10
Nov
08

judgment day

 

     I can’t wait for Judgment Day to come.  That will be the best day of my life.  On that day, God will not bring up one charge against me.  He will not bring up one instance when I failed him.  Instead of condemning me, he will commend me – without any reservation.  There will not be any hesitation on his part.  There will not be any qualifications in his verdict.   Instead he will welcome me into the wonderful bliss of living with him for all eternity.

     Jesus gets every ounce of credit for that.  He is the one who washed away all my sins.  He is the one who gave me his perfect righteousness.  “I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.”  (Is. 61:10)  Jesus did it all.   Because my living eternally with Heavenly Father depends entirely on what Jesus has already done for me, I can’t wait for Judgment Day to come.

     Mormons I have talked to don’t have the same perspective.  More than one has told me how they were taught that Judgment Day would be like sitting in a huge auditorium filled with people as every one of your thoughts and actions were shown on a giant screen.  That agrees with what Gospel Principles states:   “Stored in our body and mind is a complete history of everything we have done.  President John Taylor taught this truth:  ‘The individual himself tells the story himself, and bear witness against himself. . .That record that is written by the man himself in the tablets of his own mind – that record that cannot lie – will in that day be unfolded before God and angels, and those who sit as judges.” 

     For all those who have covered themselves with Christ’s righteousness and disdained trusting in any of their own righteousness, Judgment Day will be a most glorious day.  For all others, it will be a most horrible day.  What we are trusting in will make all the difference in the world – in the world to come.

Advertisements

62 Responses to “judgment day”


  1. November 10, 2008 at 11:50 pm

    I can’t wait to get to heaven, can’t wait to see Jesus face to face, can’t wait to sit down at the marriage supper. I’m not sure about your enthusiasm for judegement day, however. After the judgement, Revelation says that God will wipe away all tears. We’re not exactly sure what that means; is it just a reference to all the pain and trials of this life coming to an end, or is judgement going to be a horrible process to watch happened, even for the saints? It’s going to be quite a day for sure. I don’t know if something we should be excited about or not though.

  2. November 11, 2008 at 7:45 am

    I’m not excited about other people suffering and not achieving the full measure of their creation. But I am excited about the idea of a redeemed earth. So I guess it will be a day of mixed emotions.

  3. 3 Brad
    November 11, 2008 at 2:00 pm

    I agree, Mark. For the redeemed, judgment day holds no fear, only joy. For those who aren’t redeemed, it should hold fear, and no joy, although many don’t realize their need.

    The Bible says to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. I see nowhere in Scripture where being with the Lord in heaven is described as anything except joyful.

    The fact that other people WILL suffer after judgment day, motivates me to work NOW, on Earth, while we’re living, and should motivate all Christians to do the same. However, after I die, I will be in God’s presence, and don’t believe that I will feel sad for them at that point, but will instead be rejoicing at the sight of my Creator and God. After non-Christians die, I shudder to think what awaits them, though I do know what it is. Again, it’s what should motivate Christians to tell all they can, as after death, no more chances.

  4. 4 markcares
    November 11, 2008 at 2:40 pm

    Seth:
    Have you ever heard in LDS circles that depiction of Judgment Day as sitting in a big room with every one of your thoughts projected on the screen? Or something similar to that? I ask because I have had different LDS people in different parts of the country tell me that at different times. Wondering how widespread it is.

  5. November 11, 2008 at 4:32 pm

    I wouldn’t put it past some seminary teacher, or bishop or stake president using such imagery.

    Haven’t experienced it personally.

    Personally, I think it’s too speculative an area to be appropriately making such analogies. I am certain that human imagination does not comprehend the things God has in store.

  6. 6 Stephanie
    November 11, 2008 at 6:21 pm

    I have heard the very same analogy used in Presbyterian, Baptist, and non-denominational churches in the past. It is, of course, a shameful and frightening prospect to imagine one’s life shown to everyone, in minute detail, on an overhead projector… yes, I have heard that analogy used in Christian churches.

  7. 7 Stephanie
    November 11, 2008 at 6:34 pm

    Luke 21:27-28 “At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

    This verse encourages believers to look forward to Judgment Day without fear. We are told to lift our heads in expectation. Judgment Day will only be a day of judgment for those destined for outer darkness. Judgment Day will be a day of redemption for all those who belong to the body of Christ, and who have a true saving faith in Christ.

    Revelation 19:1-9 describes Judgment Day, and the author uses the celebratory word “Hallelujah!” four times. This is an expression of pure joy, not dread.

    I like to tell people that “there is nothing you can do to make God love you any more than He does right now.” Many people view God as an angry judge, which He is if you aren’t clothed in the perfection of Christ. But if you are clothed in Christ’s righteousness, God is no longer an angry judge. In fact, there is nothing you can do (works) to make Him love you any more than He already does. Human good works flow naturally from a thankful heart, as a result of what Christ did for us on the cross. Good works are an expression of love and thanksgiving toward God, and flow from a sincere desire to show God’s love and compassion to others. This is why there is so much freedom in Christ. There are no expectations placed upon believers. Good works are evidence of a saving faith, but not a requirement of saving faith.

