?"

Who are we to tempt God for signs? How would one prove this? It cannot be proven. It is "trick question". One that reminds me of some slick speaking attorneys trying to force some sort of poor response or confession in order to get their way. You see my answer wasn't facetious. There wasn't an answer. The only one you can prove it to is yourself. No one else matters. Only I can find it for myself. And after a witness can I say I have proven it? Even to myself? I am not sure. I guess that is where faith comes in. And as much as I love my family, they can only borrow from my "light" (testimony) for so long. They will at some time need to fill their own lamps.

Now I would like to delve a little into your theory on the whole Moroni = Satan thing. This just doesn't make sense to me. This is how your theory works out in my poor excuse for a brain. :-)

Satan (Moroni) decides to trick a silly farmer boy in New York because he sees some sort of potential in him. Poor farm boy gets sucked into the world of the devil but the devil is so cunning that he never realizes he is doing the devils work. Ok fine. The devil makes him translate some made up ancient text into a book that provokes spiritual thought towards his arch enemy, Jesus Christ. (Satan must not have thought that one through very well) Ok lets move on. Satan then decides all along Joseph's life he will throw some men of God(?) into his path to torture, kill, pillage and drive from town to town the very people he (Satan) helped to create. These men of God don't seem to be very Christlike. So thats why I say they were thrown in by the devil. So now he is working against himself for some reason unbeknownst to anyone except "angel of light theorists". Could you shed some light on that for us Terrano?

Ok then after Satan terrorizes poor Joseph and his cultist group of followers, whom by the way follow Christ, but the not the "real" Christ but a fake made up version of Christ. One born of a virgin. One baptized by John the Baptist. One that performed miracles, suffered and died for us. Sounds like the same One.....but I digress. I shouldn't sweat those details I suppose. Ok where was I? O yeah he terrorizes his followers, the cultists, for some reason with some of his other followers (mobs) for a while. Then he kills off poor Joe Smith for some reason with the mobs controlled by him. Then he gets another fake prophet to lead his people into the wilderness to build a community solely dedicated to serving his archenemy Christ. (still can't figure out that move, o yeah the fake Christ) Is that how this went down?

Does't seem to make any sense to me and seems to have backfired a little. All those millions of LDS folk acting Christlike. Satan really messed that one up.

Ok your last sentence intrigues me.

You said,
"The path to salvation is a progressive one and not terminated in a station."

Wow, what an original thought. (That one was sarcasm) Seems like us LDS folk have been trumpeting that for a while now. We have, we believe, prophets that still hand down revelation from Jesus Christ. This is progressive wouldn't you think? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

T4x4,

Disparaging the Angel Moroni is typical of critics like you and you always miss the fact that God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ and many angels came to Joseph Smith his first vision. Joseph had many other visions and visitations as well as many other early saints. You also look passed the fact that Mary Lightner and her aunt saw an angel. These are but a few of many events that happened to many of the early saint of the LDS Church. For you to dismiss all of them is the same as someone trying to say that all the angels in the Bible are angels of light from Satan. May be we need to consider what spirit you are trying to represent as you try to take away the testimony of Jesus Christ from good Christians and Saint of the LDS church.



"A pillar of fire appeared above my head; which presently rested down upon me, and filled me with un-speak able joy. A personage appeared in the midst of this pillar of flame, which was spread all around and yet nothing consumed. Another personage soon appeared like unto the first: he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee. He testified also unto me that Jesus Christ is the son of God. I saw many angels in this vision."


"I knelt down and if ever a poor mortal prayed, I did. A few nights after that an angel of the Lord came to me and if ever a thrill went through a mortal, it went through me. I gazed upon the clothes and figure but the eyes were like lightning. They pierced me from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet. I was frightened almost to death for a moment. I tried to waken my aunt, but I could not. The angel leaned over me and the light was very great, although it was night. When my aunt woke up she said she had seen a figure in white robes pass from our bed to my mother's bed and pass out of the window."
We always have to ask if we draw people away from Christ what will our reward be?

Teranno4x4 said...

OK - enough is enough on this idea of criticism !

I am not criticising anyone or your belief. I was questioning the authenticity of the angel moroni ! Am I not permitted to do so ?

If you can not take questioning and accept it in the spirit offered then you are bigotted and narrow minded indeed by choosing not to address the issue raised with something other than sarcasm and outward attack.

To openly confess to you :
It was Christ that spoke to His people through the prophets. The apostle Peter, writing to the Christian church, says that the prophets "prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow." 1 Peter 1:10, 11. It is the voice of Christ that speaks to us through the Old Testament. "The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." Revelation 19:10.
This is the Jesus that I believe in and testify of.

You expect me just to accept an angelic appearance as automatically being from God ? Figures in white moving around a room and from bed to bed - well, dressed in white - it must be from God !

I have a very discerning mind that does ask questions and I have difficulty in relating to arguments like these that do not look any deeper into the relevance or truth of a supernatural manifestation. Do you forget that one third of all angels (evil ones) also inhabit this home we call planet earth ? God will control and restrict them as much as possible in the supernatural battle that is raging, but their true colours must be demonstrated to the whole universe to prove Gods eternal love for His creation. Then when time is right for God - the end will come and sin and it's followers will exist no more.

You see it is possible to communicate disparaging remarks that you follow the Jesus that appeared to JS and that it was the same one from the Bible and yes you are Christian etc etc. Yes I accept all that you are saying and yes I do believe that there are honest LDS that are living according to the light that has been granted to them...

But it doesn't address the 'moroni question' directly does it?

You see satan is wanting to cause confusion to the Gospel message and the fact that the blod of Jesus will in fact save. He wants to shed confusion and open doctrinal discourse along with much alienation between 'Christian' believers. Were th men of God that persecuted JS demonstrating the love of God and protecting all life foms. In fact no - so were they from God ? LDS James you have incorrectly pifgeon-holed them. They were of the same spirit as the Sanhedrin and Roman authoroities that killed Jesus. That is for sure.

But the message of JS as provided by moroni.

If I gave you a light chocolate egg that was beautifully crafted and designed with no hollow centre. Pure and tasteful in its delight.

Then another egg was given to you which was a dark chocolate, imitated in it's design and craft, but with a centre of tasteless poison, how would you discern between the two?

Which would you eat and which would you discard?

You see this is the dilemma that I see created by the Mormon history and especially the angel moroni. The message is a wonderfullyy crafted counterfeit in which the claim is for the same Jesus that the devil has met face to face on many ocasions and believes in wholeheartedly, but ultimately wants to discredit. If you believe in a message about Jesus that the devil potentially has created, will it lead to salvation ultimately ?

tatabug said...

