Mormon doctrines are ancient according to LDS expert

[BartBurk]

mormontimes.com/DB_index.php?id=988

There’s so much proof in that article that I am considering returning to Mormonism We Catholics destroyed all of the evidence for Mormonism apparently. And experts realize the Book of Mormon is an ancient document, but won’t admit it!

It sounds like Gnosticism to me. All this would prove, if true, is that Joseph Smith wasn’t very original.

 

[Jerusha]

Well, if they want to argue an “apostasy”, that is the most logical one. And, like I have argued before, the most likely legitimate precursor of the BOM would not be ancient, but would date to 980 - 1472 AD. That is not ancient!!!

 

[PaulDupre]

That article is so full of half-truths, misdirection and mis-information that I cannot believe any educated person would take it seriously. It shows just how desperate the LDS are.

Paul

 

[mercygate]

mormontimes.com/DB_index.php?id=988

There’s so much proof in that article that I am considering returning to Mormonism We Catholics destroyed all of the evidence for Mormonism apparently. And experts realize the Book of Mormon is an ancient document, but won’t admit it!

It sounds like Gnosticism to me. All this would prove, if true, is that Joseph Smith wasn’t very original.

You are right. And so is the claim that LDS beliefs are ancient. Although the Mormon view is unique in expression, the content dates from the early second century. Gnosticism pure and simple. What’s old is new.

Christianity has never been posited upon a revelation to a single man. All of the essential truths of the faith have emerged in view of multiple witnesses.

 

[BartBurk]

That article is so full of half-truths, misdirection and mis-information that I cannot believe any educated person would take it seriously. It shows just how desperate the LDS are.

Paul

But it’s enough to make the faithful happy. That’s all the article is meant to accomplish. The article makes a lot of claims with nothing to back them up. It’s the kind of thing that will lull a lot of Mormons to sleep.

 

[PaulDupre]

But it’s enough to make the faithful happy. That’s all the article is meant to accomplish. The article makes a lot of claims with nothing to back them up. It’s the kind of thing that will lull a lot of Mormons to sleep.

Yes, I remember being a TBM. At that time, an article like this was all I needed to keep the blinders on for another little while.

So sad.
Paul

 

[Alma147]

That article is so full of half-truths, misdirection and mis-information that I cannot believe any educated person would take it seriously. It shows just how desperate the LDS are.

Paul

Your comment prompted me to go and read the article. I’m an educated person and have followed Griggs’ research in Egypt over the past dozen or so years but I don’t see that the article is “full” of half-truths or misinformation. Perhaps you could identify a few examples?

I saw one item that I thought was said poorly; but thought that it might be a limitation of the reporter who wrote the story. However, since you said it was full of this stuff, perhaps you offer a point by point critique?

Alma

 

[majick275]

the article doesn’t reference any specific Non-LDS scholars, it doesn’t reference any peer reviewed works on the subject, it doesn’t give us any specific examples of it’s claims in the form of documented evidence. it is nothing more than a group of unfounded allegations made by a BYU faculty member whose livelihood is dependent on his standing in the LDS church. point by point? here
*
Ancient writings unearthed in the last century…* which writings?

…are lending support to doctrines and teachings of Joseph Smith in what way?

C. Wilford Griggs, who has written extensively on Egypt and what are his credentials?

scholars are now admitting that “Joseph Smith got into the antiquities” before experts in the field began their discoveries which scholars? what does that mean? which experts and what discoveries?

Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book which ones?

Anciently, the fountain of Christian knowledge was Egypt and the Mediterranean region here is a half truth… define “Mediterranean region”

Many of the writings, now totaling about 8,000, are on papyri, but others are on metal plates. None are exactly alike, which lends historical credence to the finds. how is this even relevant?
if they were alike they wouldn’t matter? please…

The traditional concept that the Bible is complete came about 400 A.D., he said. Before then Christians knew that many other writings existed. this is a half truth. Christians always knew of multiple “writings” they took until St Jerome to define which ones were canonical (funny how the LDS have accepted the protestant canon)

Many of the Christian teachings found in Egyptian digs that are shared in common with Smith’s teachings have to do with the temple
show us one

Among those findings is the teaching of baptism by proxy for folks who have died without learning of Christ and his gospel then show us

Anciently, baptism was known as a “sealing” to go to heaven,
where?

*Most of the writings which have now been found were secret anciently and held back from the people until they proved their worthiness

• and this is based on what evidence?

Some speak of the potential of their divinity in what way?

*revelation and temples were denounced by religious leaders, including Augustine, as unnecessary.

• once again the half truth.

notice he doesn’t tie any documents to any specific teachings of JS the claim is just a generalization and if we take it literally he claims only that JS “got into antiquities” before some scholars made their “discoveries” and that some scholars (probably LDS) think the BoM is ancient. this is pretty weak in the body but the headline is sensational…kind of like a national enquirer article.

 

[PaulDupre]

Alma147:

Your comment prompted me to go and read the article. I’m an educated person and have followed Griggs’ research in Egypt over the past dozen or so years but I don’t see that the article is “full” of half-truths or misinformation. Perhaps you could identify a few examples?

I saw one item that I thought was said poorly; but thought that it might be a limitation of the reporter who wrote the story. However, since you said it was full of this stuff, perhaps you offer a point by point critique?

Alma

Sure. The author several times refers to “scholars” as in

Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book,…

but never names any of these scholars. Who are they? What are their credentials? Are they the kind of “scholars” that work for FARMS? Are they employed by BYU?

The author assumes that all writings that survive from the Christian Era are Christian writings. This is not true. There are many gnostic, atheist and pagan writings from the apostolic and post-apostolic period which should not be confused with Christian writings. The author states

Ancient writings unearthed in the last century and a half, primarily in Egypt, are lending support to doctrines and teachings of Joseph Smith…

Many of the Christian teachings found in Egyptian digs that are shared in common with Smith’s teachings have to do with the temple “and how the heavens can be open to us,” Griggs said.

The key to the error lies here:

Most of the writings which have now been found were secret anciently and held back from the people until they proved their worthiness.

This “secret” aspect to the teachings proves that they were gnostic and not Christian. The hallmark of gnosticism is “secret knowledge” available only to the initiated that gives special powers and superiority to those who possess it. Mormonism is gnostic yet attempts to pass itself off as Christian, so it is no surprise that Mormons wish to characterize ancient gnostic texts as Christian writings.

The author makes the following deceptive statement:

The traditional concept that the Bible is complete came about 400 A.D., he said. Before then Christians knew that many other writings existed.

This tries to foster the same faulty assumption as above - that every scrap of paper written in the apostolic period should be included in the bible as sacred scripture, no matter who wrote it or what they believed or how much it conflicted with the teachings of the apostles.

There is more, but this is a good start.
Paul

 

[twopekinguys]

One interesting point in this article is the fact that the so called “scholars” are unidentified. No names, qualifications, or affiliations are given.

That in itself is a half truth. Any person with a Master’s degree in anything can be considered a “scholar”. That doesn’t make them qualified to to assess the validity of the documents they say were found.

Leaving out the qualifications etc. of the so called “scholars” leaves the validity of the entire article in question.

I also find it interesting that there is no mention of this in Archeology Magazine, but yet it is being published on the Mormon Times.

It is all just a little bit fishy to me.

 

[majick275]

if you look at Dr Griggs other writings you will see he has a theme of drawing a parallel between JS temple ceremony and the egyptian rituals he also does the same regarding eternal progression and egyptian beliefs. so i think he misleads in this article by claiming “Christian” documents support this when he relies upon pagan sources to establish most of his points. BTW I disagree with his conclusions there too. the pyramids were NOT analagous to LDS temples and he is so set on supporting the BoA as to make his assertions on the meanings of egyptian scenes seem as ludicrous as the facsimiles in the BoA

 

[ibkc]

The key to the error lies here:
This “secret” aspect to the teachings proves that they were gnostic and not Christian. The hallmark of gnosticism is “secret knowledge” available only to the initiated that gives special powers and superiority to those who possess it. Mormonism is gnostic yet attempts to pass itself off as Christian, so it is no surprise that Mormons wish to characterize ancient gnostic texts as Christian writings.

Yes to all this, and I will add that ancient gnosticism was pagan in origin, and the gnostics simply added Jesus into their mix. Gnosticism was also very strong in Egypt, which would explain why their research is centered there.

If the Mormons wish to identify themselves with the Gnostics once and for all, and to point to the Gnostics as The True Christian Church, then they need to stop using the Bible, which according to Mormon theology was assembled by apostates, and according to Gnostic thought, it teaches heresy. Mormons should just come out and endorse such works as the Gospel of Judas and be done with it.

 

[Jerusha]

gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

Here is much of the material under discussion. Read it and make your own decision.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Funny, I’ve had a subscription to the “Biblical Archaeolgy Review” for the last 20 years and never read about all these papyrii that have been found. And he is off several centuries in his remarks about Islam’s spread.

 

[mercygate]

Funny, I’ve had a subscription to the “Biblical Archaeolgy Review” for the last 20 years and never read about all these papyrii that have been found. And he is off several centuries in his remarks about Islam’s spread.

The Nag Hammadi find is legit.

 

[bpbasilphx]

There’s so much proof in that article that I am considering returning to Mormonism We Catholics destroyed all of the evidence for Mormonism apparently. And experts realize the Book of Mormon is an ancient document, but won’t admit it!

**Nobody’s saying that the doctrines of Mormonism are not old. They are a blend of all the Christological heresies the Councils dealt with centuries ago.

That doesn’t make them true.

Hinduism is also old.**

 

[brotherhrolf]

The Nag Hammadi find is legit.

Oh sure. But it was discovered around the same time as the Dead Sea Scolls. I am not aware of any other recent (last 25 years) discoveries. I think one of them was written on a copper roll and had gnostic overtones as well.

 

[mercygate]

Oh sure. But it was discovered around the same time as the Dead Sea Scolls. I am not aware of any other recent (last 25 years) discoveries. I think one of them was written on a copper roll and had gnostic overtones as well.

Ah. I thought you were challenging the Nag Hammadi find. Time for

 

[ibkc]

Oh sure. But it was discovered around the same time as the Dead Sea Scolls. I am not aware of any other recent (last 25 years) discoveries. I think one of them was written on a copper roll and had gnostic overtones as well.

The Gospel of Judas was discovered in the late '70’s and translated and released to the world a few years ago.

 

[brotherhrolf]

The Gospel of Judas was discovered in the late '70’s and translated and released to the world a few years ago.

Hm…I wasn’t aware of that one before now. I’ll have to do some reading. Thanks.