  8. November 11, 2008 at 6:54 pm

    Something I don’t think a lot of Evangelicals get:

    Our leadership reads widely – they read YOUR theologians, ministers, and sermons.

    And sometimes they repeat your analogies too.

    Take the whole Mark of Cain stuff about blacks and the Priesthood, for instance…

    Yup, lifted it almost verbatim from Southern Baptist arguments justifying slavery, and then segregation.

  9. 9 Brad
    November 11, 2008 at 8:01 pm

    Quotes and sources, Seth, would be helpful.

  10. November 11, 2008 at 8:45 pm

    This is hardly a controversial point Brad.

    It wasn’t until 1995 that the Southern Baptist Convention issued a resolution condemning the use of the Bible to justify slavery and white supremacy. Here’s a link to the text of the resolution:

    http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=899

    It pretty much acknowledges the SBC role in perpetuating racial doctrines as a moot point.

  11. 11 Darrell
    November 11, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    “Our leadership reads widely – they read YOUR theologians, ministers, and sermons.”

    Why would the Lord’s PROPHETS need to read something that the church of the devil put out? Shouldn’t your prophets be able to go directly to God to get the answers?

    I remember listening to a tape on J Golden Kimball quotes and stories (this was while I was an active believing mormon and the tape was a POSITIVE one for the LDS Church. Not some dreaded Anti-Mormon propoganda). He said that the only way to redeem the south was to burn it to the ground and start over. Doesn’t sound like they would be quoting the Southern Baptists as a reliable source on doctrine.

    Darrell

  12. 12 Brad
    November 11, 2008 at 9:29 pm

    I’m not saying that the SBC didn’t support slavery, at one time, just as many “religious” people did. However, you’re almost trying to make it seem as though the SBC started it, when in fact anyone and everyone who perpetuated it is to blame, not just a single person or entity.

    Just b/c there wasn’t a formal resolution condemning it until 1995 didn’t mean the opinion changed at that point, it just means a formal resolution wasn’t issued. I think you would hopefully agree that not all SBC churches, and certainly not all SBC members, condoned slavery as late as 1995.

    Further, quotes from Mormon sources could never be attributed solely to non-Mormon sources. Even if some comments were culled from other sources (even SBC sources), at some point, Mormons were also making the argument for themselves. If a prophet agreed with it, then either God told the prophet to agree with what had already been said by a church that Mormonism acknowledges as wrong (unlikely), or the prophet received a direct revelation from God that it should be told.

    Which would it be, Seth?

  13. November 11, 2008 at 9:42 pm

    I really don’t care Brad.

    My point is that most of our arguments about race, back in the day, we borrowed from you guys.

    And why shouldn’t a religion that believes in seeking after anything “virtuous, lovely, or of good report” look to material from other people?

    Darrell,

    J. Golden Kimball is a nice source of fun stories, but that’s about it.

    I’m automatically suspicious of any new story I hear about him, since so many of them are apocryphal.

    I heard the same quote VERBATIM ascribed to Heber J. Grant with respect to the islands of Japan.

    Sounds more like an urban legend to me. Although I do sympathize with the point about the South on occasion.

    (kidding)

  14. 14 Brad
    November 11, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    You don’t care, Seth.

    That’s the problem.

  15. November 11, 2008 at 10:40 pm

    I don’t care in this particular instance because it’s irrelevant to the limited point I was making.

  16. 16 Darrell
    November 11, 2008 at 10:48 pm

    “My point is that most of our arguments about race, back in the day, we borrowed from you guys.”

    Please provide sources showing it was borrowed, please. My guess is you are just sharing something that is your opinion and have no proof.

    In addition, you still have not answered my question. Why would your prophets look to the church of the devil for doctrine, scholarship or anything for that matter? Why wouldn’t your prophet go straight to God and talk with Him about it?

    “J. Golden Kimball is a nice source of fun stories, but that’s about it.”

    Yeah, I know, he wasn’t speaking as an Apostle or Prophet unless what he says is good for the Church.

    To be honest, the J Golden Kimball stuff was really funny. The stories that I listened to (which were put together by HIS FAMILY BY THE WAY… so I do think they were pretty reliable) were rather refreshing and funny. Not the typical stuffed shirt type of stuff that usually is put out about LDS Church leaders. Sounds like he was a character.

