Bible, Mormonism, Great Apostacy

[why_me]

The Jews were prone to omit Christ in the Old Testament? You do know that they were looking forward to the Messiah (the Annointed), don’t you? And you do know that the Old Testament was written before Jesus was born? (The New Testament is about the New Covenant that Jesus the Christ–meaning the Annointed-- inaugarated.) Why would His name be in the Old Testament?

Justin Martyr, a philosopher who lived in the middle of the second century, leveled the following accusation against the Jews: “from the ninety-fifth (ninety-sixth) Psalm they have taken away this short saying of the words of David: ‘From the wood.’ For when the passage said, ‘Tell ye among the nations, the Lord hath reigned from the wood,’ they have left, ‘Tell ye among the nations, the Lord hath reigned.’”,28 Justin’s antagonist, Trypho downplayed the accusation by saying "Whether [or not] the rulers of the people have erased any portion of the Scriptures, as you affirm, God knows; but it seems incredible."29

Corruptions were beginning to show their faces after the death of christ as power struggles began. To assume that all was well with the scriptures is far from the truth. We can only assume what was left out of the bible or not included.

 

[John_Larocque]

Justin Martyr is saying the Jews were rejecting the Septuagint canon. Which the Jews were doing at the time Justin wrote the dialogue. Justin is talking about current events. The Protestants rejected the Septuagint 1400 years later and the Mormons followed the Protestants. If you want to believe the Jewish rejection of the Septuagint is a corruption, then the bible the Mormons use is corrupt. The Catholic Church still uses the Septuagint.

Not quite. St. Jerome, with reluctance, included the LXX-only books in his translation of the Old Testament, but in large part, the Latin Vulgate reflects the proto-Masoretic text of its day. (I have been told, outside of Jeremiah and Isaiah, the Peshitta also has a similar textual base). The only exception to the rule was the Psalter - the Latin church went with St. Jerome’s Psalter from the LXX, not with his translation from the hebrew.

Incidently, the See of Alexandria was rife with Platonism, neo-Platonism and Origenism, up until the time of St Cyril of Alexandria’s uncle (the one who helped depose St. John Chrysostom). Part and parcel were Platonist ideas including the pre-existence of souls and the eternity of creation. In the great battle between Jerusalem and the Academy, it was the latter who lost out.

 

[Rv_Cain_Spencer]

The thread is about the Mormons, no Jews. Look at post #1. I was replying to that. I brought up the Jews in order to show the inconsistency of the Catholic argument. The Catholic argument that the Catholic Church gave us the Bible, therefore Mormons (and others) who believe in the Apostasy of the early Christian Church have no right to use it, would be like the Jews arguing that they gave the world the Old Testament, therefore the Christians who believe the Jewish religion is not the true religion have no right to use it.

That is beside the point. Mormons also believe that the early Christianity apostatized.

…Zerinus… jews were the true religion… but they should have moved on by now. They can use their old testament, but they cannot take ours away. It is complicated but simple also. I have a very strange view of mormons. A view I cannot put into words easily. But the CC did indeed give us the bible because of this very simple reason; the apostles were the new testament before it was written as words and they were also the christian church before it was in existance also. Therefore they were the Catholic Church & NT then, just as they still are the New Testament and Catholic Church now.

 

[Malena60]

Remember that the LDS accept the Bible as the word of God as far as it is translated correctly, which seems to acknowledge that in the transmission of the original texts, things may have been added, deleted, etc.

I’m not sure where the idea that the LDS aren’t grateful for those that copied and circulated the Bible (whether they think they are Catholics, Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, the “undivided church”, etc that did so, and not just one group) so that we have it today, comes from.

You know what is the problem with this. That you are allowing yourself to believe that they DO believe in the same bible that we do but what they do believe is in the bible that someone in late 1800 decided what wording was fitted for the new church he was creating. Because some wording was not in accordance with what he will preach then he changed it.

Also, the KJB, the one hJS used is missing some books that protestants decided were not relevant when they translate the bible.

Don’t you all see that this is not God’s hand working but someone else? Why will God inspire someone to write something and be part of the bible and later decide it should be taken out?

John Smith was a fraud, and I pray for you that you can learn and understand your catholic faith before converting to a LDS member, this will confuse you even more. Go and pray in front of Jesus in the Eucharist and ask him to help you find the truth.

 

[Stephen168]

Well, I guess Justine the martyr must have been mistaken. You can read the quotations from the link that I posted.
Stephen168;6346774:

Justin Martyr is saying the Jews were rejecting the Septuagint canon. Which the Jews were doing at the time Justin wrote the dialogue. Justin is talking about current events. The Protestants rejected the Septuagint 1400 years later and the Mormons followed the Protestants. If you want to believe the Jewish rejection of the Septuagint is a corruption, then the bible the Mormons use is corrupt. The Catholic Church still uses the Septuagint.

Not quite. St. Jerome, with reluctance, included the LXX-only books in his translation of the Old Testament, but in large part, the Latin Vulgate reflects the proto-Masoretic text of its day. (I have been told, outside of Jeremiah and Isaiah, the Peshitta also has a similar textual base). The only exception to the rule was the Psalter - the Latin church went with St. Jerome’s Psalter from the LXX, not with his translation from the hebrew.

not quite? I’m not following you. What do the thoughts and deeds of a Catholic priest, who lived two centuries after Justin Martyr, have to do with his ‘Dialogue with Trypho?’

 

[Stephen168]

To stay with the thread: What does Justin’s ‘Dialogue with Trypho’ or the thoughts and deeds of a Catholic Priest have to do with the Catholic Church’s declaration of the bible canon and the Mormon Church’s acceptance of it?

 

[AtticusFinch]

To be fair, Mormons do not accept the Scriptures handed down to us by the Church. Joseph Smith produced his own “translation” of the King James Version which is significantly different from the Bibles found outside of Mormonism. Their view of our scripture is that it is “correct in so far as it is correctly translated.” Though I think the KJV is the “official” version, the KJV Bibles published by the CoJCoLDS centered in Salt Lake City contains many of Joseph Smith’s changes in footnotes or appendixes. I believe the RLDS use the JST as their official Bible text. If you would like to check out the Joseph Smith Translation for free and without ordering the free copy from the CoJCoLDS (which is typically delivered by a pair of friendly young men) the SWORD Project bible study software has it available for download.
crosswire.org/sword/modules/ModDisp.jsp?modType=Cults

peace

yet huge chunks are copied into the Book of Mormon almost verbatim

 

[AtticusFinch]

Mormons believe that various truths were preserved despite the supposed Great Apostasy. It would not be a surprise that they believe that the Bible was generally preserved, with various issues from transmission and translation (whether intentional or not). In the view of Mormonism, the priesthood being removed does not lead to the conclusion that the Bible could have been copied, translated, and circulated. In fact, it could be because of this supposed loss of priesthood that the original manuscripts (obviously extrapolating from the most ancient manuscripts in Greek and Hebrew we have) were changed for various reasons (again, some intentional others unintentional).

but without the Priesthood, how can the Bible have been translated correctly? I have always believed that it was the power and guidance of God that made sure the Bible kept its integrity. The LDS position on this is self-serving and indefensible

 

[zerinus]

…Zerinus… jews were the true religion… but they should have moved on by now.

Christians were the true religion, but they should have moved on by now.

They can use their old testament, but they cannot take ours away.

They can use their Bible, but they cannot take ours away.

It is complicated but simple also. I have a very strange view of mormons. A view I cannot put into words easily.

I have a very strange view of Christians!

But the CC did indeed give us the bible because of this very simple reason; the apostles were the new testament before it was written as words and they were also the christian church before it was in existance also.

That logic is valid if this logic is valid: “The Old Testament prophets were the Old Testament before it was written as words, and they were also the Jewish religion before it was in existence also.”

Therefore they were the Catholic Church & NT then, just as they still are the New Testament and Catholic Church now.

Which doesn’t make much sense to be honest; but to continue the analogy I could also add: “Therefore they were the Jewish church & OT then, just as they still are the Old Testament and Jewish religion now.”

 

[Stephen168]

The Old Testament writings were preserving by the Jews until about the second century AD when they began to reject the Septuagint. Christians held onto the Septuagint which is the basis for the Old Testament canon established by the Catholic Church. Protestants rejected the Septuagint in the 16th century for theological reasons.

There are three ways in which the Catholic Church created the New Testament.
One was the people who wrote it down were Catholic.
Two is by preserving the actual writings of the early Church and
the third is by deciding which writings should be included in the New Testament. The Table of Contents of the New Testament is Catholic Tradition adopted by the Mormon Church.

I have a question for all the Catholics here: Do you believe that the Jews gave us the Old Testament?

Referring to the three ways the Catholic Church gave the world the New Testament; the Jews gave us the Old Testament in the first and second way but the Catholic Church decided which of these writing would be in the Old Testament.

So according to the logic of the Catholics here, we have no right to use the Old Testament unless by permission from the Jews, or unless we become Jews!

No, you can use the Old Testament but know you are accepting the traditions of Judaism when you do; just as you accept the tradition of Catholicism when you use the New Testament canon.

The Catholics argue that the Mormon use of the “Catholic” Bible is inconsistent with their belief in the apostasy of the early Christian Church. By the same token, the Jews could argue that the Catholic use of the “Jewish” Bible is inconsistent with their belief in the apostasy of the Jewish religion.

No, because the Catholic Church created it own canon of the available Jewish writings, while the Mormon Church accepted the Catholic canon of the New Testament.

 

[ParkerD]

To the general reader:

Maybe it will help someone who happens to read here, to use the following analogy:

Draw a picture where in the middle of it there is a “truth box” with many, many truths from God within the box.

A person may decide what is in their personal version of the “truth box”, or they may accept the interpretation of what they have been told needs to be in it and that nothing else can possibly be in it. If I have understood somewhat correctly, a Catholic description of the “truth box” would include the Catholic Bibles, “sacred tradition” and other writings, and something described as “mysteries”.

An LDS description of the “truth box” would include the King James Translation of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, the Proclamation on the Family, the footnotes and passages added to our understanding of the Bible by means of what is referred to as the “Joseph Smith Translation” of parts of the Bible, and also many additional truths brought to the world by inspired people through the ages, plus additional truths yet to be revealed from God, plus truths that God may never reveal during the history of this world ever (so they would be “mysteries”.), plus personal revelation that may guide an individual or a family in some of their deepest questions or choices in life that impact how they live their life.

As to the Bible, how the “truths” became available from within the “truth box” is something that can be studied and appreciated, but the core point of critical importance is that a description of how one “knows” that their personal “truth box” includes the Bible, is that the Holy Spirit has born witness to the heart and mind of the person doing the reading and the thinking, that “these words are from the truth box–these words are from God.” How God provided those words to the world is interesting, and it must have happened in a “good way” ultimately because God is good and the word of God is good–but how one knows the words are from God is by revelation through the Holy Spirit–not by studying how the world received the words.

Truths emanate from God on high. Those who find some, many, and perhaps more of those truths and treasure them, find the most precious gifts in the world. The gifts of those truths are from God, not man. God is the Giver. God is the source, however the world has preserved them and shared them with each other. Thanks be to God for all the truths He has provided for His children to learn from and enjoy for their benefit and blessing.

 

[Marie5890]

To the general reader:

Maybe it will help someone who happens to read here, to use the following analogy:

Draw a picture where in the middle of it there is a “truth box” with many, many truths from God within the box.

A person may decide what is in their personal version of the “truth box”, or they may accept the interpretation of what they have been told needs to be in it and that nothing else can possibly be in it. If I have understood somewhat correctly, a Catholic description of the “truth box” would include the Catholic Bibles, “sacred tradition” and other writings, and something described as “mysteries”.

An LDS description of the “truth box” would include the King James Translation of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, the Proclamation on the Family, the footnotes and passages added to our understanding of the Bible by means of what is referred to as the “Joseph Smith Translation” of parts of the Bible, and also many additional truths brought to the world by inspired people through the ages, plus additional truths yet to be revealed from God, plus truths that God may never reveal during the history of this world ever (so they would be “mysteries”.), plus personal revelation that may guide an individual or a family in some of their deepest questions or choices in life that impact how they live their life.

As to the Bible, how the “truths” became available from within the “truth box” is something that can be studied and appreciated, but the core point of critical importance is that a description of how one “knows” that their personal “truth box” includes the Bible, is that the Holy Spirit has born witness to the heart and mind of the person doing the reading and the thinking, that “these words are from the truth box–these words are from God.” How God provided those words to the world is interesting, and it must have happened in a “good way” ultimately because God is good and the word of God is good–but how one knows the words are from God is by revelation through the Holy Spirit–not by studying how the world received the words.

Truths emanate from God on high. Those who find some, many, and perhaps more of those truths and treasure them, find the most precious gifts in the world. The gifts of those truths are from God, not man. God is the Giver. God is the source, however the world has preserved them and shared them with each other. Thanks be to God for all the truths He has provided for His children to learn from and enjoy for their benefit and blessing.

Basically it comes down to

"Thank You, God Almighty, for the Catholic Church, for it was thru Her and using Her and of Her Holy people, You gave us the Holy Bible. "

 

[AMDGtoo]

An LDS description of the “truth box” would include…the Pearl of Great Price…

Oh puleeze. Truth? Not that book. The Book of Abraham is in that. You know, the hiroglyphics that Joseph Smith found and then claimed that it was all about Abraham. Well, I think that was before the Rosetta Stone enabling folks to be able to actually read Egyptian hiroglyphics. When folks finally could, they read the hiroglypics and found that it was some sort of Egyptian prayer for the dead–not about Abraham at all! And yes, the same scroll that Joseph Smith supposedly “translated” was found and really translated.

And I’ll never forget reading my daughter’s where it said that God lives on a planet near the star Kolob. I never said a word after that. Simply closed the book. No one can convince me that Joseph Smith didn’t have one great imagination, but no one can convince me that the book is truth either.

 

[BartBurk]

This may have been addressed in an other thread but the idea of it never hit me until this morning.

Why would the LDS church accept the Bible, which from their view would be a product of the Great Apostacy, coming from the Catholic Tradition, in the first place? Since, by their own doctrines, no one had authority after the death of the last apostle.

I dont remember that issue even been addressed or thought about when I was LDS.

Just curious what the LDS Church’s stand on this? Anyone know?

Or is the LDS church sincerely grateful to the Catholic church for giving the world the Bible?

It’s just one of those cog. dis. things for me at the moment.

TIA.

Don’t the Protestants accept the Bible even thought they believed the Catholic Church apostatized from the original faith to one degree or another?

 

[AMDGtoo]

Don’t the Protestants accept the Bible even thought they believed the Catholic Church apostatized from the original faith to one degree or another?

But I think there is a difference between Protestants and Mormons.

Protestants think there needed to be a “nudging” back to what they assumed the early Church taught–that there had to be a “reformation”. The LDS think that there was a total apostasy–“reformation” wouldn’t even set things right. They wanted a complete “do over”.