Mormon response to Matthew 22

[zerinus]

I guess that is why so many Mormons (males) have so many wives (more than 1) …
Interesting…to say the least. So if it (polygamy) was banned by the mormon church in 1890 why is it still being practiced today?

I don’t know what you are talking about, land I don’t think that you do either.

zerinus

 

[Karin]

I don’t know what you are talking about, land I don’t think that you do either.

zerinus

Sure I do…there are mormons in Nevada that have more than one wife…why is this still practiced if it was outlawed by the mormons so long ago?

 

[zerinus]

Sure I do…there are mormons in Nevada that have more than one wife…why is this still practiced if it was outlawed by the mormons so long ago?

You can call them “Mormons” of you like, but I don’t. They are not members of my Church. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has a membership of close to 12 million world wide, and it is the main body that has continued form Restoration through Joseph Smith. The word “Mormon” is normally applied to us. Those people you are referring to are no more than a few thousand in number, and they are not members of our Church. We are not responsible for what we do. Practising polygamy in our Church today results in immediate excommunication.

zerinus

 

[Karin]

You can call them “Mormons” of you like, but I don’t. They are not members of my Church. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has a membership of close to 12 million world wide, and it is the main body that has continued form Restoration through Joseph Smith. The word “Mormon” is normally applied to us. Those people you are referring to are no more than a few thousand in number, and they are not members of our Church. We are not responsible for what we do. Practising polygamy in our Church today results in immediate excommunication.

zerinus

Thank you for that clarification…they must belong to some other mormon group then…sorry that I confused them with your mormon group.

 

[PaulDupre]

This is how:

Deuteronomy 21:

15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated

2 Samuel 12:

8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

1 Timothy 3:

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach.

zerinus

No one disputes that polygamy was practiced in early OT times. But I would like to see some evidence that it was practiced during Jesus’ time.

BTW, the 1 Tim passage is understood by Christians to mean that a bishop cannot be divorced and remarried. This makes far more sense in light of Jesus’ teaching in Matt 19:3-9.

Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?”

And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,

and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’?

“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?”

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way.

“And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

You’ll notice that Jesus talks about “two” becoming “one flesh”. He does not say “two or more”.

I think that polygamy was allowed in early OT times for the same reason polygamy was allowed - the hardness of their hearts. Polygamy degrades women and makes them little more than property. Mormon apostle Heber C Kimball said it best:
Heber C. Kimball:

I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow.

Paul

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Did you never hear then of those “plain and precious parts” that were removed?

All I can say is that Im very disappointed to learn about this, for in the past I recall reading this from the LDS.com webpage:
8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1
I have always thougth the lds believed the Bible to be inerrant and accurate and I thought the claims of corrupted texts was not an official LDS position. However after you said there are parts missing I decided to do a quick search on the lds.com page, here is what I found: The position of the Church regarding the Bible is that it contains the word of God as far as it is translated correctly (A of F 8). Joseph Smith taught that “many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled.” He also said that the Bible was correct as “it came from the pen of the original writers,” but that “ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.” (HC 1: 245; 6: 57.) The Church reveres and respects the Bible, but recognizes that it is not a complete nor entirely accurate record, and affirms also that the Lord has given additional revelation through his prophets in the last days that sustains, supports, and verifies the biblical account of God’s dealings with mankind.
scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/b/55
Well there goes a huge load of credibility in my mind. According to the above they dont even believe a single undefiled copy of the Bible existed. In short not a single Christian before Joseph Smith ever had a Bible, I dont believe Jesus ever had such failure in mind.

ps-what book does “HC 1:245” mean and is it available online?

 

[zerinus]

No one disputes that polygamy was practiced in early OT times. But I would like to see some evidence that it was practiced during Jesus’ time.

The best evidence is the one I gave, which is Paul’s comment to Timothy. Paul would have had no reason to say that, if there were not some Christians practising polygamy at that time.

BTW, the 1 Tim passage is understood by Christians to mean that a bishop cannot be divorced and remarried.

Which Christians? That is the most nonsensical “understanding” of that scripture imaginable.

This makes far more sense in light of Jesus’ teaching in Matt 19:3-9.

That makes no sense to me at all.

You’ll notice that Jesus talks about “two” becoming “one flesh”. He does not say “two or more”.

So David and his many wives whom God “gave to his bosom” did not become “one flesh” with him?

I think that polygamy was allowed in early OT times for the same reason polygamy was allowed - the hardness of their hearts. Polygamy degrades women and makes them little more than property.

That is your opinion, but not God’s opinion. Polygamy was practised by the most righteous ancient patriarchs long before the Law of Moses was given.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

All I can say is that Im very disappointed to learn about this, for in the past I recall reading this from the LDS.com webpage:
8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1
I have always thougth the lds believed the Bible to be inerrant and accurate and I thought the claims of corrupted texts was not an official LDS position. However after you said there are parts missing I decided to do a quick search on the lds.com page, here is what I found: The position of the Church regarding the Bible is that it contains the word of God as far as it is translated correctly (A of F 8). Joseph Smith taught that “many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled.” He also said that the Bible was correct as “it came from the pen of the original writers,” but that “ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.” (HC 1: 245; 6: 57.) The Church reveres and respects the Bible, but recognizes that it is not a complete nor entirely accurate record, and affirms also that the Lord has given additional revelation through his prophets in the last days that sustains, supports, and verifies the biblical account of God’s dealings with mankind.
scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/b/55
Well there goes a huge load of credibility in my mind. According to the above they dont even believe a single undefiled copy of the Bible existed. In short not a single Christian before Joseph Smith ever had a Bible, I dont believe Jesus ever had such failure in mind.

ps-what book does “HC 1:245” mean and is it available online?

You know what? What you are saying is a load of nonsense, and does not require further comment from me.

zerinus

 

[Catholic_Dude]

You know what? What you are saying is a load of nonsense, and does not require further comment from me.

zerinus

Where is the nonsense?
There is nothing more offensive to Catholic ears that someone saying the Bible is corrupted. In the quote above, it explicitly says there was information corrupted before a single Bible was completed.

 

[zerinus]

There is nothing more offensive to Catholic ears that someone saying the Bible is corrupted

First of all I don’t care what the Catholics think. I am only interested in the truth. Secondly, the Catholics too don’t believe the Bible is sufficient, so they have augmented it with their Tradition. We think we have done better. We have augmented it with modern scripture and additional revelation from the Lord.

zerinus

 

[PaulDupre]

The Mormon Church has always maintained that the Bible is hopelessly corrupt and untrustworthy:

1 Nephi 13:

24 And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God.

25 Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God.

26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.

27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.

28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.

29 And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest—because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them.

The above passage claims that the bible we have now is not the same bible written by the prophets and apostles. Many of the “plain and precious parts” were taken away by the “great and abominable Church”. Why? “that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.” (1 Ne:13:27)

Verse 29 states that those who believe the bible with the plain and precious parts deliberately removed by the great and abominable church stumble so that Satan has great power over them.

Continued…

 

[PaulDupre]

Bible corruption continued…

What do the modern LDS prophets and apostles say?

President Ezra Taft Benson wrote of

“the Bible, which passed through generations of copyists, translators and corrupt religionists who tampered with the text”
(Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 53).

Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., popular LDS author and son of the tenth president of the church, said

“The early ‘Apostate Fathers’ did not think it was wrong to tamper with inspired scripture. If any scripture seemed to endanger their viewpoint, it was altered, transplanted or completely removed from the Biblical text” (Religious Truths Defined, p.175).

Apostle Mark E. Peterson casts doubt on the reliability of the Bible and states forcefully that the corruption was intentional:

“Many insertions were made, some of them ‘slanted’ for selfish purposes, while at times deliberate falsifications and fabrications were perpetrated”
(As Translated Correctly, p.4).

Quote:
“It is evident then that many of the ‘plain and precious’ things were omitted from the Bible by failure to choose all of the authentic books for inclusion, and by deliberate changes, deletions and forgeries …”
(As Translated Correctly, p.14).

The encyclopedia of Mormonism:

“Thus, the elements of mistranslation, incompleteness, and other errors weaken the Bible”
(Encyclopedia of Mormonism , Vol. 1, Bible).

Again we can see from this small sample of quotes how the conviction that the bible is corrupt and untrustworthy starts with The Book of Mormon (“the most correct book on earth” and “the keystone of our religion”) and continues to pervade Mormon thinking and writing throughout their history.