    Darrell

  17. November 12, 2008 at 1:01 am

    This book would be a good starting point:

    Stephen R. Haynes, Noah’s Curse: The Biblical Justification of American Slavery (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)

    On page 129, he cites Dr. Benjamin Palmer, one of the “moving forces” of the Southern Presbyterian Church in New Orleans (1856 to 1902) thus:

    “[t]he descendants of Ham, on the contrary, in whom the sensual and corporeal appetites predominate, are driven like an infected race beyond the deserts of Saraha, where under a glowing sky nature harmonized with thier brutal and savage disposition.”

    And then on page 132:

    “Upon Ham was pronounced the doom of perpetual servitude—proclaimed with double emphasis, as it is twice repeated that he shall be the servant of Japeth and the servant of Shem. Accordingly, history records not a single example of any member of this group lifting itself, by any process of self-development, above the saveage condition. From first to last their mental and moral characteristics, together with the guidance of Providence, have marked them for servitude; while their comparative advance in civilization and their particiapation in the blessings of salvation, have ever been suspended upon this decreed connexion with Japhet and with Shem.”

    As for the Mark of Cain, I heard it in a PBS documentary and remember reading it in a book too as well as various other places. But unfortunately, I didn’t take notes since it didn’t occur to me that I’d ever be arguing the issue.

    In any case, it’s such a matter of common knowledge that the Southern Baptist Convention was one of the most racist religious bodies of the 19th and 20th centuries that I’m rather surprised you are even arguing the point. The segregation on Sunday continues in the American South to this day.

    Now, since this is a bit off topic, I’ll leave it there.

  18. November 12, 2008 at 1:02 am

    I agree that J. Golden Kimball stories are rather fun. Serves as a reminder that there ought to be a place for oddballs in the Church.

  19. 19 Darrell
    November 12, 2008 at 1:30 am

    “In any case, it’s such a matter of common knowledge that the Southern Baptist Convention was one of the most racist religious bodies of the 19th and 20th centuries that I’m rather surprised you are even arguing the point. The segregation on Sunday continues in the American South to this day.”

    I never argued that the SBC did not have racist policies in the past. I am asking you for documentation to support your assertion that the LDS Church borrowed this doctrine/policy/practice from the SBC. You are trying to make it sound like the LDS Church was just following in the steps of the evil SBC and other Protestant Denominations and not getting their guidance from the Prophet. Now, do you have any documentation to show that they borrowed this practice or are you just asserting your OPINION that they borrowed the practice?

    Darrell

  20. November 12, 2008 at 3:20 am

    Well, I don’t think the teachings came out of thin air.

    Neither do I think that they came from God.

    So where does that leave us?

  21. 21 Darrell
    November 12, 2008 at 12:25 pm

    “Well, I don’t think the teachings came out of thin air.

    Neither do I think that they came from God.

    So where does that leave us?”

    With your opinion and no documentation.

    Darrell

  22. 22 Brad
    November 12, 2008 at 1:58 pm

    Gee, Seth, if they didn’t come from thin air, and, as you say, also didn’t come from God, why were the Mormons so die-hard about no blacks themselves? Do you mean to say that your leaders (including the prophets, seers and revelators of the time) were really NOT in touch with God, but instead adhered to this belief that was clearly contrary to God’s teaching?

    How is that possible, given the prophet’s intimate connections with God?

  23. November 12, 2008 at 9:04 pm

    There is no LDS doctrine of either prophetic or scriptural infallibility.

    Quit projecting the faulty theology of your own religion onto ours.

  24. 24 Darrell
    November 12, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    “There is no LDS doctrine of either prophetic or scriptural infallibility.

    Quit projecting the faulty theology of your own religion onto ours.”

    Depends on the prophet you listen to. BY said the scriptures were fallible but that any word that he spoke was better than scripture.

    What is crazy about your thinking on this Seth is this… if neither the prophet nor the scriptures are infallible… if BOTH can be wrong… what do you trust in? You have said in the past that if the prophet speaks, the way you determine if he is right or wrong is if his teaching line up with scripture. However, if the scripture can be wrong (fallible) how can you trust that it are right? If the prophet speaks something that goes against the scriptures, how do you know that the prophet is not right and the SCRIPTURES are wrong? Heck, if both are fallible than they BOTH might be wrong. You are left not knowing if ANYTHING is right. You can’t be sure of ANYTHING!! Seems like a sad place to be.

    Darrell

  25. 25 Brad
    November 12, 2008 at 10:10 pm

    That’s kinda the point, Seth.

    From the lds.org website, which we as Christians are constantly referred to to find out what Mormons REALLY believe: “As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are blessed to be led by living prophets—inspired men called to speak for the Lord, as did Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, Nephi, Mormon, and other prophets of the scriptures. We sustain the President of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator—the only person on the earth who receives revelation to guide the entire Church. We also sustain the counselors in the First Presidency and the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators.”

    It goes on to say: “We can always trust the living prophets. Their teachings reflect the will of the Lord, who declared: “What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same” (D&C 1:38). Our greatest safety lies in strictly following the word of the Lord given through His prophets, particularly the current President of the Church. The Lord warns that those who ignore the words of the living prophets will fall (see D&C 1:14–16). He promises great blessings to those who follow the President of the Church.”

