LDS Question - How did the first church fail?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xavierlives
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JMJ4,

Regarding the comments from ParkerD part 2, I located something that may interest you.
  1. If you are interested in “coins”, then you may be disappointed in that the Book of Mormon speaks of “different pieces of their gold, and of their silver”, which does not mean “coins”–it just means a unit of measure that was distinctly known and quantifiable and had an assigned value. (Alma 11:4)
There is some evidence to the units of measure mentioned by ParkerD above. I quote:

“Weights and measures in units of one, two, four, seven. With space on the plates scarce, some wonder why Mormon would take precious room to give an exhaustive, detailed description of Nephites weights and measures (Alma 11:1-20). Is is interesting that today in the highlands of Guatemala, in the isolated village of Santiago Atitlan, the same units of weights (1, 2, 4 and 7) are used in the markets. Some have suggested that this could be a bit of evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.” (Gilbert Scharffs)
 
mfbukowski said:
Interestingly, some translations say “husband of only one wife” for both translations which gives it a whole new meaning.
Click to expand...
The word for “one” in the Greek is just mia, the feminine form of eis. While I think “only one” is a correct exegesis - the most natural sense in the immediate context and the only one that fits with Paul and Christ’s entire teaching on marriage and their clear approval of celibacy - the word “only” is not actually there in the text.
 
JMJ4,

Here is something else I have located in terms of evidence, which may also spark your interest.

Steel, iron, cement, wheels, silk, linen, horses, elephants, barleys, highways, metal plates, etc.

*For nearly a century after Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon, such things were considered anachronisms. Today, evidence of such items has been found, mostly by non-LDS scholars. For example, the Book of Mormon mentions “barley” (Welch, 1992, 130). Scholars made this discovery in Mesoamerica in recent years. Horses, believed to have been first introduced by the Spaniards, were mentioned in the Book of Mormon. New findings show the accounts of horses in Book of Mormon times should not be considered “erroneous or unhistorical” *(Welch 1992, 98-100)

(Gilbert Scharffs, 2002, 106)
 
JMJ4,

This is an article from Hope of Israel Ministry, which I ran into a while ago and seems to be very interesting, especially because they are another organization having nothing to do with the LDS Church. It might be worthwhile investigating their claim.

hope-of-israel.org/hebinusa.htm
 
evanfaust said:
JMJ4,

Here is something else I have located in terms of evidence, which may also spark your interest.

Steel, iron, cement, wheels, silk, linen, horses, elephants, barleys, highways, metal plates, etc.

*For nearly a century after Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon, such things were considered anachronisms. Today, evidence of such items has been found, mostly by non-LDS scholars. For example, the Book of Mormon mentions “barley” (Welch, 1992, 130). Scholars made this discovery in Mesoamerica in recent years. Horses, believed to have been first introduced by the Spaniards, were mentioned in the Book of Mormon. New findings show the accounts of horses in Book of Mormon times should not be considered “erroneous or unhistorical” *(Welch 1992, 98-100)

(Gilbert Scharffs, 2002, 106)
Click to expand...
Before any of this matters, LDS scholars have to establish why evidence concentrated in Mesoamerica alone can give plausibility to a story that entails significant events involving massive populations in North America, on the East Coast and the Great Plains, which Joseph Smith claimed by revelation to be the locations of major military actions in the BOM. This leaves Mormons with the problem of explaining the improbable inequity in the distribution of historical artifacts: for if Nephite civilization was such that it left evidence in South America, why is North America barren of any such items? Without a meaningful answer to that question, South American findings strengthen the case against the BOM, by underscoring the deficiency of evidence in North America, which is the only place where Joseph Smith ever claimed that specific locations in the BOM existed. The inclusion of Mesoamerica as a BOM location is a serious possibility, but every apparently helpful artifact found there, in the absence of corroborating artifacts in North America, digs the hole yet deeper for the case that LDS archaeologists are trying to make.
 
evanfaust said:
JMJ4,

Regarding the comments from ParkerD part 2, I located something that may interest you.
  1. If you are interested in “coins”, then you may be disappointed in that the Book of Mormon speaks of “different pieces of their gold, and of their silver”, which does not mean “coins”–it just means a unit of measure that was distinctly known and quantifiable and had an assigned value. (Alma 11:4)
There is some evidence to the units of measure mentioned by ParkerD above. I quote:

“Weights and measures in units of one, two, four, seven. With space on the plates scarce, some wonder why Mormon would take precious room to give an exhaustive, detailed description of Nephites weights and measures (Alma 11:1-20). Is is interesting that today in the highlands of Guatemala, in the isolated village of Santiago Atitlan, the same units of weights (1, 2, 4 and 7) are used in the markets. Some have suggested that this could be a bit of evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.” (Gilbert Scharffs)
Click to expand...
Most, however, would say that this is a huge and desperate stretch for confirming evidence. If these people were really the lost tribe of israel, you would think they would have some kind of confirming tradition. The fact taht they recognize the same units of weights means nothing on its own.
 
Hello evenfaust and ParkerD -

Thank you for your responses. Please know that I could not possibly accept the Hope of Israel Ministry as a credible source in the study of archaeology. Archaeology being the “scientific study of material remains (as fossil relics, artifacts, and monuments) of past human life and activities.”

I am not sure if you are restricted from accessing credible sources or if none have ever been brought to your attention. Either way, I would like to suggest Biblical Archaeological Review magazine and it is also available online. It is a great way for “us amateurs” to see what is involved in the true science of archaeology.

There you will see it is very common for ancient artifacts to survive thousands of years despite new civilizations coming along and building right on top of them. Included in the findings are some of the very earliest Christian churches!

Isn’t it wonderful to know that God has left behind so many artifacts for us to see and that they can help strengthen our faith?
 
Evanfaust,
Becfor eyou get all excited about tangential issues like archeological finds supporting the BOM, you still have to get past the fundamental credibility issues of Joseph Smith. As you know, we have shown him to be a serial adulterer and you agree that he had sex with the wives of at least 10 other men. How could a true prophet of God behave in a way that is forbidden in scripture (the 6th commandment is afterall, thou shall not commit adultery)? I know Joseph Smith claims the rules changed but eternal truths do not change. What is evil, remains evil. This man was not from God.
 
JMJ4 said:
Hello evenfaust and ParkerD -

Thank you for your responses. Please know that I could not possibly accept the Hope of Israel Ministry as a credible source in the study of archaeology. Archaeology being the “scientific study of material remains (as fossil relics, artifacts, and monuments) of past human life and activities.”

I am not sure if you are restricted from accessing credible sources or if none have ever been brought to your attention. Either way, I would like to suggest Biblical Archaeological Review magazine and it is also available online. It is a great way for “us amateurs” to see what is involved in the true science of archaeology.

There you will see it is very common for ancient artifacts to survive thousands of years despite new civilizations coming along and building right on top of them. Included in the findings are some of the very earliest Christian churches!

Isn’t it wonderful to know that God has left behind so many artifacts for us to see and that they can help strengthen our faith?
Click to expand...
JMJ4,
I did stop by the library today, and briefly here are several books with references to the subject of my prior post you had inquired about:

A River Running West–The Life of John Wesley Powell; Donald Worster, Oxford University Press, NY, 2001, pp. 397, 399, 404, and 405. “whole shiploads of America’s relics going abroad…” “ancient burial mounds…”

Beyond the Hundredth Meridian; Wallace Stegner, Riverside Press, MA, 1953; pp. 252, 257. “For some tribes not even vocabularies had been preserved, few records of the legendry and lore, only random collections of artifacts…”

See also Mysteries of the Mexican Pyramids; Peter Tompkins, 1976, Harper & Row, pp. xv-xvii (about the Aztec calendar and astronomy and cosmic cycles understood by the Aztecs), also read about Cortes and his wanton destruction of Tenochlitlan and its 300,000 inhabitants, who thought he was Quetzalcoatl as promised to return from the east.

Also Eyewitness to Discovery, Brian Fagan, Oxford University Press, 1996; p. 334-on by John Lloyd Stephens: “a golden age people who perished, entirely unknown.”; P. 345 (Alberto Ruiz) writes about Mayan tomb motifs, representing “life triumphing over death” with also a tree of life representing this.

Also The Art and Architecture of Ancient America, George Kubler, Penguin Books, 1975, p. 23 about the spread of styles of art from ancient Mayan cultures in central Mexico.

I personally think that the winged serpent motif (the Creator) is so plainly a related representation of the fact that Jesus Christ is represented as the serpent raised on a pole who saves Israel from fiery flying serpents, is very interesting when I have found that motif in various Ancient American cultures.

Good luck to you, and have a good day.
 
ParkerD said:
JMJ4,

I personally think that the winged serpent motif (the Creator) is so plainly a related representation of the fact that Jesus Christ is represented as the serpent raised on a pole who saves Israel from fiery flying serpents, is very interesting when I have found that motif in various Ancient American cultures.
Click to expand...
Proven to be a myth, started by the Spanish who conquered.
 
RebeccaJ said:
Proven to be a myth, started by the Spanish who conquered.
Click to expand...
You can go to a library and read the source material, RebeccaJ. These were thoroughly researched works I have cited. I realize you have no interest in doing that kind of research, but you could if you wanted to–your choice. Bye.
 
ParkerD said:
You can go to a library and read the source material, RebeccaJ. These were thoroughly researched works I have cited. I realize you have no interest in doing that kind of research, but you could if you wanted to–your choice. Bye.
Click to expand...
Thoroughly researched to find what you wanted to find, which is not research. Not accepting research that shows what you have found is questionable, is not even in the realm of making a reasonable assertion.

Telling me “bye” like some 14 year old doesn’t change this.
 
ParkerD- Thanks for the book references. I will do a little research on them as well.

Have you had a chance to look at the Biblical Archaeological Review online?

By the way, can I ask a question (that should probably be on a different LDS thread)?

It states on page 8 of The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ “Some inspired people, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, recognized that practices and doctrines had been changed or lost. They tried to reform the churches to which they belonged.”

To what church did Martin Luther belong?
 
JMJ4 said:
ParkerD- Thanks for the book references. I will do a little research on them as well.

Have you had a chance to look at the Biblical Archaeological Review online?

By the way, can I ask a question (that should probably be on a different LDS thread)?

It states on page 8 of The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ “Some inspired people, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, recognized that practices and doctrines had been changed or lost. They tried to reform the churches to which they belonged.”

To what church did Martin Luther belong?
Click to expand...
JMJ4,
If you are serious in asking this question, then Luther was Catholic until he was excommunicated in 1521 by Pope Leo X.

If he had had his way, the Catholic church would have reformed within (remember, the idea of stopping the practice of “indulgences” and all the reformations he outlined in the Ninety-Five Theses, and the counter-Reformation that basically was somewhat of a result of what he started). It appears he didn’t like that a church was begun that used his name as its title–he would have taken its name only from Christ, if he had started a church, but he didn’t.

I disagree with many of his ideas, but I am grateful he showed people that they didn’t need to subscribe to a belief in the sole authority of the church for understanding what God wanted them to do, and certainly for his translation of the Bible into readable German for the German people, and for his desire to do the will of God even if it was contrary to the “will” of the church.
 
Evanfaust,
Becfor eyou get all excited about tangential issues like archeological finds supporting the BOM, you still have to get past the fundamental credibility issues of Joseph Smith. As you know, we have shown him to be a serial adulterer and you agree that he had sex with the wives of at least 10 other men. How could a true prophet of God behave in a way that is forbidden in scripture (the 6th commandment is afterall, thou shall not commit adultery)? I know Joseph Smith claims the rules changed but eternal truths do not change. What is evil, remains evil. This man was not from God

Evanfaust responds,
PaulC…The credibility issue is in your mind and in the mind of unbelievers! To me and in the mind of many millions Joseph was and is a Prophet of God.

How could an adulterer

1 - Bring an angel from Heaven in the presence other three men?

2 - How could an adulterer see and converse with Jesus Christ in the presence of another witness.

3 – How could an adulterer bring Moses, Elijah and many other prophets in the presence of another witness?

4 – How could an adulterer be ordained by John the Baptist, Peter, James and John in the presence of another witness?

5 – How could an adulterer and a liar cause another Pentecost where angels and the Lord Himself appear in front of 1000 people?

And I could go on…and on…and on…But I think you got the idea!

You and I read the same article and yet you concluded that Joseph definitely committed adultery, while it states that there is no conclusive proof of children or sex. The only thing that seems to be clear is that Joseph married or sealed to these women for eternity. As I said before, even if is proven that he had children or sex with these women does not make of him an adulterer, simply because he was married to them. However you jump to the conclusion that he had sex with all of them just to fit your pre-conceived notion that Mormonism is a fraud.

But I am not a bit surprised of your misguided understanding of Joseph Smith because even Jesus was mistreated in much the same way as Joseph Smith. He was accused of having a devil (Matthew 11:18; John 8:48; 10:20) and of being in league with the devil (Matthew 9:34). He was termed a “glutton” and “winebibber,” who consorted with sinners (Matthew 11:19). Betrayed by one of his closest associates (Matthew 26:47-50), he was ultimately arrested, while all of his disciples forsook him and fled (Matthew 26:56). He was led away and accused of various crimes, with supporting testimony from false witnesses (Matthew 26:59-60). Among the list of accusations, we find blasphemy (Matthew 26:65; compare to John 10:33), sedition (Luke 23:2, 5, 14), and treason (for having declared himself king). He was spat upon and struck by both Jews (Matthew 26:67) and Romans (Matthew 27:30), and the latter also whipped him (Matthew 27:26). In the end, he was tried and executed for treason (Matthew 27:37), the same crime of which Joseph Smith was accused when imprisoned at Carthage.

How could anyone expect Joseph Smith to be accepted by all when the savior himself was misunderstood and rejected by so many.
 
ParkerD said:
JMJ4,
If you are serious in asking this question, then Luther was Catholic until he was excommunicated in 1521 by Pope Leo X.

If he had had his way, the Catholic church would have reformed within (remember, the idea of stopping the practice of “indulgences” and all the reformations he outlined in the Ninety-Five Theses, and the counter-Reformation that basically was somewhat of a result of what he started). It appears he didn’t like that a church was begun that used his name as its title–he would have taken its name only from Christ, if he had started a church, but he didn’t.

I disagree with many of his ideas, but I am grateful he showed people that they didn’t need to subscribe to a belief in the sole authority of the church for understanding what God wanted them to do, and certainly for his translation of the Bible into readable German for the German people, and for his desire to do the will of God even if it was contrary to the “will” of the church.
Click to expand...
How did Luther know the will of God? Luther recognized that he was a sinful man. So what did he do? Create a Faith paradigm where sin didn’t matter, all you needed was faith to be saved. Do you really think God changed his mind about sin, just because Martin Luther wanted him to? He famously wrote to one of his followers to Sin Boldly to show their faith if God’s mercy. Do you really think God wanted people to Sin Boldly?

Jesus taught the Apostles the truths about salvation. He send the Holy Spirit to remind and inspire them to teach those eternal truths to the nations. The Catholic Church has held and taught those truths for 2000 years. Those truths never change and those that deny those truths are none the less responsible for following them or risk being condemned.
 
evanfaust said:
Evanfaust,
Becfor eyou get all excited about tangential issues like archeological finds supporting the BOM, you still have to get past the fundamental credibility issues of Joseph Smith. As you know, we have shown him to be a serial adulterer and you agree that he had sex with the wives of at least 10 other men. How could a true prophet of God behave in a way that is forbidden in scripture (the 6th commandment is afterall, thou shall not commit adultery)? I know Joseph Smith claims the rules changed but eternal truths do not change. What is evil, remains evil. This man was not from God

Evanfaust responds,
PaulC…The credibility issue is in your mind and in the mind of unbelievers! To me and in the mind of many millions Joseph was and is a Prophet of God.

How could an adulterer

1 - Bring an angel from Heaven in the presence other three men?

2 - How could an adulterer see and converse with Jesus Christ in the presence of another witness.

3 – How could an adulterer bring Moses, Elijah and many other prophets in the presence of another witness?

4 – How could an adulterer be ordained by John the Baptist, Peter, James and John in the presence of another witness?

5 – How could an adulterer and a liar cause another Pentecost where angels and the Lord Himself appear in front of 1000 people?

And I could go on…and on…and on…But I think you got the idea!

You and I read the same article and yet you concluded that Joseph definitely committed adultery, while it states that there is no conclusive proof of children or sex. The only thing that seems to be clear is that Joseph married or sealed to these women for eternity. As I said before, even if is proven that he had children or sex with these women does not make of him an adulterer, simply because he was married to them. However you jump to the conclusion that he had sex with all of them just to fit your pre-conceived notion that Mormonism is a fraud.

But I am not a bit surprised of your misguided understanding of Joseph Smith because even Jesus was mistreated in much the same way as Joseph Smith. He was accused of having a devil (Matthew 11:18; John 8:48; 10:20) and of being in league with the devil (Matthew 9:34). He was termed a “glutton” and “winebibber,” who consorted with sinners (Matthew 11:19). Betrayed by one of his closest associates (Matthew 26:47-50), he was ultimately arrested, while all of his disciples forsook him and fled (Matthew 26:56). He was led away and accused of various crimes, with supporting testimony from false witnesses (Matthew 26:59-60). Among the list of accusations, we find blasphemy (Matthew 26:65; compare to John 10:33), sedition (Luke 23:2, 5, 14), and treason (for having declared himself king). He was spat upon and struck by both Jews (Matthew 26:67) and Romans (Matthew 27:30), and the latter also whipped him (Matthew 27:26). In the end, he was tried and executed for treason (Matthew 27:37), the same crime of which Joseph Smith was accused when imprisoned at Carthage.

How could anyone expect Joseph Smith to be accepted by all when the savior himself was misunderstood and rejected by so many.
Click to expand...
What witnesses saw these remarkable things from Joseph Smith? Were they willing to die for what they saw as Jesus’ Apostle’s were. It seems to me that all these witnesses seemed to leave the faith, including the three witnesses that claimed to see the golden plates. And maybe, just maybe they did see something. This doesn’t mean it was from God. Remember in Galatians, when Paul says that even if an Angel was to tell you something different from the Gospel he taught (which is the Catholic Gospel), let them be accursed. The test for whether something is from God, is always to see whether it is consistent with what the Apostles were taught by Christ. And he definitely taught against Adultery, which means to have sex with another persons spouse.

Look, I have no doubt that you became a Mormon in entirely good faith and that you probably live a devout life. I feel for you here. Your most basic beliefs are being attacked which is never pleasant, particularly for Mormons because your social lives are so closely tied to your faith. In fact, I have mixed feelings about challenging you here. I am not trying to hurt you but I feel obligated to point out the obvious here. and obviously, I also want to make sure the Catholic view gets heard. Afterall, this is Catholic answers forum
 
Stephen168 said
“But you did not respond showing us the biblical proof of a Melchizedek Priesthood.
We showed you how Christ and the Apostles taught and/or set an example for a celibate clergy, but you have not shown how Christ or the Apostles taught or set an example for a polygamous clergy.

Evan comments,
If you check my posting, I actually asked you to point me out the discrepancies on the Melchizedek Priesthood. Besides, you did not prove that Jesus was not married and you did not show any scripture conclusively proving that the clergy should be celibate. In addition, the Popes only forced celibate on the priests in the year 1070. By the way you did not comment on many of the arguments I presented in the posting. As far as the polygamy, I explained before, but you made no comments. I will say it again: God has allowed polygamy to be practice by some great prophets of the past and there is nothing saying the God could not institute polygamy again. Do you see the Lord saying anywhere in the Bible that Polygamy is of the devil or that whoever practice polygamy ever again will be condemned?

And look here some other changes instituted by the Popes. Maybe you can explain why the Popes made these changes while you believe that all truth was already revealed by Christ and the Apostles. Again, I am reminding you that the Popes are not entited to revelation because they do not claim to be prophets…then I ask again why are they changing doctrines?

Infallibility of the Catholic Church

“The Church is not susceptible of being reformed in her doctrines. The Church is the work of incarnate God. Like all God’s works, it is perfect. It is, therefore, incapable of reform…”

“If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine of faith which had BEEN PREVIOUSLY HELD, that single instance would be the death blow of her claim to infallibility…” and also to her claim of being the true church!”
Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XII, page 262
FOOF – page 61

Changes that have taken place in this church.

1 – It was built upon a foundation different than that which was built by Christ. His church was built upon a foundation of: “And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone;”

2 – The worship of Saints. Approx. 375
3 – Worship of the Virgin Mary. Approx 431.
4 - The Doctrine of Purgatory. Approx. 593
5 - The imposition of religious images. Approx 788.
6 – Forced celibacy of the Priest. Approx. 1074.
7 – Use of the Rosary. Approx. 1090.
8 – The sale of indulgences. Approx. 1190.
9 – The Divine substitute of bread. Approx. 1200.
10 – The Institution of the Transubstanciation (Wherein the sacrament supposedly becomes the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ). Approx 1215.
11 – The Book of Apocalypse (Revelation) introduced into the cannon of scripture. Approx. 1546.
12 – The Inquisition of Spain. Approx. 1478.
 
Paul C
“What witnesses saw these remarkable things from Joseph Smith? Were they willing to die for what they saw as Jesus’ Apostle’s were.”

Evanfaust comments…
In fact many suffered persecution and were killed, many women were raped by the mob and many families lost all their possessions and had to flee to another state to survive. I suggest you investigate the history of the LDS Church a little better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top