Grace to you all,
Paul

 

[flameburns623]

All I can say is that Im very disappointed to learn about this, for in the past I recall reading this from the LDS.com webpage:

8 We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1

I have always thougth the lds believed the Bible to be inerrant and accurate and I thought the claims of corrupted texts was not an official LDS position. However after you said there are parts missing I decided to do a quick search on the lds.com page, here is what I found:The position of the Church regarding the Bible is that it contains the word of God as far as it is translated correctly (A of F 8). Joseph Smith taught that “many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled.” He also said that the Bible was correct as “it came from the pen of the original writers,” but that “ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.” (HC 1: 245; 6: 57.) The Church reveres and respects the Bible, but recognizes that it is not a complete nor entirely accurate record, and affirms also that the Lord has given additional revelation through his prophets in the last days that sustains, supports, and verifies the biblical account of God’s dealings with mankind.

scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/b/55
Well there goes a huge load of credibility in my mind. According to the above they dont even believe a single undefiled copy of the Bible existed. In short not a single Christian before Joseph Smith ever had a Bible, I dont believe Jesus ever had such failure in mind.

ps-what book does “HC 1:245” mean and is it available online?

Many believe that the A of F should be edited to reflect Joseph Sith’s intended meaning–that the Bible is correct so far as it has been “transmitted” correctly.

“HC 1:245” referes to the History of the Church, Volume 1, page 245. I can’t seem to find it online in a hurry. If it is available pershaps someone else will know.

 

[Karin]

Can I ask…where are the Gold Plates that Smith translated?

 

[zerinus]

The Mormon Church has always maintained that the Bible is hopelessly corrupt and untrustworthy:

False. There is a difference between saying that the Bible has been tampered with and parts removed from it and saying that it is “hopelessly corrupt”. The Bible is part of our standard works. We put it on a par with the rest, and treat it the same. The Book of Mormon says that one of its purposes is to prove to mankind that the Bible is true. This year the Bible is curriculum being taught in our Sunday School lessons.

The above passage claims that the bible we have now is not the same bible written by the prophets and apostles. Many of the “plain and precious parts” were taken away by the “great and abominable Church”. Why? “that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.” (1 Ne:13:27)

Agreed.

Verse 29 states that those who believe the bible with the plain and precious parts deliberately removed by the great and abominable church stumble so that Satan has great power over them.

Not quite. It says that because of the removal of those plain and precious parts, many stumble (theologically), which causes divisions and contentions (over doctrinal issues) among them.

What do the modern LDS prophets and apostles say?

President Ezra Taft Benson wrote of

I agree with what Ezra Taft Benson has said.

Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., popular LDS author and son of the tenth president of the church, said

Joseph Fielding Smith Jr was not an “LDS prophet or Apostle”.

Apostle Mark E. Peterson casts doubt on the reliability of the Bible and states forcefully that the corruption was intentional:

I am not entirely in agreement with the way he has expressed it, but in general he is probably right.

The encyclopedia of Mormonism:

Again, I might not have expressed it in exactly the same way, but I would tend to agree with that.

Again we can see from this small sample of quotes how the conviction that the bible is corrupt and untrustworthy . . .

That is not what those quotes are saying. See above.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Can I ask…where are the Gold Plates that Smith translated?

Why do you want to know?

zerinus

 

[PaulDupre]

Can I ask…where are the Gold Plates that Smith translated?

Since the Mormons are reluctant to answer…

From the Testimony of Joseph Smith in the intro pages of The Book of Mormon:

When, according to arrangements, the messenger [the angel Moroni] called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge until this day, being the second day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight.

Hope this helps,
Paul

 

[Karin]

Why do you want to know?

zerinus

Because I am in need of some new gold bangles …
Because I would like to know if these can be seen by everybody, if they are still around on this planet/world…
why do YOU think?

 

[Karin]

Since the Mormons are reluctant to answer…

From the Testimony of Joseph Smith in the intro pages of The Book of Mormon:

Hope this helps,
Paul

Thank you Paul.
So can I ask another question…who are these people that the BoM is talking about…Moroni,Omni,Alma etc?
Also since the BoM states “*This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.”…*what do the American Indians think of this?

 

[zerinus]

Because I would like to know if these can be seen by everybody, if they are still around on this planet/world…

The answer is No.

zerinus