    So while you say there’s no doctrine of either prophetic or scriptural infallibility within your church, the above seems to say the opposite, for it says “we can always trust the living prophets”, “their teachings reflect the will of the Lord”, and “our greatest safety lies in strictly following the word of the Lord given through His prophets, particularly the current President of the Church.”

    Gee, Seth, so when blacks couldn’t hold the priesthood, was this simply the opinion of the prophet, or was it actually God’s Word? And since Mormons, according to the church’s own website, are told to “strictly” follow what is said, and are told that they can “always trust the living prophets” and that “their teachings reflect the will of the Lord”, then if the teachings WEREN’T from God, as some Mormons would say, then 2 questions arise:

    1) How would any Mormon be justified in not following it, if, as the Church says, the prophet’s teachings reflects the will of God?

    2) If the prophet’s teachings DON’T reflect the will of God, then why all the commands to follow what the prophets say, since according to the church, their teachings DO reflect God’s will?

    Help me to understand the thinking here, Seth.

  26. 26 Darrell
    November 13, 2008 at 1:36 am

    Brad,

    There is a hymn that is taught to young children (primary) in the LDS Church. It says…

    Follow the Prophet, follow the prophet, follow the prophet, don’t go astray. Follow the prophet, follow the prophet, follow the prophet, he knows the way.

    So, yes, the LDS Church IS taught to follow the prophet and that he CANNOT lead the church astray. Hence the reason many people, like myself, have issues when they come face to face with the fact that the prophets of the LDS Church have taught FALSE doctrine and have led the church astray. This is the reason that people like Millett and Seth are trying so hard to REDEFINE mormon teachings with things such as “the prophets are not infallible” etc. Some of the problems with this teaching…

    1) It does not line up with what has been taught over and over again in the church. No prophet has come out and corrected the past teachings of those such as BY who said the prophets words are scripture. Nor have you seen them correct songs such as “Follow the Prophet” to show that the prophets CAN lead the church astray and he does not ALWAYS know the way.

    2) As I mentioned in my previous post… if you accept that the prophets AND scriptures are fallible then you are left with NOTHING to trust in. What is the point of having and prophet and having the scriptures if you can’t trust in them? It is a sad state to be in.

    Darrell

  27. 27 Brad
    November 13, 2008 at 2:35 pm

    Agreed Darrell – still curious as to Seth’s reply.

    Current church material (e.g. the LDS website quotes I mentioned) still advocate that the prophets (both current and past) can ALWAYS be trusted, that their teachings REFLECT God’s will, and are to be STRICTLY followed.

    That’s hard to get away from.

  28. 28 Susan Brown
    November 16, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    Judgement day will not be scary for the true believer, AMEN! Jesus will come in the air (this is not His 2nd coming as he doesn’t come to earth), those that have died believing in Jesus’ finished work on the cross, their bodies will rise and meet their souls (which have been in Heaven since they died) and they will join Jesus in the air; then we who are alive will also join Him. We won’t have to die, wow! This all happens before Revelation 4. You see the church is not mentioned after that, the rest of the bad stuff happens to those that have denied the true faith.
    The judgement true Christians face is more like the judge awarding an olympic medal in a ceremony. The Beema seat judgement is where all believers get their REWARDS for things done for Christ. It is not a punishment as our sins were forgotten the moment we believed.
    The 2nd Coming of Christ to the earth is the great and terrible day that all non-believers should fear. Once the Christians are caught up in the air with the Lord, the judgement of the LORD begins on earth.
    So if the unbeliever won’t believe in Christ now, when they can do so without much persecution, they most likely won’t during the time of tribulation when they will be beheaded for their faith and also if they don’t take the mark of Satan.
    A great place to go to get a awesome study of the Attributes of God and a study of Christ is
    Blue Letter Bible Institute. You can download, for free, Dr. David Hockings teachings directly from the Scriptures on these two subjects. He is a Dr. of Hebrew, Greek and Jewish Culture.
    If you do not worship and follow the ONE TRUE GOD, you are truly in for a bad day come judgement day. Why do think Jesus said, “But who do you say that I AM?” It is the most important question in the world.
    Good luck!

  29. November 17, 2008 at 1:39 am

    I didn’t say anything about “following the prophet.”

    I was talking about inerrancy, as most Evangelicals understand the term.

    We believe in following the prophet. But we do not have a doctrine of inerrancy (whatever some lay Mormons may believe).

    1 Nephi 19:6

    “Nevertheless, I do not write anything upon plates save it be that I think it be sacred. And now, if I do err, even did they err of old; not that I would excuse myself because of other men, but because of the weakness which is in me, according to the flesh, I would excuse myself.”

    Mormon 8:17 speaking about the entirety of the Book of Mormon:

    “And if there be faults they be the faults of a man. But behold, we know no fault; nevertheless God knoweth all things; therefore, he that condemneth, let him be aware lest he shall be in danger of hell fire.”

    And Mormon 9:31:

    “Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.”

    Mormon 9:33 speaking of the limitations of the the condensed nature of Reformed Egyptian:

    “And if our plates had been sufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no imperfection in our record.”

    You are all, of course, aware of the Article of Faith about the Bible being translated correctly.

    Inerrancy is refuted by these passages.

  30. November 17, 2008 at 1:47 am

    As for the idea that the slogan of “follow the prophet” somehow suggests that prophets are infallible, I would reject that. First, it seems to me that if our scriptures from past prophets are fallible, we should hardly expect our living prophets to be any different. Secondly, I think the idea is refuted in D&C 107.

    Basically, D&C 107 lays out the authority structure of the LDS Church.

    Verses 30-32 speak of quorums – the Twelve Apostles are one quorum, the First Presidency is another, and combined quorums of the Seventy are a third. All are equal in authority. Here’s the passage:

    30 The decisions of these quorums, or either of them, are to be made in all righteousness, in holiness, and lowliness of heart, meekness and long suffering, and in faith, and virtue, and knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity;
    31 Because the promise is, if these things abound in them they shall not be unfruitful in the knowledge of the Lord.
    32 And in case that any decision of these quorums is made in unrighteousness, it may be brought before a general assembly of the several quorums, which constitute the spiritual authorities of the church; otherwise there can be no appeal from their decision.

    I would put heavy emphasis on verse 32, which gives the possibility that the General Authorities, acting as quorums, might possibly make an unrighteous decision.

    Now we get to verses 79-84. Keep in mind that the “President of the High Priesthood” means the president of the Melchizedek Priesthood – or in other words, the current prophet and president of the Church. Here’s the process for disciplining the prophet:

    79 And the Presidency of the council of the High Priesthood shall have power to call other high priests, even twelve, to assist as counselors; and thus the Presidency of the High Priesthood and its counselors shall have power to decide upon testimony according to the laws of the church.
    80 And after this decision it shall be had in remembrance no more before the Lord; for this is the highest council of the church of God, and a final decision upon controversies in spiritual matters.
    81 There is not ANY person belonging to the church who is exempt from this council of the church.
    82 And inasmuch as a PRESIDENT of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;
    83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.
    84 Thus, NONE shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God, that all things may be done in order and in solemnity before him, according to truth and righteousness.
    (emphasis mine)

    Note in verse 81 that it says NONE are exempt from the laws of the Church. Follow that with a procedure for judging transgression of a prophet and I’d say the meaning here is pretty darn clear.

    Of course, you will never hear these passages explained or emphasized in a typical LDS ward. I’ve never heard it in decades of active Church service. I was rather surprised when an LDS blogger pointed them out to me about 4 years ago. But even if the LDS membership are unaware of these verses and Church teaching ignores them, they remain there. And they are pretty plain to read.

    But, in spite of the fallibility of the prophets and the scriptures, do I still have confidence in them?

    I do.

  31. November 17, 2008 at 4:53 am

    One more verse I forgot – D&C 1:24:

    Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

  32. 32 Darrell
    November 17, 2008 at 5:32 pm

    Seth,

    What you have demonstrated here is my point exactly…

    If, as you say, the prophets are fallible AND the scriptures are fallible you have nothing to rely on. How do you know what you are following is of God? Perhaps the scriptures from D&C you site above are WRONG and the quorums of the church are always right? You can never know because, as you say, the scriptures are fallible. Then again, perhaps JS was wrong in his translation of the BOM and the BOM is a complete fraud… you never know since the prophets are fallible.

    Under this scenario you can NEVER be sure if what you are following is of God or not. You are left wandering in the darkness. Sounds like under your flavor of mormonism that is exactly where you are. I find that sad. What is crazy about this is that the history of the bible shows it is incredibly accurate and reliable. In addition, the bible itself speaks of its infallibility. I will chose to rely upon it as the word of God and place my confidence in Him rather than the ever changing doctrines of an institution of man.

    Darrell

  33. 33 Brad
    November 17, 2008 at 6:40 pm

    Seth, under your scenario, then who is right, and how can we ever know? The prophets? Maybe, maybe not. The LDS scriptures? Maybe, maybe not. Non-mormons? Maybe, maybe not.

    You’d never know – you’d always have to wonder. What if YOU interpret a prophet’s particular POV to be solely his opinion, and not doctrine, and something that shouldn’t be followed, while a different Mormon interprets that the prophet’s same POV is doctrine, and is to be followed. Which of you has it right, since neither the prophet nor the scriptures can be viewed as infallible?

    Further in your argument, your using words from potentially fallible scriptures to prove that prophets can, indeed, be fallible? Do you really not see the logical circles in that?

  34. November 17, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    Darrell,

    Can you rely on your wife?

    Brad,

    If you want to talk logical circles, fine.

    How about imposing a doctrine of inerrancy on the Bible, when NO SUCH DOCTRINE can be found within the pages of the Bible. If the Bible really is inerrant and sufficient, then where do you get off imposing an EXTRA-BIBLICAL doctrine on it.

    Can you not see the logical circles in that?

    Frankly, your logical circles are worse than mine.

  35. 35 Brad
    November 17, 2008 at 7:51 pm

    Seth, try 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God-breathed…”

    Then try Titus 1:2 “…God, who does not lie…”

    And although you tried to deflect our questions, by posing questions of your own, you still haven’t answered them, Seth.

    We’re not using logical circles. We claim complete innerancy of Scripture, based on what Scripture tells us, but do not claim to be “led” by any prophet, whether we think he is infallible or not.

    If, as you say, you believe the D&C undermines any theory of infallible prophets, then why the writings and ideas on the lds.org website which suggest only to follow the prophet, and that he can and is to be relied upon as leading people to God’s will (as I explained in post #25)?

    If the D&C means what you think it does, yet your own religion’s website to an outside world says, when addressing the subject of prophets, to follow them, and doesn’t limit that to anything or make any mention of ONLY following them during certain times or under certain conditions or ONLY if you think they’re right, AND in fact gives LDS scriptures (from D&C 1) to support the very fact that their words SHOULD be followed (again, with no mention to a conditional following, but to an unconditional following), then how is that to be reconciled with each other? Your statements are conflicting with the LDS website (and the D&C scriptures it provides). It doesn’t seem to add up.

  36. 36 Darrell
    November 17, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    “Can you rely on your wife?”

    Your willingness to equate the trust you place in your spouse with the trust you should place in God just goes to show how far off your concept a holy, eternal, transcendent God is. God is not a man who progressed to become a God, so I cannot even come close to comparing my trust in another human to my trust in Him and His word. Sorry.

    Darrell

  37. 37 Susan
    November 17, 2008 at 9:43 pm

    Here are some other helpful references in regard to the inerrancy of Scripture:

    “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:20-21

    “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.” 2 Peter 3:15-17

  38. November 17, 2008 at 10:21 pm

    Merely pointing out that you don’t need 100% to get where you need to be Darrell.

    Brad, how does this statement:

    “All Scripture is God-breathed…”

    equal inerrancy?

  39. November 17, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    Likewise Susan, I see those scriptures as equally consistent with God as the source, but a flawed human being as the middle-man. Inerrancy is not demanded by any of those scriptures.

  40. 40 Darrell
    November 17, 2008 at 11:46 pm

    “Merely pointing out that you don’t need 100% to get where you need to be Darrell.”

    See, this is where I think you are entirely wrong. If you cannot trust that the scripture you are reading is accurate and you cannot trust that the teachings you are receiving are accurate THEN YOU CANNOT KNOW IF WHAT YOU ARE DOING WILL GET YOU INTO HEAVEN. The bottom line is, Seth, since you cannot rely on your scripture or your leadership to be right, HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU ARE FOLLOWING TRUTH? You don’t!!

    You see, in reality, God is ALWAYS RIGHT. And, as He has told us and proof shows us, we CAN rely on the bible to be right… it is God’s word. So I know that I am following truth… it has been shown to me both historically and through my faith that it is truth and I can trust it 100% of the time. God is right 100% of the time… I don’t have to rely on (as you do) errant scriptures and a fallible leadership that I cannot trust in.

    Darrell

  41. 41 Susan
    November 18, 2008 at 1:14 am

    I’m praying for ya Seth :)

  42. 42 Brad
    November 18, 2008 at 3:44 pm

    Well, Seth, if you NEED more evidence other than the fact that God Himself inspired Scripture, that’s why I provided the other verse in Titus 1:2, which shows that God doesn’t lie. Therefore, if God inspired Scripture, and God doesn’t lie, then Scripture, by those very definitions, MUST be truth, thus, by definition, there can’t be errors, otherwise there wouldn’t be all truth in Scripture.

    Of course, if you don’t WANT to believe it, then nothing will convince you otherwise, Seth.

    Further, the Scriptures Susan provided are also clear evidence that men were inspired to write the Bible by the Holy Spirit, thus if God doesn’t lie, and inspired all Scripture, then by definition, what the men wrote would no more be susceptible to error than if God Himself put pen to paper.

    Again, if you don’t WANT to believe it, then nothing will convince you otherwise, Seth.

    You can’t just believe parts of the Bible, or say parts of it are in error and parts aren’t. That’s inconsistent with what the Bible itself says. You either have to believe all of it, or you have to throw all of it out. There’s no middle ground.

    Where do you stand on that, Seth? Do you believe all of it, or do you throw it all out?

  43. November 18, 2008 at 10:27 pm

    Yeah Brad, but you’re only providing half the equation:

    God-breathed inspiration + medium of a flawed human prophet = Scripture.

    You keep leaving out that human element.

    Or do you believe that God shuts off the prophet’s brain for a couple hours and takes over his motor functions while he’s at his writing desk?

    That would be extremely creepy, but very Calvinist – I’ll grant you that.

  44. 44 Darrell
    November 19, 2008 at 12:14 am

    “Yeah Brad, but you’re only providing half the equation:

    God-breathed inspiration + medium of a flawed human prophet = Scripture.”

    Read it again Seth… it does not say “all INSPIRATION is God breathed”… it says “all SCRIPTURE is God breathed”. Try again!!

    Darrell

  45. November 19, 2008 at 1:13 am

    I understand that Darrell.

    But the fact remains that Paul wrote those epistles. Not God.

    Therefore, they can only be inerrant if Paul was not actually a factor in their authorship. Meaning divine mind control basically.

    Do you believe in divine mind control?

  46. 46 Darrell
    November 19, 2008 at 2:43 am

    I believe that a holy, transcendant, omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient God can and does make sure that what we have today in the bible is His word. After-all…

    1) He created the world
    2) He parted the red sea
    3) He freed the Isralites from Egypt
    4) He created everyone of the billions of stars in the sky
    5) He is able to listen to MILLIONS OF PEOPLE who are speaking to Him at once
    6) He is able to ANSWER EVERYONE OF THEIR PRAYERS AT THE SAME TIME
    7) He numbers the hairs on EVERYBODY’S heads
    8) He has always existed and will exist forever
    9) He knows what I am going to say BEFORE I ever say it
    Etc, etc, etc

    I think you get the point that it would be pretty easy for a God this great to make sure that the scripture we read today in the bible is correct. It IS God breathed. How He did it… I do not know… but I do believe He did it.

    Darrell

  47. 47 Stephanie
    November 19, 2008 at 2:48 am

    Good explanation, Darrell.

  48. November 19, 2008 at 4:25 am

    So, do you believe in divine mind control?

    If not, you have not guarantee of inerrancy.

  49. 49 Darrell
    November 19, 2008 at 10:56 am

    Seth,

    Do you consider yourself so all knowing as to say that the ONLY WAY God could make sure the scripture we have today inerrant is do perform what you define as “divine mine control”?

    Darrell

  50. 50 Darrell
    November 19, 2008 at 10:57 am

    OOOPS! I meant “divine mind control”… too early in the morning here and my fingers are not working.

    Darrell

  51. 51 Texas
    November 19, 2008 at 12:45 pm

    I think it all boils down to is “Do you trust God?” God is not a man that He should lie.
    God is going to protect His Word. He wants us to know the truth, so why would He
    allow it to be corrupted. God is far greater than us mere men and women. Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean NOT on your own understanding. Proverbs 3:5

  52. 52 Brad
    November 19, 2008 at 3:04 pm

    God-breathed inspiration + medium of a flawed human prophet = Scripture.

    You keep leaving out that human element.

    Or do you believe that God shuts off the prophet’s brain for a couple hours and takes over his motor functions while he’s at his writing desk?

    That would be extremely creepy, but very Calvinist – I’ll grant you that.

    Seth, realize that when you say this, you’re bringing God down to our level. You may not be meaning to, but you most certainly are. When you try to insert your “flawed human prophet” into the equation (which is NOT Biblical, by the way), you’re essentially saying that man had the ability to circumvent God’s will when it came to inspiring Scripture, b/c man could write whatever he wanted, and b/c of that, Scripture isn’t inerrant.

    There’s only one problem with that – the Bible doesn’t agree with you. Look back at a Scripture which Susan provided, from 2 Peter 1:20-21. Who inspired the men to write what they did, Seth? Do you think they came up with it all on their own, and then God said “not perfect, but good enough” and called it the Bible? That’s essentially the viewpoint you’re taking. You are saying that God – our omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, all-loving, Creator of the world from nothing – simply couldn’t overcome man’s ability to write what they wanted?

    If that’s the case, then that would be no god I’d want to worship. Heck, if that were the case, it would prove that God ISN’T omnipotent, b/c He couldn’t even get men to write what He wanted them to! No, I wouldn’t worship a god who couldn’t even accomplish that. And if you believe that about God, and believe that the Bible isn’t without error, then which parts are in error? How can you trust any of it? Maybe ALL of it is made up, and NONE of it is true. Where does it stop?

    I’m thankful to worship the one true God, who could accomplish His will, DESPITE imperfect men.

  53. 53 Brad
    November 19, 2008 at 3:07 pm

    Absolutely, Texas, Proverbs 3:5-6 is a GREAT way to think about this.

    And Seth, for the record, I believe the Bible was written exactly as God willed it to be written, with different styles from different people at different times, yet all saying exactly what God wanted them to say. The verbal plenary theory, to be exact.

    I can’t imagine believing as you do, that the Bible is not without error, and that God couldn’t have perfectly inspired it. What an awful place to be.

  54. 54 Susan
    November 19, 2008 at 3:52 pm

    “As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.” Isaiah 59:21 (Sounds like it will be preserved forever to me.)

    “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.” Proverbs 21:1 (Sounds like God has the sovereign authority over every human being, and those He chooses to preserve His Word will preserve His Word.)

    “Devise your strategy, but it will be thwarted; propose your plan, but it will not stand,
    for God is with us.” Isaiah 8:10 (Sounds like even if evil men devised plans to corrupt His Word, their plans would not succeed.)

    “I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted.” Job 42:2 (God said that His Words would never pass away ~Matthew 24:35~, and if that was His plan, no man can change that)

    “Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man;
    I will question you, and you shall answer me.” Job 38:2-3

    I fear for the people that will stand before this Holy and Perfect God one day, trusting in their own knowledge and wisdom and rejecting the Truth that God clearly provided in His indestructable Word.

  55. November 19, 2008 at 6:54 pm

    Yes Susan, but all of those scriptures are consistent with an ULTIMATE vindication of God, EVEN IF, flaws are in the Bible.

    Darrell, you can pass it off on other methods if you wish. Perhaps God simply manipulates all Paul’s formative experiences such that Paul could not help but write true. Perhaps God took over Paul’s motor functions to produce a perfect text. Perhaps God forces all the cosmic elements to conspire that 1 Corinthians was written correctly. Whatever.

    It all boils down to the same thing – an annihilation of human will and a removal of Paul himself as a significant factor in the text.

    And off we go into theodicy land, where Calvinism never fares very well.

    But really, if the text of the Bible is so sufficient, why do you need a PhD in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic to figure out what it’s really saying? Why was the NIV even necessary? Wasn’t God’s word perfect enough for people to figure it out on the first go-through without a bunch of translation committees? Not to mention that thinking your English NIV Bible is sufficient for understanding the “original autographs” shows a profound unawareness of how translation from one language to another works.

    Translations NEVER transmit the full meaning of the original autographs perfectly. To properly understand a Hebrew writing, you have to know Hebrew and have the full linguistic and historical context before you can even understand what the scriptures are saying.

    You will never get a full understanding of what the original autographs were saying until you know everything that went into them and have a perfect understanding of how the original languages translate into meaning. In short, you can’t 100% rely on the Bible until you are, yourself are practically omniscient.

    What is left of the idea of inerrancy but a pious sounding noise?

    Yes, I understand that you all want that 100% guarantee.

    But really Darrell, why does God have to give you a 100% guarantee of anything? What’s the theological justification for Him providing you with that?

  56. 56 Susan
    November 19, 2008 at 7:26 pm

    Seth,

    What made you choose Mormonism? How did you determine that the Mormon Church is closer to the “truth” than the other religions out there? Since you obviously don’t believe that you can know for sure.

    I’m done with the inerrancy of Scripture debate. I’m not conceding….I just see that you have your mind made up…for now :)

  57. November 19, 2008 at 10:44 pm

    I was born into it. And grew up in it.

    Then after college I went through about a year long period of questioning. Got my answers, and here I am.

    By the way, I do appreciate the prayers.

  58. 58 Darrell
    November 20, 2008 at 2:42 am

    “It all boils down to the same thing – an annihilation of human will and a removal of Paul himself as a significant factor in the text.”

    Do you believe that God knows what you are going to be at this exact minute one year from today?

    Darrell

  59. November 20, 2008 at 5:38 am

    I think He has a pretty good idea Darrell. I’m also open to the possibility that He does know exactly. But I’m also open to the idea of a God who is waiting to be surprised by us.

    Has a certain logical appeal anyway. If our actions are predetermined, there is no way you can assert that free will actually exists. And love and allegiance given freely is of infinitely more value than when given by force. I would say that God prefers the former.

  60. 60 Darrell
    November 20, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Seth,

    In your opinion, is God Omniscient?

    Darrell

  61. 61 Susan
    November 21, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    I love the reference that David H. Stern uses frequently in the Jewish New Testiment Commentary concerning predestination vs. freewill (found originally in the writings of the Mishna by Rabbi Akiva ~Avot 3:15~):

    “All is forseen and free will is given.”

    It’s a concept that I can’t wrap my mind around, but I believe it to be true. God is outside of time, so He sees all things. But being able to see the choices we make before we make them, doesn’t imply that He made the choice for us.

    Seth – thanks for anwering my question. And I consider it an honor to be lifting you up in my prayers.


Comments are currently closed.

November 2008
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Blog Stats

  • 182,278 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 998 other followers


%d bloggers like this: