I've got an intereting scenerio/question: So you can make a Biblical argument that without Christ, a person could not go to heaven "I am the way, the truth..." So what about those who never had the opportunity to have the Gospel preached to them/to hear the Gospel ? For example, anybody living in the Americas' prior to its "discovery" by Columbus could theorectically be doomed to hell, unless they happen to be one who believes in the Book of Mormon, and that Christ visited the New World. Open for discussion, commentary , etc.
I suspect theologians far more learned than us have struggled to answer that question. I will take a stab at it. Jesus placed great, great emphasis upon the importance of believing in Him. He sent out the twelve, and then sent out the seventy, to spread the Good News about Him. Then He gave His followers a commission to spread this Gospel throughout the world. We can conclude that He desires all people to know of Him, that they may have an opportunity to believe in Him. But not all people have that chance. In fact, no one before approximately 30 A.D. had that chance. But before Christ came, people did have the opportunity to know God, to have faith in Him, and to live in keeping with their belief in Him insofar as their revelation extended. And the N.T. tells us that people like Abraham, Moses, David, Joshua, etc. had faith in God which was accounted for righteousness. So it seems safe to say that the same thing is true of people who've lived since the resurrection but have not heard of Jesus. The world itself testifies of God's existence and goodness, and those who believe and trust in Him (in keeping with the measure with which He has revealed Himself, or has been revealed, to them) may well have their faith accounted to them for righteousness. We are not their judges (fortunately!). But I do think that the state of knowledge such people live in is a very perilous one. How much better it would be for them if they were to hear the Gospel! My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, it says in Hosea 4:6, and the reason those people in Hosea's day lacked knowledge of God was because their Aaronic priests mostly rejected the truth themselves and were not teaching the people about God. Today, all believers have in a sense been made "kings and priests unto God" (Rev. 1:6) and we all have that priestly responsibility to contribute our efforts and/or resources to the Great Commission so that all men may be taught of Christ. Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world...
I don't remember the exact details from a Bible course I did, but it seemed to suggest that people who hadn't heard the gospel would be Ok if they had deduced that God existed from observing his wonders, such as stars and life etc. I would like to offer my services as a bit of a Mormon expert. I'm a little rusty on it but if anyone wants to know anything I will do my best to help. I have quite a lot of literature on them.
I think in a way Paul addresses this question. Romans 1:20 Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. The suggestion that God would judge other than by the light that has been revealed to a person is to suggest that God is capricious, and we know that is not so. God is revealed in all creation from the foundation of the earth, and pre-eminently and most especially in Jesus. We have responded to that revelation that we have heard with our ears. Others who have not heard with their ears will be measured according to the response they have made to the that which has been revealed to them. In a sense the prophet Micah points us in this direction Micah 6:8 He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? Now I am not suggesting that salvation may be had by any other name, but rather that there is a general revelation of the love of God independent of the word proclaimed, but rather that our response is to Christ whose name we know, and others may well respond to Christ whose name they have not known in this life. Psalm 19:3-5 There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard; yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.
I would like to offer my services as a bit of a Mormon expert. I'm a little rusty on it but if anyone wants to know anything I will do my best to help. I have quite a lot of literature on them.[/QUOTE] Wondering about Mormon Scripture. Some question the vailidity of it due to per say no archeological and/or secondary source material. I guess thats a start.
I have an older brother who married into LDS (one of the enemy's most popular snares is to encourage marriages to spiritually unsuitable women), so I've studied up somewhat on that, too. AnglicanAgnostic, I hope I am not 'stealing your thunder' with my post. The 'Book of Mormon' is their most prominent 'scripture' (not that I would grace it with that descriptor, but they do). They also rely on 'The Pearl of Great Price' and 'Doctrine and Covenants.' In the early 1800s Joseph Smith did some ditch and well digging with his family. Then he claimed he had found a magic stone while so digging, and that the stone could reveal the whereabouts of buried treasure. He did some treasure searching for pay by placing the seer stone in his hat, burying his face in the hat, and 'letting' the stone 'guide' him around to some location where he'd tell the paying party to dig. Then he claimed to have seen an angel named Mormoni who guided him to some gold plates with hieroglyphic-style writing on them, which he proceeded to translate by means of some 'magic spectacles' which he referred to as the Urim and Thummim. He sent a copy of the hieroglyphics and his translation to some college professor who knew languages, hoping for verification. The language expert found the symbols to be gibberish and not a language, and he apparently never returned what he received (or it was lost). So then the enterprising Smith set about the task of re-creating his 'translation' (which became the Book of Mormon); his method, according to witnesses, was to place a 'seer stone' in his hat, bury his face in the hat, and dictate. His wife and his friend Oliver Cowdery took turns as his customary scribes in this endeavor. The Book of Mormon is written in "King James" language and includes many passages copied directly from the KJV as well as many more paraphrased passages, but no credit is given to the Bible in these instances; the writings are represented as new, inspired work. During the years that followed, Joseph Smith used his position among his followers and the mandate of 'divine revelation' to 'marry' two dozen women, some of whom were already married to one follower or another. His first wife, Emma, was never happy about this... as one could guess!
In terms of doctrine, Mormons believe (in addition to the Bible and their 'scriptures') the pronouncements of their modern-day 'apostles'; in fact, they believe that revelation from God continues to be progressive in such a manner that the modern pronouncements overrule and nullify any previous doctrinal revelations (from 'scripture' or otherwise). So, for example, the early Mormons had 'revelations' that plural marriage was necessary to attain the 3rd level of heaven called the Celestial Kingdom where God the Father lives, and that blacks were racially inferior beings who could never hold priesthood offices; in the years since then, new pronouncements have been made which countermanded the previous ones.... and they think that all of the pronouncements were from God (even though you and I know that God does not change His mind). Mormons believe in 3 levels of heaven: Terrestrial, Telestial, and Celestial. People who are reasonably decent human beings land in the 1st level. IIRC, those who profess faith in Christ (like you and I) will get to the 2nd level. 3rd level requires being married and having the marriage 'sealed' in their temple; the marriage is forever and ever, and the married couple will beget countless spirit children while in the Celestial Kingdom. Mormons believe: as God was, so are we now (i.e., God was once a mortal like us, but He progressed into Godhood); as God is, so shall we become (Gods ourselves). They also believe that Lucifer and Jesus are brothers! If Mormon missionaries come to visit you and you listen to them, they will emphasize all the similarities between it and mainstream Christianity. The history, the oddities, and the contradictions will be left out of their explanation. Some who join that 'church' never actually learn the truth behind their religion. Tithing is required in the LDS, so membership numbers are much more important financially than accurately portraying their history and beliefs. When I asked my brother in conversation if it was true that their 'church' believes Jesus and Lucifer are brothers, he said "No!" but his wife said, "Yes, that's correct," and he looked at her in amazement... even though he'd been an "elder" in their church for a decade by that time.
By the way, for anyone who wants to deeply research the LDS, Utah Lighthouse Ministry is the most valuable resource of information which can be found on their website, in their periodic newsletters, and in the books available for sale on their site. http://utlm.org/faqs/faqgeneral.htm
Mormonism is such a weird heresy, it puts to the test the view of Eastern Orthodox theologians that iconoclasm was the last original heresy and all subsequent heresies are merely regurgitations or recombinations of pre-existant heresies. Ordinarily if one has a copy of St. Epiphanius handy, and St. John of Damascus for the more recent errors such as Nestorianism, Monothelitism, Iconoclasm, Pelagianism and so on, it is fairly easy to dissect a modern cult. So for example, the Soccinian Unitarians of Transylvania and Hungary and the nominal Unitarian Christians one would associate with late 18th century post-Puritan Unitarianism of the sort @Stalwart and I dislike with some passion, we can directly identify with the heresy of the corrupt bishop Paul of Samosata, who held the same dismissive view towards the deity of our Lord. In the case of Mormonism however, it becomes more of a challenge, but not impossible. Essentially, it represents a fusion of several Pagan heresies (polytheistic atomism or Epicureanism, with a hierarchy of deities who merely organized pre-existent matter, with aspects of Manichaean Gnosticism and Islam* (additional revelation, polygamy, avoidance of intoxicants), and several other exotic heresies, like that of the hydroparastatae (who blasphemously dared to celebrate a “eucharist” with water instead of wine). * Islam is defined as a heretical sect by St. John of Damascus; he regarded it as a perversion of Christianity rather than as a new religion.
The Pearl of Great Price includes the Book of Abraham which Joseph Smith "translated" from some Egyptian Papyri. These papyri were thought to have been destroyed in the 1871 Chicargo fire, but were rediscovered in the metropolitan Museum of art in 1967. This has caused Mormons embaressment as Smith has changed the pictures and of course the translations don't match up. This was in 1826 and he got fined $2.68. The original court records were rediscoved in 1971. Smith didn't pay the fine and did what was called at the time "a leg bail" ie he legged it. This isn't as bad as it sounds as there was a nudge nudge wink wink arrangment at the time, you run and we won't look for you. This is most probably true, but if you see what purports to be a copy of these particular hieroglyphics be aware unscrupulous people have faked these hieroglyphics to gain money from the Mormons. This is not entirely true, some of it is copied from the 1729 Presbyterian Westminster Confession and Catechism, but I take your point Will continue soon my mouse is playing up on my computer.
Continued from above. Well yes and no, The early Mormons had section 101 of the Doctrine and Covenants which said a man should have one wife. This printed each year till 1876 when presumably "God" changed his mind and commanded polygamy. God changed his mind back again in 1890 when everlasting polygamy was then banished, possibly under pressure from US legal moves. There you go, you have learnt a new word Telestial invent by Smith. and was legally enforcable against some people in England till 1926.
Smith liked his neologisms. By the way, just out of curiosity, the Papyri from which Joseph Smith pretended to translate the Book of Abraham, could you elaborate on the details? What does the original document actually say? I have a very close friend who to my great frustration became a Mormon and married a Mormon.
The original papyri are from what is called by Egyptologists "The book of Breathings" a part of 'The book of the dead". It is not the work of one person and is attributed to the God Thoth. It contains many charms, advice for the dead about their beliefs, and general helpful info for their next life. They date from about 200BC and are fairly common funeral documents. The translation is of course dodgy, it can be shown that Smith translated 3 paragraphs and 23 lines from just 3 characters. Egyptologists have accused him of having the wrong heads on two figures in his picture of one of the papyri. And lo on the original the heads are on missing bits of the papyri.
Amusingly enough I have actually read translations of parts of the Egyptian Book of the Dead, but not the “alternative translation” provided by Joseph Smith. So was Joseph Smith unfamiliar with the Rosetta Stone and the advances made in the field of Egyptology, or was he just exceptionally dumb?
Joseph Smith was unfamiliar with the Rosetta stone but it wouldn't have mattered if he did. The successful breaking of the code enabling translations only occurred two or three years before he bought the papyri even though the stone was discovered in 1799. The knowledge of this at the time was restricted to those few who were specialist in the field. J.S. wasn't dumb. If I was a non- Christian I might enjoy being treated like a prophet and have women fawning over me-