Differing interpretations of Bible teachings

[teancum79]

The DNA vs. Mormnism thread got onto this tangent so I’m hoping we can move over hear.

 

[ralphinal]

Not a bad idea.

NOt ot get specific, but why do you think that your (LDS) interpretation is more authoritative than mine (Catholic)?

 

[teancum79]

Two words Living Prophet.

Aside from that I think that the scriptures for the most part mean just what they say.I find a lot of places where some very plain concepts are taken and “recontextualized” to mean something different. Like a Salvation Army guy I spoke with who felt that the entire book of James was to be used when people where in serve trials and persecution. That asking God for help to understand the scriptures was somehow bad.

 

[ralphinal]

Two words Living Prophet.

Aside from that I think that the scriptures for the most part mean just what they say.I find a lot of places where some very plain concepts are taken and “recontextualized” to mean something different. Like a Salvation Army guy I spoke with who felt that the entire book of James was to be used when people where in serve trials and persecution. That asking God for help to understand the scriptures was somehow bad.

Now, one the second part, lots of people have pushed ideology on scripture. That is not abnormal. It is one advantage of having a central Church authority to help. Both Catholic and Mormons can agree to that.

First point, living prophet. Let us begin this discussion with a simple question: does anything in the New Testement contradict the Old?

 

[teancum79]

In terms of core doctrine I’ve not found any. However in terms of practice there where some major changes Old law/New law stuff. Not killing sheep and other animals (I’m rather thankful for that one). Most of these though where really minor IE don’t kill become don’t be angry still centered on the same basic concept.

 

[ralphinal]

In terms of core doctrine I’ve not found any. However in terms of practice there where some major changes Old law/New law stuff. Not killing sheep and other animals (I’m rather thankful for that one). Most of these though where really minor IE don’t kill become don’t be angry still centered on the same basic concept.

Right. It is more of an evolution of application and change in approach, but not in dogma or teaching. Christ did not come to abolish the law but through him the law might be fulfilled.

Based on this, is it safe to say that no prophet of God can counteract, change, or make inactive the Bible? After all, if Jesus did not, why should anyone else?

 

[teancum79]

Right. It is more of an evolution of application and change in approach, but not in dogma or teaching. Christ did not come to abolish the law but through him the law might be fulfilled.

Based on this, is it safe to say that no prophet of God can counteract, change, or make inactive the Bible? After all, if Jesus did not, why should anyone else?

Um no. A prophet of God could if he was commanded to. I’m not aware of any cases where they have, but the very concept of continuing revelation is to have the news from God not just the history. I think it’s also worth mentioning that if and when an error in the Bible is there it is very much the position of a prophet to authoritatively teach what is right. Now a prophet from God is going to keep things in the same general vain, but like Christ or Moses or Abraham they have the authority to teach Gods will and make changes as needed. Without this Circumcision could not have been a religious thing the 10 commandments would be Moses 1 suggestions for a happy life. Christ’s higher new law would have been simply a new twist on the Law of Moses not a fulfilling of and end to those practices.

 

[ralphinal]

Um no. A prophet of God could if he was commanded to. I’m not aware of any cases where they have, but the very concept of continuing revelation is to have the news from God not just the history. I think it’s also worth mentioning that if and when an error in the Bible is there it is very much the position of a prophet to authoritatively teach what is right. Now a prophet from God is going to keep things in the same general vain, but like Christ or Moses or Abraham they have the authority to teach Gods will and make changes as needed. Without this Circumcision could not have been a religious thing the 10 commandments would be Moses 1 suggestions for a happy life. Christ’s higher new law would have been simply a new twist on the Law of Moses not a fulfilling of and end to those practices.

So, you are saying that a prophet can counter the previous teachings of God, even though there is no example of it in the Bible. Circumcision was required for the Jews, but Baptism is the sign of the covenant for Christians. There was no change in the religios teachings, gentiles were not under the law. Besides Jesus SAID it was a fulfilment, not just a new twist.

Assuming you are correct, what proof would a prophet need of his authority?

 

[teancum79]

A prophet is God’s spokesmen on earth. They can do what ever God tells them to.

Circumcision was an act started with Abraham. It was by revelation that it was done.

Baptism also came by revelation. If something old could not ever change than Christ would be a fraud.

Christ taught that you shall know them by their fruits. James tells us to ask God if we lack wisdom. It has also been suggested that we study the scriptures (I think in Acts somewhere, but I’m not sure). All of these actions can help a person know if a person is a prophet of God.

 

[ralphinal]

A prophet is God’s spokesmen on earth. They can do what ever God tells them to.

Circumcision was an act started with Abraham. It was by revelation that it was done.

Baptism also came by revelation. If something old could not ever change than Christ would be a fraud.

Christ taught that you shall know them by their fruits. James tells us to ask God if we lack wisdom. It has also been suggested that we study the scriptures (I think in Acts somewhere, but I’m not sure). All of these actions can help a person know if a person is a prophet of God.

Ah, but you did not tell me how a prophet proves his authority. In other words, what makes Joseph Smith acceptable and Muhammed not. How can we know that someone is authentically from God?

 

[teancum79]

Ah, but you did not tell me how a prophet proves his authority. In other words, what makes Joseph Smith acceptable and Muhammed not. How can we know that someone is authentically from God?

Do they testify of Christ? If not than I’d never rate them any more than a wise person no matter how good their ideas may be.

What are their fruits? This one tends to get a bit gray because you can look for either the great stuff Mohamed leading his people away from worshiping dumb idols. Or the negative of a religion which has many violent people and often oppress women. The same can be done with any significant person. It’s a little less cut and dry than the testifying of Christ bit.

It is also of value to see what prophecies they make. Again the eye of the beholder impacts this one. If one wanted to find a false prophecy of Christ its not hard.

“He clearly stated that if the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed he would build it back in three days. Any attempts to make it look like he was referring to his own death hare just attempts to explain away his mistake.”

Bottom line a person has to get in touch with the Holy Spirit and learn who to follow.

 

[ralphinal]

Do they testify of Christ? If not than I’d never rate them any more than a wise person no matter how good their ideas may be.

What are their fruits? This one tends to get a bit gray because you can look for either the great stuff Mohamed leading his people away from worshiping dumb idols. Or the negative of a religion which has many violent people and often oppress women. The same can be done with any significant person. It’s a little less cut and dry than the testifying of Christ bit.

It is also of value to see what prophecies they make. Again the eye of the beholder impacts this one. If one wanted to find a false prophecy of Christ its not hard.

“He clearly stated that if the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed he would build it back in three days. Any attempts to make it look like he was referring to his own death hare just attempts to explain away his mistake.”

Bottom line a person has to get in touch with the Holy Spirit and learn who to follow.

Ok. BUt how do you KNOW that you are listening to the Holy Spirit? Further, is it possible that someone can start good and finish bad?

 

[SaintTrainee]

If one wanted to find a false prophecy of Christ its not hard.

“He clearly stated that if the temple at Jerusalem was destroyed he would build it back in three days. Any attempts to make it look like he was referring to his own death hare just attempts to explain away his mistake.”

Bottom line a person has to get in touch with the Holy Spirit and learn who to follow.

There was NO mistake. On the lds website it states that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that he lived a perfect life , so my question is if Jesus is the Son of God, why would God make any mistakes through his Son? There are NO prophets in the bible that were “wrong” or false in their prophecy. If there was then you would be calling God a liar. God is all truth and all good. Satan is the father of all lies not Jesus nor God the Father. If Jesus led a perfect life then how did he make mistakes? How come no one prior to the creation of Mormonism figured these things except for JS? Maybe there is another who is trying to explain away his real motivations for creating a new false religion?

 

[teancum79]

Ok. BUt how do you KNOW that you are listening to the Holy Spirit? Further, is it possible that someone can start good and finish bad?

Yes to your second question. Judas is a perfect example.

The way I know i guess is kind of personal. I only really considered the possibility of there not being any God at all for a day or two when I was a teenager. After I got past that it was a matter of what made the most sense and felt right. Frankly Christianity does not make nearly as much sense as other religions. Some guy surfers and dies once and that lets you get into heaven.

Anyhow semi long story short I spent several years talking to my friends, family, reading various books both in favor of and opposed to different religons and doing a lot of praying. Over time I started to put things into place. It is most amazing when your sitting down reading from the scriptures and you mind feels like it is full of light and you know what your reading really is right and not just some cool story our parents made up. That;s how I know that Christ is my Savior. From there on out its a matter of matching that soft of feeling (peace joy love and it just makes sense) that helps me to know what is from God and what is not.

So despite there being a bit more “logic” in other belief systems no where else have I found the feeling of peace that surpasses all understanding.

I don’t know if that makes a whole lot of sense, but That’s how I came to know. Sense that time there have been many more events that remind me of those feelings and confirm what I know to be right.

 

[ralphinal]

Yes to your second question. Judas is a perfect example.

The way I know i guess is kind of personal. I only really considered the possibility of there not being any God at all for a day or two when I was a teenager. After I got past that it was a matter of what made the most sense and felt right. Frankly Christianity does not make nearly as much sense as other religions. Some guy surfers and dies once and that lets you get into heaven.

Anyhow semi long story short I spent several years talking to my friends, family, reading various books both in favor of and opposed to different religons and doing a lot of praying. Over time I started to put things into place. It is most amazing when your sitting down reading from the scriptures and you mind feels like it is full of light and you know what your reading really is right and not just some cool story our parents made up. That;s how I know that Christ is my Savior. From there on out its a matter of matching that soft of feeling (peace joy love and it just makes sense) that helps me to know what is from God and what is not.

So despite there being a bit more “logic” in other belief systems no where else have I found the feeling of peace that surpasses all understanding.

I don’t know if that makes a whole lot of sense, but That’s how I came to know. Sense that time there have been many more events that remind me of those feelings and confirm what I know to be right.

Thanks for the tetimony. I love knowing how people got to where they are.

Alright, let us say that we accept the Prophet’s athority and he can change previous rulings, and even scripture. Would this be Mormon teaching?

 

[teancum79]

Thanks for the tetimony. I love knowing how people got to where they are.

Alright, let us say that we accept the Prophet’s athority and he can change previous rulings, and even scripture. Would this be Mormon teaching?

As far as I know. Its kind of an interesting thing. On the one hand a prophet generally does not alter teachings much of the law of Moses was a formalizing of long standing practices, but they must have the power to do so if needed.

 

[ralphinal]

As far as I know. Its kind of an interesting thing. On the one hand a prophet generally does not alter teachings much of the law of Moses was a formalizing of long standing practices, but they must have the power to do so if needed.

But, how do you know that a Prophet tomorrow won’t flip the world on you? At that point, are you wrong to hold to what you know?

Case in point, prior to 1978, no black was allowed the priesthood in the LDS church. There were scriptures pointing to skin color as a sign of impurity and lots of Prophets said some really bad things. Now, that has all been changed. Why? Prove that it was not changed to fit social norms. Same with multiple marriage.

 

[teancum79]

But, how do you know that a Prophet tomorrow won’t flip the world on you? At that point, are you wrong to hold to what you know?

Case in point, prior to 1978, no black was allowed the priesthood in the LDS church. There were scriptures pointing to skin color as a sign of impurity and lots of Prophets said some really bad things. Now, that has all been changed. Why? Prove that it was not changed to fit social norms. Same with multiple marriage.

prove is a very strong word. Also in dealing with LDS history don’t rely too heavily on the Journal of Discourses. The speeches recorded there where never proof read by the speakers. If you watched Bush talking you know that some times what comes out of the mouth is not what was meant and people don’t always transcribe correctly.

That being said the prevailing issue of the Priesthood can be answered simply enough. Does the LDS church have the Priesthood of God?

If yes than God can say who gets it and how does not.

If no than what was denied?

Anyhow what I have seen fairly consistent was a teaching that black people are decedents of Cain through ham’s wife. This linage was denied the blessings of the priesthood in this life for a time. Some see this as raciest, but some prospective needs to be had. no one from about 100 ad to the 1820’s had the priesthood. regardless of linage. In OT days the priesthood was often restricted to very specific linages. How much of this is for a reason beyond God said I’m not really sure, but I trust God and his prophets.

 

[ralphinal]

prove is a very strong word. Also in dealing with LDS history don’t rely too heavily on the Journal of Discourses. The speeches recorded there where never proof read by the speakers. If you watched Bush talking you know that some times what comes out of the mouth is not what was meant and people don’t always transcribe correctly.

So the Prophets may not have held the racist views that seem to be prevelant in some of the writings? Why did they not have those writings fixed? What about the quotes in the Scriptures about being black is a sign of sin?

That being said the prevailing issue of the Priesthood can be answered simply enough. Does the LDS church have the Priesthood of God?

If yes than God can say who gets it and how does not.

If no than what was denied?

Anyhow what I have seen fairly consistent was a teaching that black people are decedents of Cain through ham’s wife. This linage was denied the blessings of the priesthood in this life for a time. Some see this as raciest, but some prospective needs to be had. no one from about 100 ad to the 1820’s had the priesthood. regardless of linage. In OT days the priesthood was often restricted to very specific linages. How much of this is for a reason beyond God said I’m not really sure, but I trust God and his prophets.

Ok. The issue with Cain and Ham’s wife is for another thread. We can talk about that later.

In other words, it is a coincidence that the change was made after the civil rights movement just like multiple marrige was banned after it was banned civilly. Actually, I will accept that for the purpose of this conversation.

So, where we are is that LDS Prophets can change things, even though Biblical ones never did, including Jesus who was more than a prophet, you have to trust the Holy Spirit that is enough, and that as time goes on, the doctrines can change.

Correct?

 

[teancum79]

So the Prophets may not have held the racist views that seem to be prevelant in some of the writings? Why did they not have those writings fixed? What about the quotes in the Scriptures about being black is a sign of sin?

Ok. The issue with Cain and Ham’s wife is for another thread. We can talk about that later.

In other words, it is a coincidence that the change was made after the civil rights movement just like multiple marrige was banned after it was banned civilly. Actually, I will accept that for the purpose of this conversation.

So, where we are is that LDS Prophets can change things, even though Biblical ones never did, including Jesus who was more than a prophet, you have to trust the Holy Spirit that is enough, and that as time goes on, the doctrines can change.

Correct?

Its a lot of bother to go track someone down and make them change their book. And without proof how to make them do it. Now it is likely that many people had views that today would be called raciest. As would most people who fought to free the slaves. The time when a statement is made is very vital. That black people would someday run for president was probably not thought of by Lincon or many early civil rights activities. So finding views that today would be seen as bad and segregationist back 150+ years would have been the rebels leading the charge to help the slaves.

Links to the official information.

scriptures.lds.org/en/od/1

scriptures.lds.org/en/od/2

Way back when in the D&C there is a bit about obeying the law which we take fairly seriously. Having a practice made illegal was a factor in the decision of plural marriage. As far as the Priesthood I’ve not read anything from inside the church to support a connection to the civiel rights movement. For a group that was way ahead on tobacco being bad to get get years behind on civil rights does not add up for me.

Bible prophets did change things at times. Some practiced plural marriage. Joshua commanded the slaughter of entire cites after Moses said “thou shalt not kill”. These changes like many other though are consistent to some basic ideas. When king Saul came back from a war where he was told to kill everything and he saved a bunch he was told that obedience is better than sacrifice.
If God says to do things different than he said before that’s his call to make. My parent used to tell me to not play with matches. Latter at specific times I was told to start a fire and at other to put one out. I was always obeying the rules. Sometimes a specific action different from the norm must be taken.