Share This Episode
Viewpoint on Mormonism Bill McKeever  Logo

Appendix Definitions Part 2

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever
The Truth Network Radio
February 3, 2021 8:41 pm

Appendix Definitions Part 2

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 530 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


February 3, 2021 8:41 pm

Eric Johnson is writing a new book that will be published next year by Harvest House Publishers called Introducing Christianity to Mormons. At the end of the book is an appendix defining unique Christian and Mormon terms used in the book. Bill and Eric take a look at some of the definitions and see if they … Continue reading Appendix Definitions Part 2 →

COVERED TOPICS / TAGS (Click to Search)
Mormonism LDS Mormon
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever

When sharing your faith with the Latter Day Saints helps to know what their church is taught in several basic topics. For this reason Gorman's research ministry has provided its crash course Mormonism crash course, Mormonism includes concise articles highlighting what LDS leaders and church manuals have taught on issues that will probably come up in a typical conversation. You can find these informative articles. A crash course Mormonism.com that's crash course Mormonism.com .1 Mormonism program that examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective view .1 Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect.

And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism does appendix 2 in the book sharing the good news with Mormons misrepresent Mormon thought welcome to this edition of viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry and with me today is Eric Johnson. My colleague at MRM sharing the good news with Mormons was a book that was put together by Eric Johnson and Shawn McDowell. They were the general editors of this book a number of Christians, wrote chapters for the book and at the end of the book there is what's known as appendix 2, and it is 101 Mormon terms defined from Aaronic priesthood to Zion.

It's meant to be very concise explanations of terms that are used in Mormonism.

Well, as I explained yesterday we received letter from an LDS gentleman who felt that what was said in these definitions did not really represent Mormon thought. He said I do not know who compiled the article on Mormon terminology, but I will definitely say that the author does not have much comprehension of many Mormon terms and for that matter. He does not have much comprehension of some terms is used in the Bible as written.

Some of the terms are very deceiving of the actual truth about what Mormons believe.

I started to make you a list of corrections, but I decided it's not worth the time or effort, and I doubt that the author would make the corrections in the next edition. If I did tell him the errors Bill let me stop you right there because I am the one who put this together and if I found out that I was saying something that was wrong. I certainly would've contacted harvest House publishers and said you know what, in the next edition. Could we make this fix. We've done that with other books where either there was a typographical mistake or something that we thought might be a little clearer if we could change it around so I wish that he wouldn't assume that I would just ignore it if he ignored his suggestions. If they had any validity to them. I understand your objection Eric because it does imply that somehow we are dishonest. He may not have known it was you that wrote that you would think it would probably either BU or at least Shawn. Even though the book contains a number of essays by different Christians. So what we're doing focus were going through the appendix 2 of sharing the good news with Mormons and just picking some at random because as the person mentioned he does not give us any specific so we don't know what exactly it is that bothered him, but so far in going through what you have said regarding these terms Eric sounds to be spot on. Now, naturally, are not going into a lot of detail, but this wasn't meant to be exhaustive at all.

You kept your definitions under 100 words which I got a command you that's that's a difficult feat in and of itself.

So what were doing is we're looking at what Eric has said regarding these terms and comparing it to what the LDS church is said about those terms or in some cases, what LDS leaders have said about those terms.

So yesterday we finished with the term anti-Mormon, and again, Eric. I think that what you said is quite pertinent and your definition is is accurate. It's never meant to be a flattering term.

It is a pejorative.

And that's one of the reasons why we find it quite offensive when a Mormon refers to us as anti-Mormon that in and of itself implies that we have something against Mormons, which we certainly do not have anything against Mormons, though we freely admit that we do have difficulty with with the doctrines of Mormonism. Now I know Russell and Nelson when he became the 17th president. He tried to take that word out of our vocabulary. Personally, folks were knocking to play that game. If a Mormon wants to play that game. That's up to them.

We are not going to do that Mormonism is been a legitimate term really since the beginning of this movement and were not going to make a course correction merely because someone says we can't use that word any longer. It still fits in easement many Latter Day Saints use it if for nothing else out of habit to this very day. So let's look again at what you have actually said was the next word we can look at apostasy, great. So the great apostasy. The belief that true Christianity lost its authority after the death of Christ's apostles, which made it necessary for God to restore the true church through Joseph Smith and the founding of the LDS church in 1830, I can't think of anything that's wrong with that definition I think it's right. Historically, I think it's right. Theologically, at least in the context of Mormonism. But let me just read you what true to the faith has to say about that truth of the faith. The subtitle a gospel reference published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in 2004 under the heading of apostasy on page 13 it says during the great apostasy people were without divine direction from living prophets. The apostasy lasted until heavenly father and his beloved son appeared to Joseph Smith in 1820, and initiated the restoration of the fullness of the gospel.