No question. I would definitely choose the light chocolate egg. Milk chocolate is my favorite.

Teranno4x4 said...

Tatabug,

Hahahaha - good to read from you again!

jayleenb said...

T 4x4 - I have changed my mind. My testimony is precious to me usually I never mind sharing it. People can challenge it all they want because nothing will cause me to question it.

But after reading that last entry of yours I see no point. You said: "If you can not take questioning and accept it in the spirit offered then you are bigotted and narrow minded indeed by choosing not to address the issue raised with something other than sarcasm and outward attack."

The irony in your statement is astounding.

There is something written about casting one's pearls before swine, who simply seek to trample them and turn and rend you. That description seems to fit you to a tee.

At this point I will simply agree to disagree with you. I'm sorry you believe in a God who gives someome a serpent in answer to the most sincere prayer of their life.

See, I think it is you who are following the counterfeit, and quite honestly not a very carefully crafted one at that.

But I'm glad you at least believe in a Jesus who died for your sins.

Our 'conversation' is over. You may have all the last words you wish. :)

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear Jayleenb,

I was actually waiting for your testimony by e-mail.

I was also disappointed by your last comment.

Maybe you chose not to read the comments of Anon and LDS james where they went off on one to try and raise sarcasm and wit in an attempt to skirt around the critical issue of identifying moroni.

I do not challenge your personal testimony, nor do I trample it down or belittle it in any way.

My comments were not intended for you, and you will see that the comment was not addressed to you, so it does concern me that you took it so personally.... ? Why ?

If you are pleased to be in such a denomination that gives you the peace in your life that is right for you and your Saviour then so be it. I just don't see how 'moroni' can have any influence for your life changing decision, reasons that were heavily influenced by the events at Calvary and not in the Americas.

Thanks for reading in the 'correct' intended spirit . I will still continue to pray for you and your health.

Darion Alexander said...

T4X4, mentioned that you believe in the Christ that Peter mentioned talked to His prophets of old. Can I assume then, without offense, that you mean to say that Yahweh/Jehovah is Christ?? With that question can I ask you where you derived this conclusion?? Where in the Old Testament does it mention Christ? Notwithstanding the various Messiah prophecies, or David praising or psalming his Redeemer or the Rock of His Salvation, or even the Isaiah prophecies of the Messiah becoming a Saviour for His people, etc. etc.

By the way, what would be the difference between Moroni appearing to Joseph Smith Jr and Gabriel appearing to Mary and Joseph?

Anonymous said...

If Joseph Smith would have stuck to just marrying single women, that probably would have helped in our look back at his life and problems. Polyandry should be mentioned as well when you speak of his problems.
But as your Prophet has said, "the Mormon faith lies at the heart of Joseph Smith's first vision when he was 14 years old"
Too bad JS couldn't get the story right the first time it was told. And of course, all the followers of your faith think there was no other rendition of the story but the one they have been fed in Sunday School.
I think I will leave my learning of the history of the LDS church to the actual historians who Don't have an agenda. Belief is a powerful thing, and it no doubt clouds your view. You should come out from under it some time. The world is a more beautiful place without it.

Anonymous said...

T4x4,


"I do not challenge your personal testimony, nor do I trample it down or belittle it in any way."

"My comments were not intended for you, and you will see that the comment was not addressed to you, so it does concern me that you took it so personally.... ? Why ?"


When you use the false angel of lights spirit of darkness then it leads people away from Christ and you try to distroy their testimony of Jesus Christ. What spirit are you T4x4? Your spirit of contention draws people away from The Christ the Son of the Living God.

Anonymous said...

"You expect me just to accept an angelic appearance as automatically being from God ?"

We expect you to study and pray about it restored church. If God tells you that you should not join then you should go in peace and sin no more.

Anonymous said...

"Do you forget that one third of all angels (evil ones) also inhabit this home we call planet earth ? God will control and restrict them as much as possible in the supernatural battle that is raging, but their true colours must be demonstrated to the whole universe to prove Gods eternal love for His creation."


Because God is in control you need to pray and study this Angel Moroni problem out and repent and be baptised to the restoration of the truth rather than just debate the doctrines. If God tells you to stay where you are then do so in peace and we will pray for your success.

Anonymous said...

"You see satan is wanting to cause confusion to the Gospel message and the fact that the blod of Jesus will in fact save. He wants to shed confusion and open doctrinal discourse along with much alienation between 'Christian' believers."


You are trying to confuse me and lead me from my testimony of Jesus Christ given to me by the Holy Ghost
and now you would have met comit the unforgivible sin. ????? What spirit are you? The spirt of confusion and alienation from my testimony of Jesus Christ by the Holy Ghost? Only one spirit keeps His children from returning to his Father in Heaven. You must repent and come to the restored gospel of truth of the First Vision of Joseph Smith of the Father and His Son Jesus Christ. If this is true then the BofM is true and all things will be shown to you if you are honest in heart. If not you will keep trying to draw Gods children away from the true restored gospel of truth.

Latter-Day James said...

Terrano, do you read English? I assume so because you seem to type it ok and I think you are from the UK....
You keep claiming that we haven't answered you.

You said:

"Maybe you chose not to read the comments of Anon and LDS james where they went off on one to try and raise sarcasm and wit in an attempt to skirt around the critical issue of identifying moroni."

Thanks for the compliment. My wife calls it something other than wit but thanks anyway :-).

See I wasn't kidding when I said this earlier:

"Teranno, something bugs me about your line of criticism and questioning. There is the ignorance of answers given and accusations of questions not answered."

See what I mean? I may joke but this wasn't a joke what I said just above in quotes.

Teranno. Pay attention here, I am about to identify Moroni.

He is an Angel of God.


There he has been identified. Wait..... don't do it. Don't ask me to prove it. I have that discussed that too.

Once again you want to beat on this dead horse. It can't be proven.

Please come up with something new. I feel as though I am wasting my time now.

Anonymous said...

" I just don't see how 'moroni' can have any influence for your life changing decision, reasons that were heavily influenced by the events at Calvary and not in the Americas."

It goes to Christ is the Savior for all people. This the one answer that you and your Christians and your version of the Bible can't answer. This is why the BofM and the Angel Moroni. Still not getting it?

Anonymous said...

"If I gave you a light chocolate egg that was beautifully crafted and designed with no hollow centre. Pure and tasteful in its delight."

"Then another egg was given to you which was a dark chocolate, imitated in it's design and craft, but with a centre of tasteless poison, how would you discern between the two?"

"Which would you eat and which would you discard?"

T4x4, are you trying to poison our hearts against the testimony of the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ that sent the Angel Moroni to Joseph Smith? Would you be so evil to poison your brothers and sisters?

GB said...

Tx4,

This has been an interesting exchange. I came upon this quote which I think has merit. Bro. Bushman speaks for me with this one.

Mormons wonder why all Christians don’t understand that we believe in the Book of Mormon on the basis of a spiritual witness.

It is very hard for a Mormon to believe that Christians accept the Bible because of the scholarly evidence confirming the historical accuracy of the work. Surely there are uneducated believers whose convictions are not rooted in academic knowledge.

Isn’t there some kind of human, existential truth that resonates with one’s desires for goodness and divinity? And isn’t that ultimately why we read the Bible as a devotional work?

We don’t have to read the latest issues of the journals to find out if the book is still true. We stick with it because we find God in its pages—or inspiration, or comfort, or scope. That is what religion is about in my opinion, and it is why I believe the Book of Mormon.

I can’t really evaluate all the scholarship all the time; while I am waiting for it to settle out, I have to go on living. I need some good to hold on to and to lift me up day by day. The Book of Mormon inspires me, and so I hold on.

Reason is too frail to base a life on. You can be whipped about by all the authorities with no genuine basis for deciding for yourself. I think it is far better to go where goodness lies.
. . . Educated Christians claim to base their belief on reason when I thought faith was the teaching of the scriptures.

You hear the Good Shepherd’s voice, and you follow it.

Bushman, On the Road with Joseph Smith, 15–16 (9 August 2005).

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear LDS James,

Your comment made me chuckle when I read it.

However you are correct that my English is not that bad (except from the odd typist's spelling mistakes - I don't tend to use spell checkers). Location though, I leave to your imagination. If you think UK then that's fine, but I could also be writing from Switzerland, or Sweden, or Canada or Hong Kong.... your belief is your belief, reality is sometimes different ;-)

Thank you for identifying moroni, you have taken the stance that is preached and practised by the LDS movement - for that you must be pleased inside. Please understand that my questioning was not critical in any way - more objective and trying to get to the bottom of why you believe this way.

To state that you believe and that is it - by taking an agressive tendancy, isn't going to warm the cockles of my heart.

You see, maybe I do pray (not as often as I should maybe), maybe the Holy Spirit has communed with me, and maybe I have been given different information to you. You see I communed directly with the Holy Spirit for guidance and JS communed with an angel. It was his father that identified the angel as presumptously 'being from God' for him and not the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

There are clear cut and distinct differences here. My questioning is genuine - to try and make you think openly and not from a preconceived viewpoint. You see if deception was used at the start of your movement by the angel calling himself moroni then for all the claims of restoration and faith in Jesus - what exactly are your foundations built on ?

You see Anon makes rash claims too and writes around six comments to my one. I have made my testimony clear about Jesus that I believe in and choose to worship. This is the Jesus from the Bible and it is the Jesus that you read about in the four Gospels. These accounts can not be found in the BoM which is why the whole message of salvation does not lie on the emphasis or relevance of the BoM, but with the Gospel message only found in the Bible. It starts in Genesis, culminates at Calvary and ends in Revelation.

Am I trying to poison you - no because like it or not - the words that I write are true. Take the Bible away - what are you left with in years to come?

James, you have claimed along with Anon in previous comments that millions of LDS believers can't be wrong. OK - accepted, and I believe that the majority are genuine honest Christians who have searched for Jesus. However statistically you are wrong. There are 6 billion plus citizens on the globe today. That puts your LDS membership firmly in a minority group. So to argue about majorities and 'must be right' statistically isn't accurate either. Even if you look at the statistics for the US where your membership is highest, it would still be considered a minority. So truth in following and in statistics - no, sorry.

Anon - To claim an alliance with mainstream Christianity for interpretation of scripture and state that some of my beliefs are off the wall and not considered to be part of the organised churches is either grasping at straws or showing extreme naivity. Christ-mass, Easter, Lent to name but three mainstream Christian man-made traditions based on pagan origins which I do not follow out of respect for my Saviour - does that make me wrong, militant or simply showing a desire to respect and follow Jesus and not the masses.

You see for me my Belief and Faith in Jesus is a personal ongoing experience. You can not save me. No church or organisation can save me. The only thing that can save me is my relationship to Jesus, who by the shedding of His blood has purchased my redemption. This is how basic it is. Everything else that I choose to accept and partake in is a peripheral acceptance of that Belief and Faith.

GB
I appreciate your communication in sharing the Bushman comment.

Just a couple of observations from my perspective (for what it is worth here):
Isn’t there some kind of human, existential truth that resonates with one’s desires for goodness and divinity? And isn’t that ultimately why we read the Bible as a devotional work?
I personally have no desire for divinity, since I have had no part to play in the demonstration of divine love for all mankind. I am in the reverse role of expressing my love for God. I can inherit eternal life as my reward, but eternal life does not include divinity. If I sit on the throne of the Queen of England (since I must live in the UK) does that make me the monarch ? If Jesus has opened His home in heaven for all to have the opportunity to share in what He is offering, will that make us God ? You see this too is the very first interaction of satan with mankind - and his lie did not come true. We are now under his commanding influences and not those chosen for us originally by God. What a liar!
Also the Bible I study as I did the topics that I took for education, not as a devotional. That is the way to learning and not simply meditation.

Reason is too frail to base a life on. Isn't reason dictated to by conscience? Isn't it influenced by a connective working of knowledge? Does a child know the differences between right and wrong - obedience and disobedience ? So reason does play a major part in life. Liberal attitudes are destroying today's society by sidelining reason. Comments like this do not help the cause for the better way of life.

Educated Christians claim to base their belief on reason when I thought faith was the teaching of the scriptures. Here is one great 'Christian' misconception. Teaching is one concept, belief another and faith yet another. A true definition of faith is the loyal following of the intangible love for Jesus with the focus of improving one's own life and also the lives of those that one comes into contact with as a direct result of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

One can teach a concept of one's belief and faith, but it does not demonstrate it. That would be a physical manifestation that would allow others to see the strength of the claimed faith. It has absolutely nothing to do with the scriptures or the teaching of them. The Bible proactively supports the lives of many that demonstrate the faith described.

gb said...

Tx4: I personally have no desire for divinity, since I have had no part to play in the demonstration of divine love for all mankind.

GB: I am sorry to hear that. As I read that, this scripture came to mind. John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

I personally understand that it is difficult to love each other, but it is a commandment.

Tx4: I can inherit eternal life as my reward, but eternal life does not include divinity.

GB: I am sorry to hear that also. 2 Pet 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and GODLINESS, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the DIVINE NATURE, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (emphasis mine)

Tx4: If I sit on the throne of the Queen of England (since I must live in the UK) does that make me the monarch ?

GB: I didn’t know that you “must live in the UK”. My understanding of the Hebrew/middle eastern cultural is that governing power is in the throne and the person sitting on it, not in the title of the person. So in that culture if you were sitting on the throne of God, you would wield the power of God.

Tx4: If Jesus has opened His home in heaven for all to have the opportunity to share in what He is offering, will that make us God ?

GB: I don’t know. But it will make us a god.

Tx4: You see this too is the very first interaction of satan with mankind - and his lie did not come true.

GB: Why is it that so many people get this one wrong? Satan told a lie and then he covered it with a truth to make it more plausible.

Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: (the LIE)
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (the TRUTH)

Gen 3: 22 ¶ And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Notice that God didn’t condemn them for wanting to be like God, but for partaking of the fruit. God is very willing to share His power with those who follow His program.

Satan on the other hand didn’t want to follow the program, but sought to usurp God’s power and glory.

Tx4: Isn't reason dictated to by conscience?

GB: No.

Tx4: Isn't it influenced by a connective working of knowledge?

GB: Knowledge? What is knowledge? I would say it is influenced by information, not knowledge (depending on your definition of knowledge). The information we use to base our reason on, may not be accurate, but only current. That is Bushmans point.

Tx4: Does a child know the differences between right and wrong - obedience and disobedience?

GB: Everyone starts out with a conscience (sometimes called the light of Christ) but this conscience can be “seared” by continually ignoring it.

Tx4: So reason does play a major part in life.

GB: Sometimes. Sometimes emotion is the major player.

Tx4: Liberal attitudes are destroying today's society by sidelining reason.

GB: Agreed. Because they ignore reason and history and are governed by emotion.

Tx4: Here is one . . . he Holy Spirit.

GB: Notice he used the qualifier “educated”.

BTW thanks for the response.

Anonymous said...

"You see for me my Belief and Faith in Jesus is a personal ongoing experience. You can not save me. No church or organisation can save me. The only thing that can save me is my relationship to Jesus,..."

Lets just forget the need for baptism and other commandments. Lets just be pick and choose which scripture we want to use it is much easyer that way but not very Biblical.

Mormanity said...

Anon @ 11:04 PM, March 13, 2008, if I am correctly identifying the responses that are yours, you've done a great job of dealing with Teranno. Are you sure you're not a member? You might want to check with your ward clerk and see if there is a membership record in your name for a baptism you might have forgotten about. In any case, thanks for your active participation.

I am surprised at how hard it is for some people to respond intelligently to what others write. When some think they see black and white, it might just be the black of having closed eyes and the occasional phantom flash of white when punched squarely in the head.

~plaid said...

To me I am more convinced of the authenticity of the Church's origins being a divine restoration of the original Church of Christ by the testimony of Joseph's wife, Emma, than I am of the testimony of those who saw angels or plates. She had such a close association with Joseph as his (first) wife and also seemed very intelligent and determined.

She questioned some of the "problems" with Joseph that are questioned now, such as polygamy. After his death, she could have easily distanced herself from all that was associated with Joseph's teachings and testimony of all that he experienced and helped to bring forth with the Restoration of the Church and it's organization. Mormons and their religion were very unpopular at this time, as the persecutions and martyrdom stood as witness. Her life could have been less complicated by the unpopular association to this group and their beliefs by walking away from it all. Instead Emma embraced most of Joseph's teachings, and really only left out the part about polygamy as she organized her own religious associations.

I can understand her aversion to the polygamy aspect, and I also struggle with this concept on many levels (although it seems so enmeshed throughout so many world religions, including the spring-board of Christianity --Judaism-- that it would be difficult to find a religion where you could escape it). So it makes sense that her feelings of aversion might motivate the abandonment of polygamy. And it also shows she was willing to abandon those things she just couldn't accept or believe. Yet she clung to so much of the Gospel of Christ as it was given through Joseph.

Anonymous said...

At 5:53 AM, March 22, 2008said… Mormanity,
"Anon @ 11:04 PM, March 13, 2008, if I am correctly identifying the responses that are yours, you've done a great job of dealing with Teranno. Are you sure you're not a member? You might want to check with your ward clerk and see if there is a membership record in your name for a baptism you might have forgotten about. In any case, thanks for your active participation."
When I said I am not a member, I should have said that I was a convert for over 30 years but because of circumstances with members I had my name removed. No matter how bad the members have damaged my life they can't take away my testimony or my ability to good to my fellow man. I am sure all the members that I have had bad dealings with are good people they just saw fit to do bad things to me. It is amazing how the more they messed up my life the more our Heavenly Father poured out the Holy Spirit to me and built up my testimony of the restored gospel. I hope to soon be able to dedicate my life full time to doing missionary work, that is if the church wants me, if not I can do it with Gods blessing.
I give out a big thanks for all your effort to your church callings and this blog. As a former member I know how much extra time the church demands and I have truly been blessed by your extra effort on Mormanity. O' that we all could put our talents to such good use.
I hope I haven't hurt Teranno's feeling to bad or messed up your blog to much. I had waited for some 25 years for the internet so I could get answers to gospel questions quickly. Its like having my own personal seer stone. After hearing so much negative information on the church all my life I am glad I can give my small input of defense to those that wish to tear down the restoration. If we never meet I look forward to seeing you and your family on the other side.

Teranno4x4 said...

Hi Jeff,

Must you be so down on my comments and applaud those that 'deal with me' ?

Is this the Truth that you believe in to be the true Christian value ?

Is there nothing that I have written that you can align yourself with Biblically ?

Regarding your comments about 'black and having closed eyes' I seem to recall that a similar comment about having ones eyes opened occured in the Garden of Eden. That didn't lead to much good either.

I think that I will stay with God's Truth in this instance under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, thanks.

As for Anon, I have enjoyed the banter and the communication, but when it gets too presumptious and personal in an attacking way, then that turns me off and I lose all interest, since neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit work under such circumstances. I still have a broad smile on my face and it will take a lot more than Anon's comments to remove it.

We should lift one another in encouragement whether we choose to agree or disagree on topics discussed.

Anonymous said...

Terrano - Soooo, how is you feel you lift people up by telling them they are following Satan? You seem to forget that this is an LDS blog and for some reason you're unhappy with what you believe so you have to come here and rip on LDS beliefs like a chihuahua nipping at everyone's ankles.

And you are basically calling yourself the 'annoited one' where Bible teaching is concerned. What an ego.


And now you want to act like the hurt puppy? Biting, annoying chihuahua's often get kicked. There's a reason. From what I read and see, people here are more than patient with you.

Teranno4x4 said...

Anon (and I don't believe you to be the same Anon as earlier),

You seem to have a great big chip on your shoulders.

This is an LDS blog and I am respectful to that.

You make a lot of claims that you do not back up.

For example. I have never said that you or anyone else is 'knowingly' following satan. I have asked many questions about the credibility of the angel moroni and the origins for the BoM. I know that there are many sincere Christians in the LDS faith and to generalise that you are all 'knowingly' following satan would be rash and hypocritical in it's judgement. Remember splinter, plank and eye ? We are all sinners, regardless of denomination. However when you understand something from a different perspective and still continue in a certain way, can God wink at the once determined ignorance ?

You want your church to grow, you audiciously claim that you have 'the truth'. OK this blog gives an opportunity to witness and not tear down, but you seem content to try and rip shreds from my comments because they are not in-line with yours. Fine - go ahead, but let me tell you that you don't even touch on the surface. Why because your words are not the words of a real follower of Jesus Christ. Kindness, compassion mercy and longsuffering. You concentrate on the reproach without offering a 'true' solution.

The Bible is quite clear in it's teachings. It answers itself in many levels. You can find many verses repeated in both OT and NT in their own contexts and relatively straightforward to understand. No one verse can be used to support any doctrine or creed, otherwise that doctrine becomes man-made and not inspired by God.

I will explain something now in plain English for you. I use the Bible as my guide (not my focus), as my eyes are fixed firmly on my Saviour, Jesus Christ. I request of Him daily to send me His Spirit so that he can also guide me and keep my eyes fixed on the Heavenly principals, leading me in my daily life.

As I understand this blessing / promise is available to all who seek Him and a future salvation. I also understand that LDS believe in baptism by immersion and also by the Holy Spirit ? There is nothing individual about my claiming the promise of the Holy Spirit or the words that you use as exclusive - "annointed one". It is freely available to all. Or maybe you don't want it .... ?

Hurt puppy - no. True loving Christian - yes. Long may that continue, even to death.

BTW - What does God think about your self-appointed style of LDS witness?

gb said...

tx4: The Bible is quite clear in it's teachings.

GB: Apparently not. Witness the numerous "christian" denominations.

tx4: It answers itself in many levels.

GB: I agree! I myself have noticed that it supports LDS doctrine in many ways on many levels.

tx4: You can find many verses repeated in both OT and NT in their own contexts and relatively straightforward to understand.

GB: I agree

tx4: No one verse can be used to support any doctrine or creed, otherwise that doctrine becomes man-made and not inspired by God.

GB: I disagree. The Bible doesn't claim to be complete. In fact it gives several indications that much is missing.

With so much missing it is quite possible that a single verse may reference a true doctrine that was well understood by many of the ancient Christians.

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear GB,

The comment was supposed to address Anon's previous attempt at discrediting the nature of my attempts to communicate.

GB said : "Apparently not. Witness the numerous "Christian" denominations."

This is due to human diverse interpretation of the one Truth. However, there is the addition of enhanced scripture or commentaries (not from 'new' writings) from those inspired by God. The Protestant Reformers come to mind in the middle ages - taking faith back to it's basic roots in God. Taking stock of one's position with God and having a personal 'reformation' is an excellent way of emptying of self.

GB said : "I disagree. The Bible doesn't claim to be complete. In fact it gives several indications that much is missing."

I have never said / claimed that the Bible was complete. I agree that there are references that we are not available to us today. Does that change the Gospel Message. Was the messiah prophecied about in Genesis, Deuteronomy, Psalms, Isiah, Malachi etc etc ... Of course. So isn't that the whole Gospel message as recorded by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John ? Isn't this what Paul and the Apostles were constantly referring to as the 'good news' ? This is the one true message and the Living Word!

In actual fact if you want to break it down into verses / sentences, then I was originally right, since no one verse can be taken out of context from the whole chapter, especially when viewed in the original languages there were no chapters and verses, just one stream of prose. So nothing could be extracted in 'part' and mis-used as it is in so many instances, today.

Also, those doctrines that you claim the 'ancient Christians' would have understood that seemingly have 'Biblical reference' doesn't automatically make it correct and right.

Some of the theology of the day was way off the mark and was inherently tainted of the Babylonian, Greek and Persian take-overs, so much so that Jewish 'world-views' were corrupt in many areas. Could this be the reason why Paul was particularly eager to correct some of the belief of the day ? It takes time to ring in the changes. Jesus had 3.5 years in His ministry and still did not manage to change the views of the Jews, steeped in their tradition so much so that they totally missed the loving Messiah that they were waiting for!

gb said...

Tx4: This is due to human diverse interpretation of the one Truth.

GB: So then, which of the many “interpretations” is correct? How are we to know?

If there is a conflict, who is the final arbiter?

Tx4: However, there is the addition of enhanced scripture or commentaries (not from 'new' writings) from those inspired by God.

GB: Where does one find “enhanced” scripture? And who are "those inspired by God"? And how do we know they are inspired by God?

Tx4: The Protestant Reformers come to mind in the middle ages - taking faith back to it's basic roots in God.

GB: By what authority did they do it? And where did they get said authority? How do we know they took "faith back to it's basic roots"?

Maybe they lead it off in a more divergent path than it was then currently on.

Tx4: I agree that there are references that we are not available to us today. Does that change the Gospel Message.

GB: Without them, how do we know? It is possible even likely that they would. Again witness the many “Christian” denominations all claiming the truth. All cannot be correct.

Tx4: Also, those doctrines that you claim the 'ancient Christians' would have understood that seemingly have 'Biblical reference' doesn't automatically make it correct and right.

GB: In that the 'ancient Christians' were much closer to the writers/sources of the New Testament, they have a higher probability of being more "correct and right" than the current traditional orthodox Christians.

Tx4: Some of the theology of the day was way off the mark and was inherently tainted of the Babylonian, Greek and Persian take-overs, so much so that Jewish 'world-views' were corrupt in many areas.

GB: Who made you the judge of what was on and off the mark? By what authority do you judge?

And yet another 1000+ years of those same influences brought “traditional” Christianity closer to the truth? Surely you jest.

Tx4: Could this be the reason why Paul was particularly eager to correct some of the belief of the day ?

GB: Yet you would have us believe, that somehow traditional Christianity grew closer to the Truth without the corrective influence of the apostles and with an incomplete instruction manual. How can that be?

GB said...

Tx4,

I was hoping for a response and farther discussion. What happened?

Teranno4x4 said...

Dear GB,

I have seen your comment and will be glad to reply in more detail. Some of what you say is taking my comment out of context and twisting what I mean. Some of it is making a mountain out of a molehill that is not there.

I apologise, but you have caught me in the middle of two weeks door-to-door humanitarian charity collections fpor underpriveliged, war-torn, poverty stricken and disaster areas of the world that I do each year totally voluntarily after my normal working hours.

I will try to find a few moments to reply soon.

Teranno4x4 said...

GB: So then, which of the many “interpretations” is correct? How are we to know?
If there is a conflict, who is the final arbiter?

It may be news for you but the Textus Receptus (Received Text) is the closest uncorrupted version of the original scriptures that we have today. They have been proven time and again by many scholars who work on the ancient parchments that we have available. If the latin vulgate differs so vastly from the Textus Receptus, who could have changed the Latin versions ? Oh yes of course – the early Roman church who also compromised Christianity to also accommodate much of Pagan Rome of the day… The answer is to stick to a translation of the Bible that is based upon the Received text and you won’t be reading any corrupted or doctrinal changes to the original intended message, that have been proved and twice proved by many of the letters of early Christians quoting original scriptures and also the findings like the dead sea scrolls.

GB: Where does one find “enhanced” scripture? And who are "those inspired by God"? And how do we know they are inspired by God?
Test them by God’s Word and by the evidences of the prophets that have gone before. If what they teach and the manner taught, together with the same characteristics displayed by the prophets when they were in vision or in dream, then the Inspiration most certainly could and should be Divine. If any one iota is contrary or not in keeping with what has gone before, then most certainly the message is counterfeit. Prayer, fasting and time with God will provide a personal answer to this question.

GB: By what authority did they do it? And where did they get said authority? How do we know they took "faith back to it's basic roots"?
They had and could claim the authority of Jesus Christ in whose name they believed and acted accordingly reverently.

Maybe they lead it off in a more divergent path than it was then currently on. Not possible – that is why they were known as – Reformers – that is what the word stands for.The Roman church had proceeded way off track with idol worship of Mary, infant baptisms and the sale of indulgences, said to alleviate the suffering of an individual’s soul in purgatory. They protested against this controlled way of worship and the doctrines taught by the church. Can you find any of these doctrines mentioned, in any of the Gospels as taught by Jesus or followed by the disciples ?

GB: Without them, how do we know? It is possible even likely that they would. Again witness the many “Christian” denominations all claiming the truth. All cannot be correct.
I agree all denominations can not be correct. Search your Bible in the Book of Revelation for the word ‘remnant’. This describes one group of people(s) and their characteristics, who will be saved at the second coming of Jesus. Thankfully Jesus is our judge and He knows who the Remnant are.

GB: In that the 'ancient Christians' were much closer to the writers/sources of the New Testament, they have a higher probability of being more "correct and right" than the current traditional orthodox Christians.
Highly unlikely especially as you can read in all the epistles instances where individuals are being brought into rebuke for one reason or another. That is either for a personal selfish gain or for changing and manipulating the belief of the early Christians in an attempt to twist doctrine to their own views. You would be surprised at how many genuine Christians are in the world today and who have come to know Jesus personally and follow him as their Saviour in the most uncorrupted way.

GB: Who made you the judge of what was on and off the mark? By what authority do you judge?
I make no judgement here. I can claim support from historical evidence. I have visited Rome. I have eyes. I can see and read. I can listen to tour guides who give facts on the historical importances (mostly catholic). I can learn. There is enough evidence in the world that has existed 2000+ years and it is quite easy to interpret the intended messages that are inscribed on the buildings and artefacts. It is easy to recognise the influences of ruling powers in the occupied territories – Jerusalem being one that also comes to mind and the evidences are quite openly accessible… ?

And yet another 1000+ years of those same influences brought “traditional” Christianity closer to the truth? Surely you jest.
No jest – this is very serious. The Reformation brought Christianity back on track. Why do you think that it was allowed in the first place. 1260 years were prophecied in both Daniel and Revelation against a corrupt controlling power. Read them for yourself and insert the understanding of the ‘official’ Christian (Papal) church of the Middle Ages. If not it would have died out by now.

GB: Yet you would have us believe, that somehow traditional Christianity grew closer to the Truth without the corrective influence of the apostles and with an incomplete instruction manual. How can that be?
The Bible is not an instruction manual. It is a collection of books that have been Inspired by God’s influence, making them Holy by definition. Any old Joe Bloggs writing about such matters would not have any credibility to being in harmony or under direction from God. The fact that the Bible refers to itself on so many levels in books and verses and from NT to OT give backing that it stands out from all other writings that have gone before or ever been since. That is not to say that we can not learn from other writings, but that we should always look to the greater light to see exactly how any lesser light instructs us to go. No harmony between the two – then no follow!

Please don’t look to further cherry pick or nit pick on any grammar or take any sentence out of context. I have tried to communicate as openly and as respectfully as I believe.

GB said...

T: The answer is to stick to a translation of the Bible that is based upon the Received text and you won’t be reading any corrupted or doctrinal changes to the original intended message, that have been proved and twice proved by many of the letters of early Christians quoting original scriptures and also the findings like the dead sea scrolls.

GB: I have a couple of faithful LDS friends that have done exactly that. They share with me that those texts support LDS theology; more so than they support “traditional orthodox Christian” theology.

T: Test them by God’s Word and by the evidences of the prophets that have gone before. If what they teach and the manner taught, together with the same characteristics displayed by the prophets when they were in vision or in dream, then the Inspiration most certainly could and should be Divine. If any one iota is contrary or not in keeping with what has gone before, then most certainly the message is counterfeit. Prayer, fasting and time with God will provide a personal answer to this question.

GB: I have done that and found that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that the Book of Mormon is a faithful witness of Jesus Christ and His Gospel.


T: They had and could claim the authority of Jesus Christ in whose name they believed and acted accordingly reverently.

GB: So what you are saying is that any yahoo, who 1) claims authority, 2) is self deluded (believed), 3) acts accordingly, and 4) puts forth a pious image, should be followed unquestioned. Where is Reverend Wright? LOL!

Sorry but you haven’t provided any support for your claim that “they had” authority. Did they get it from the corrupt and apostate church? Can you get a live branch from a dead tree?


T: Not possible – that is why they were known as – Reformers – that is what the word stands for.

GB: LOL. So they called themselves “reformers” and that makes it so. LOL. And Hillary believes in the constitution too. You have presented NOTHING to show that they had authority to “reform”, and NOTHING to show that change in direction they made was the right one.

T: Can you find any of these doctrines mentioned, in any of the Gospels as taught by Jesus or followed by the disciples ?

GB: No. Neither can I find the doctrine of the Trinity, Sola scriptura, priesthood of all believers, nor grace alone. So clearly the corruption continued, only in a different form.

T: The Bible is not an instruction manual.

GB: So without instructions or authority, the “reformers” were able to put “Christianity back on track”. LOL!

T: The fact that the Bible refers to itself on so many levels in books and verses and from NT to OT give backing that it stands out from all other writings that have gone before or ever been since.

GB: Chapter and verse please.

T: That is not to say that we can not learn from other writings, but that we should always look to the greater light to see exactly how any lesser light instructs us to go. No harmony between the two – then no follow!

GB: I find the LDS canon to be in harmony with the Bible. So I will follow them.


T: Please don’t look to further cherry pick or nit pick on any grammar or take any sentence out of context. I have tried to communicate as openly and as respectfully as I believe.

GB: Oh, I think you are sincere, (deluded but sincere) even though your posts don’t come across that way. I will try not to let the fact that you are so wrong about the Church get in the way of being civil with you.

Teranno4x4 said...

GB: So what you are saying is that any yahoo, who 1) claims authority, 2) is self deluded (believed), 3) acts accordingly, and 4) puts forth a pious image, should be followed unquestioned. Where is Reverend Wright? LOL!

Sorry but you haven’t provided any support for your claim that “they had” authority. Did they get it from the corrupt and apostate church? Can you get a live branch from a dead tree?


Jesus is the vine and we are the branches - this is the Living tree. If the roots to the dead tree is the apostate church are dead, then it is easy to ask Jesus to re-graft oneself back on to the living vine.

He has and can give that authority - that is His own preogative. Any comment by you to the contrary is irreverent as you were not the one crucified.

Branches can exist on their own, connected to the vine or they can be multi-branched and still bear fruit. Jesus nowhere says that the church is the underlying and sole authority - that comes out of catholisism and as you stated already is apostate.

It is quite clear that "1) claims authority, 2) is self deluded (believed), 3) acts accordingly, and 4) puts forth a pious image, should be followed unquestioned." - does nothave Jesus' authority because the emphasis is on self and claim only. the presence of the Holy Spirit can contest that one easily where necessary - by their fruits shall ye know them ...! Authentic or pretender - see the fruits. No fruits - to be cut off and burned in the fire (not by mankind - but at the end of time).

I look forward to your continued trying civil comments even though you sneeked in 'deluded' - I could just place the mirror on yourself ... :-)

GB said...

Tx4: He has and can give that authority - that is His own preogative. Any comment by you to the contrary is irreverent as you were not the one crucified.

GB: Agreed, He can and has given authority to Joseph Smith as recorded in scripture. Any comment by you to the contrary is irreverent as you were not the one crucified.

But nowhere is it recorded that He gave authority to the "reformers" because He never did.

Sorry if the word "deluded" offended your tender sensibilities. How about "blind but sincere", is that better?

tatabug said...

I very much like GB's question of how can you get a live branch from a dead tree. But I am troubled by the Teranno's belief that live branches can exist independent of a tree. When Jesus taught in parables, he did so by using true concepts and principles. Were he to then introduce ideas which were contrary to those true principles, then the parable would lose its meaning. For instance, it goes against the laws of nature for a live branch to exist independent of a live tree. It would be a waste of time for Jesus to use parables if he illustrated or even implemented procedures which the people were unfamiliar with and even went so far as to violate the laws of nature. So now it seems, in Teranno's world, that live branches can just spring up and bear fruit spontaneously without first having been given the ability to do so by a live tree.

GB said...

T: 1260 years were prophecied in both Daniel and Revelation against a corrupt controlling power.

GB: Making things up?

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

It says 1260 days not years.

I couldn't easily find the Daniel reference. What does it really say?

GB said...

tatabug,

They have to cling on to the live branch from a dead tree delusion, for without it their "traditional orthodox Christian" house of cards collapses.

They have to cover up their lack of authority by what ever means they can think of.

Martin Luther understood that he lacked authority to do what he did, so he made up the "priesthood of all believers" doctrine as a cover.

Teranno4x4 said...

But I am troubled by the Teranno's belief that live branches can exist independent of a tree.

Dear tatabug and GB,

Let me first state that I do not believe in the statement above in the context of Jesus' parable that I used.

I have re-read the comment that I made and I can see where it has been mis-read and taken out of context. I apologise for this in not making the point clearly enough.

When I make the point that 'branches exist on their own' it is in the context that they are attached to the vine.

Let me illustrate my meaning. If you have only one twig that sticks straight out, then it is a single branch and it can still bear fruit. Or you can have a thick stem that shoots off breaking out in all directions supporting itself by the main vine and gets laden down with fruit. The emphasis that I was trying to make is that both scenarios 'bear good fruit' unlike what you would find from a dead branch.

I apologise that you read something other than I do actually believe! I do not believe that a branch can exist away from the main vine as it would be a 'dead branch' ready for burning (unless Jesus can perform a re-graft before His second coming) !

My belief explained more clearly, the instance with Aaron and his staff springs to mind Numbers 17:8. The staff was not a living piece of wood, yet it budded and brought forth almonds. The work of Almighty God as our Creator can make a dead wood blossom and bear fruit should He so desire or if it be desired of Him in utmost repentance. Who made the laws of nature?
Tatabug - do you limit Almighty God who has proved that it is possible as contained in scripture? I believe wholeheartedly in the parable of Jesus, but the account in Numbers is a whole new dimension to think about.

Teranno4x4 said...

GB,

The comment that I made about Daniel and Revelation can only be understood if you can accept the Day - Year principal that is symbolically included in the prophetic messages (see Num 14:34; Ezek 4:6, 7).

Daniel's time period is illustrated in chapter 12 as 1290 days. The numbers between the two books are different, but they illustrate the same period in earth's history (as in 1260 fits quite nicely into 1290 years). Take a look to the accounts as to what is depicted in both books. You can read trials, persecutions, murder and oppression of God's people. Coincidence that both visions contain this - no it is a double whammy warning consistent in OT and NT.

If you choose not to agree with the day - year principal, then exactly who is the woman identified who runs to the wilderness for 1260 days (years)? Is it coincidentally just happen to be known as the 'dark ages' and the persecution of 'true faith' and 'true believers' or the 'true church'? Jesus often refers to Himself as the Bridegroom. Elsewhere the church is referred to as the Bride adorned for her Husband. This is the true identity of the woman in this prophecy.

To start to understand prophecy, one needs to understand the symbols used and the times stated in history. Daniel 2 is a good place to start as it depicts the earth right up to Jesus' second coming, taking into account the Babylonian empire, the Medo- Persians, the Greeks, the Romans and the split spiritual-secular divided empires of the remnant Roman conquered World otherwise known as modern Europe. That is as you descend down the statue depicted in Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

Look at the common similarities like beasts represented, number of heads, horns and characteristics and a whole understanding can open up before you. Daniel 2 even describes the empires to come in some skilled detail to prove that he was a true prophet.

Seeing as his early prophecies can easily be identified by history, why shouldn't the ones of the end of time also be understood? Hello JS - are you replacing the gifts of Daniel as a true prophet of God or complimenting them? What do JS & GB make of these latter-day-event prophecies from Daniel 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12?

BTW - don't you believe that you are a priest of God?

GB said...

Although it is obvious that the numbers in Daniel and Revelation are symbolic, it is unwise for you to assume that they are to be interpreted by Num 14:34 and Ezek 4:6,7.

It is interesting that you claim to know the number of years the woman (church) would be in the wilderness (taken from the earth). Yet, you are unable to site specific events and dates for the return.
My understanding is that prophecies are more specific of events than of dates and time.

Since you seem to be very interested in prophecies and even though you seem willing to accept the apostasy of the early Christian church, I will list several of the prophecies of the apostasy, because they will help make clear the prophecies of the restoration (not reformation) that you don’t seem to accept and understand.

Isa. 24: 5 changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.
Isa. 29: 13 this people draw near me with their mouth.
Isa. 60: 2 darkness shall cover the earth.
Amos 8: 11 a famine . . . of hearing the words of the Lord.
Matt. 13: 25 his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat.
Matt. 24: 5 saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many.
Matt. 24: 24 shall arise false Christs, and false prophets.
John 6: 66 his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Acts 20: 29 shall grievous wolves enter in among you.
1 Cor. 11: 18 there be divisions among you.
Gal. 1: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him.
Gal. 3: 1 who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey.
2 Thes. 2: 3 shall not come, except there come a falling away first.
1 Tim. 1: 6 some having swerved have turned aside.
1 Tim. 4: 1 giving heed to seducing spirits.
2 Tim. 1: 15 all they which are in Asia be turned away from me.
2 Tim. 2: 18 Who concerning the truth have erred.
2 Tim. 3: 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power.
2 Tim. 4: 4 turn away their ears from the truth . . . unto fables.
Titus 1: 16 profess that they know God, but in works they deny him.
James 4: 1 From whence came wars and fightings among you.
2 Pet. 2: 1 false prophets also among the people.
2 Pet. 3: 17 being led away with the error of the wicked.
1 Jn. 2: 18 now are there many antichrists.
1 Jn. 4: 1 many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Jude 1: 4 certain men crept in . . . denying the only Lord God.
Rev. 2: 2 which say they are apostles, and are not.
Rev. 3: 16 thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot.
Rev. 13: 7 to make war with the saints.

And here is a list of prophesies of the restoration.

Isa. 2: 2 (Micah 4: 2) Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains.
Isa. 11: 11 Lord shall set his hand . . . to recover the remnant of his people.
Isa. 29: 14 I will proceed to do a marvellous work.
Jer. 31: 31 will make a new covenant with the house of Israel.
Ezek. 37: 26 it shall be an everlasting covenant.
Dan. 2: 44 set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed.
Joel 2: 28 afterward, that I will pour out my spirit.
Amos 3: 7 revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
Mal. 3: 1 send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me.
Mal. 4: 6 turn the heart of the fathers to the children.
Matt. 17: 11 (Mark 9: 12) Elias . . . come, and RESTORE all things.
Matt. 24: 14 gospel of the kingdom shall be preached.
Acts 3: 21 times of RESTITUTION of all things.
Rom. 11: 25 blindness . . . until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Eph. 1: 10 in the dispensation of the fulness of times . . . gather together in one all things.
Rev. 11: 3 two witnesses, and they shall prophesy.
Rev. 14: 6 I saw another angel . . . having the everlasting gospel.

No “reformation” mentioned. Humm!!!

I am no Bible scholar but I can see the obvious. 1830 clearly satisfies “And in the days of these kings” described in Dan 2:44.

“. . . the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: . . .” clearly implies that every other time the Lord set up His kingdom on the earth, it was later destroyed. So it couldn’t be “reformed” only restored.

“. . . and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.”

As opposed to Matt 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Can men reform something that God has taken away? No ONLY God can restore it.

Now if Jesus set up His kingdom with certain offices in it; shouldn’t it stay that way?

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Does the absence of said offices not indicate the apostasy? A restoration would include the restoration of said offices, would it not?

Why didn’t the reformation bring back said offices? Would the reason be that no authority was given to the reformers? And without authority and revelation they couldn’t get it right. Clearly!

Tx4: What do JS & GB make of these latter-day-event prophecies from Daniel 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12?

GB: Speaking for GB in a few words;

Daniel 7 Daniel sees four beasts representing the kingdoms of men—He sees the ancient of days (Adam) to whom the Son of Man (Christ) shall come—The kingdom shall be given to the saints forever.

Daniel 8 Daniel sees in vision a ram (Media and Persia), a he goat (Grecia), four other kings, and then, in the last days, a fierce king who shall destroy the holy people; but he shall be broken when he stands up against the Messiah.

Daniel 9 Daniel fasts, confesses, and prays for all Israel—Gabriel reveals time of the coming of the Messiah who shall make reconciliation for iniquity—Messiah shall be cut off.

Daniel 10 Daniel sees the Lord and others in a glorious vision—He is shown what is to be in the latter days.

Daniel 11 Daniel sees the successive kings and their wars, leagues, and conflicts which lead up to the Second Coming of Christ.

Daniel 12 In the last days Michael shall deliver Israel from their troubles—Daniel tells of the two resurrections—The wise shall know the times and meanings of his visions.

Tx4: BTW - don't you believe that you are a priest of God.

GB: Actually I am an Elder, and I can trace my priesthood back to Jesus Christ. Can you?

GB said...

Tx4,

Either you have given up, moved on, or have been banned from this blog.

If you wish to continue our discussion you can email me

vbowler@infowest.com