I don't see how your definition contradicts that it seems to concur with what this definition is saying. So I don't know why an individual Latter Day Saints would have a problem with your definition of that term. Another one is atonement and I write a work accomplished through the suffering of Jesus at Gethsemane and his death on the cross that allows all humans to rise in the resurrection to one of the three kingdoms of glory. The Mormon atonement also paves the way for potential exultation in the celestial kingdom well again will go back to the book true to the faith. What is it have to say about the atonement well on page 15 it says it is also the greatest expression of the Savior's love for the father and for us in that same section goes on to say, under the subheading, the atoning sacrifice. Jesus his atoning sacrifice took place in the garden of Gethsemane and on the cross of Calvary. How does that conflict with what you said Eric. Now I know that there's been some controversy over where the atonement actually took place because as you see here it says on page 17 that it took place in the garden of Gethsemane and on the cross of Calvary, which of course makes us wonder will what part of man's sins were taken care of and Gethsemane that you needed to go to the cross afterwards to finish it. That doesn't make sense to Christians historically have looked to the cross is where the atonement took place, there needs to be a death of a sacrifice.

And certainly there was no death in the garden of Gethsemane, so it had to be the cross where Jesus died so I don't see how you got that wrong but it also goes on to say on page 18 and 19 of the book true to the faith. The Savior has declared that eternal life is the greatest of all the gifts of God, citing from doctrine covenants section 14 verse seven he goes on to say, to gain eternal life is to be made worthy to dwell in God's presence inheriting the place in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom. Again, I don't see any conflict between what you have said in that section as opposed to what the LDS church has said in this official manual true to the faith. I think I'm being fair by saying it was Gethsemane and the cross because most Mormons will bring in both.

I think a lot of that has happened more in recent years where Latter Day Saints now are emphasizing the cross more than they used to.

But boy, if you go to your book in their own words Bill and look under the term Gethsemane you will find that especially in earlier years. It was always about Gethsemane, and very little about the cross for me just give you an example.

This is from Gerald Lana 70. This is in the inside magazine April 1981, page 22 he said.

And so in the Garnica somebody Christ stood before the law and paid the price and suffering for every sin as though he himself had committed them. Why don't see the cross and here I see Gethsemane. In fact, Russell and Nelson the 17th president of the church. This is what he said in the April 2013 & magazine on page 35. The Savior began shedding his blood for all mankind not on the cross, where the agony of the atonement was completed, but in the Garnica 70 there. He took upon himself the weight of the sins of all who would ever live. I mean even in that quote.

Yes, the cross gets mentioned.

But what is the emphasis on saga 70. It seems to be and it goes back to my initial objection here. Why would you need two places the Mormon church doesn't explain that what was the tone for in the garden as opposed to what needed to be atoned for on the cross. I've not read anything for many Mormon leaders or any official source that really answers that question and I think it needs to be answered.

Another term in the appendix is baptism and this is what I write required for the remission of sins and membership in the LDS church.

Baptismal candidates must be eight years or older, a Mormon male who holds Melchizedek priesthood authority immerses the candidate in water, usually at a local LDS chapel, a covenant with God is made at this time with the candidate promising to keep all the commandments now. Again, that's a very concise definition of that term. But let me again turn to true to the faith. I'm looking at page 23, under the subheading, your baptismal covenant when you were baptized.

You entered into a covenant with God you promise to take upon yourself the name of Jesus Christ keep his commandments and serve him to the end. At the bottom of that page it says keeping the commandments. Your baptismal covenant is a commitment to come into God's kingdom, separating yourself from the world and standing as a witness of God at all times and in all things and in all places, citing Mosiah 18, nine your efforts to stand as a witness of God include everything you do and say will you turn the page and you look at page 25. It says remission of sins because you have been baptized, you can receive a remission of your sins. In other words, you can be forgiven through the mercy of the Savior with this blessing you can be permitted eventually to live in the presence of heavenly father go down a couple paragraphs on page 25. It says being born again through the ordinances of baptism and confirmation. You were born again into a new life. Where do you conflict with any of those definitions I see nothing there. So again, I would say your definition is perfectly acceptable. There are other terms that I don't think are going to be controversial at all living give you the definition I gave her Bible. One of the four standard works.

The official translation used is the King James version of the Bible. According to the eighth article of faith. The Bible is true only as far as it is translated correctly. All facts that is nothing. I think that somebody could say well you're trying to mislead the reader. Another word is branch and I write a Mormon congregation that is not large enough to form award. Now somebody might say that's not very much information. I didn't think it was that important of a word. So I limited myself to one sentence of the larger congregation is known as award and the smaller one is known as a branch.

Quite simply, tomorrow were going to continue looking at some of the objections that this latter-day St. gentlemen had towards appendix 2. In the book sharing the good news with Mormons.

Thank you for listening you would like more information regarding his research ministry.

We encourage you to visit our website at www.mrm.org you can request a free newsletter Mormonism research. We hope you will join us again as we look at another viewpoint is


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime