This broadcaster has 662 podcast archives available on-demand.
Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.
August 15, 2021 9:00 pm
When one examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective view .1 limited 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. Should Christians fellowship with members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Welcome to this addition viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry and with me today is Erin shuffle all of my colleagues at them or last week we began looking at a statement that was made by a Presbyterian group. Originally in 1897. They put forth a statement that was titled 10 reasons why Christians cannot fellowship the Mormon church today were going to be looking at point number 10. This one however did not have a specific title for I call it species, and Generation X. My summary for it, but it reads as follows. The Mormon church teaches that God is a polygamist. The natural father of all intelligent beings in heaven to earth and hell that angels and devils are his offspring by procreation or natural generation and that Adam is the father of Christ's human nature as Brigham Young was father of his children, so the big idea here is that the way that God's come about in the morning system is through procreation and generation by a male and a female in the include in this idea programs Adam God idea which for Brigham meant that Mary and heavenly father were the parents of Jesus, his mortal body.
The one of the references in order to prove the premise that the list there is wisdom inspires the gods to multiply their species there, citing the key to theology, which was a book that was written by Mormon apostle Parley P. Pratt, who was the brother of Orson Pratt. They have listed as page 52. Now that can be kind of confusing because the key to theology are the key to the science of theology is sometimes known actually came out. Originally I believe in the 1850s doubt they are citing a later addition that came out in the 1880s that would make more sense.
It would be the more modern version to the time that this was being written, and they have as a reference page 52. Then in the next reference. They cite the seer now this was written by Orson Pratt, another Mormon apostle in the church.
Page 37 where it says each God through his wife or wives raises up a numerous family of sons and daughters for each father and mother will be in a condition to multiply forever and ever. That's certainly something that's understood today by modern Latter Day Saints. If a Mormon couple were to be good enough to get into the top level of the celestial kingdom that mail would be given a reward for his faithfulness. The ability to organize new worlds and to populate those worlds.
She would be considered the God of that world and his wife would be the goddess mother you might say, similar to heavenly mother in Mormon theology today. Now Mormonism today is more ambivalent or undecided on whether heavenly father himself is a polygamist and is a bit of nuance today about whether our heavenly father is the actual father of our intelligent being. Our intelligence or whether he's merely the father of the spirit body that includes our person or our intelligent being self.
The essential complaint here is that instead of this almighty powerful infinite God actually creating creatures that the gods of the cosmos are essentially sexually begotten by male-female pairs. They also have a reference again going to new witness for God which was a book that was written by BH Robertson and as we've mentioned last week.
BH Roberts plays an important role in this because he is going to give a rebuttal to this statement, but let me just read very quickly what BH Roberts said on page 461 that goes along with this accusation that was made in the statement.
Robert said through that law, in connection with an observance of all the other laws of the gospel man will yet attain unto the power of the Godhead and like his father God, his chief glory will be to bring to pass the eternal life and happiness of his posterity. This goes along with this idea that once this Mormon couple attains their exultation, they will have the ability to procreate. Throughout all eternity. Just as Mormons believe that their God Elohim. Heavenly father is procreating with heavenly mother and we are the result of that, procreation, we once existed as spirit sons and daughters of God in our preexistence and then we would later because we are good enough in that preexistence to take on the human body here in this mortality and this mortality is a probationary period to prove ourselves worthy to get back in the presence of God. We should mention here that the book new witness for God by BH Roberts. It was issued in 1895 and it was approved by a committee appointed by the first presidency as quoting Orthodox and consistent with our teachings. So if you are citing something that has the approval of the first presidency. You have a good source from which you can use when talking with your LDS acquaintances now in mentioning BH Roberts we need to get into his rebuttal. This statement was published in the desert written news and within days. BH Roberts gives a response to this statement, Jenny delivers that response in the tabernacle, which is then printed again in the desert is so obviously the church took this quite seriously. At the time.
BH Roberts would be probably one of the bigger guns. As far as an LDS apologist is concerned. BH Roberts was a pretty prolific writer.
He is very intelligent guy. There's no doubt about that. The first thing that BH Roberts response to is a statement that we emphasized a couple of times last week that the purpose of this statement was not to really show any ill will towards Mormons but to merely respond to the religious aspects of the faith.
The writers of this statement were not saying we should not be friends with Latter Day Saints. They were just saying we have to stop short as Christians from fellowship in a religious capacity with members of the LDS church. What did BH Roberts have the say regarding that statement. He acknowledged that the people who had drafted this statement 10 reasons why we cannot fellowship build his church were probably just discharging the religious duties but he felt like he still had to address the claims he he thought they were stated in such a way as to make the LDS faith sound as odious as possible and he was concerned that the youth that had seen what was published in the desert knees would be given a false impression, and based on what the critics have said you mentioned that he felt it was given them when he says the most offensive terms as possible. The desire being to make said doctor and obnoxious, and second, there should be some means of determining what Mormon doctrine is but he is trying to make the accusation that they're purposely trying to make it sound worse than I guess what BH Roberts thinks it is, but BH Roberts needs to understand were coming from a New Testament perspective. He's a latter-day St. obviously working at different worldviews here and I don't think we have to try and state Mormon positions in an odious manner as he would say because it is obnoxious to us is terrible to some people think well.
When we represent Mormonism. We need to do so fairly may think. Well, that must mean that we steal management. We let them give their best academic presentation is the most palatable sort of evangelical friendly presentation of Mormonism possible. The problem though is that were what you said were operating off of a biblical perspective. Which means when we evaluate the fruits of Mormonism.
We are going to be looking at what the prophets and apostles have said what they taught to their children with the published to the people. So Roberts is going to fall back on what we have heard in more recent years in the past 2030 years, namely that official doctrine is restricted to the standard works and that critics should only aim at that which is in the standard works whereas the assumption of the Presbyterians is that if somebody claims to be an apostle or profit in a publishing public claims about God and in the salvation and their having influence on the people. That's fair game that isn't BH Roberts sounding a bit confusing when he makes a comment like that because in his rebuttal. He says we consider the Bible book of Mormon book of doctrine and covenants, and scenes of Joseph the seer. Our guides in faith and doctrine. The first four been adopted as such by a vote of the saints in general conference reference to other writings are only for illustration of the subjects. Now in this he is quoting from the compendium of the doctrines of the gospel that came out in 1898. To me it sounds like it's affirming basically the accusation that was made against them that they certainly do consider the book of Mormon doctrine covenants Pearl of great price and scenes of Joseph, the Sears guides and faith in and doctrine will if Joseph Smith's statements are considered guides in faith and doctrine wooden that same authority pass on to every leader that comes after Joseph Smith. Of course it would have heard from some Mormons that Joseph Smith is a you might say P profit, whereas subsequent LDS prophets are lowercase P profits that the sayings of Joseph Smith have special weight among Mormons. It's interesting here that BH Roberts says that the sayings of Joseph Smith are in the same list as the standard works. He does specify the need to be well attested sayings, not the mere repetition of rumor, but it sounds like BH Roberts has a much higher view of the sermons of Joseph Smith that are controversial, whereas the BYU minimalist horsemen like Blake Ostler would downplay at the can call it discourse or the sermon in the Grover Joseph Smith is more polytheistic. Roberts goes on to say in our articles of faith which had been repeatedly accepted by vote of the church in general conference assembled as matters most assuredly believed by the church. We say 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. He says in relation to this. This fixes the status of the Bible and the book of Mormon as sources of authority on doctrine among us as to the book of doctrine covenants in the program price I give the following account of the official action of the church with accompanying explanations from minutes of the general conferences conferred to before I even try to look at that. I don't think he's being quite accurate here. Or maybe he's purposely trying to be a little bit misleading. None of those other books that are unique to Mormonism are taken with any qualification such as as is translated correctly. They don't say that about the book of Mormon, or the doctrine covenants or the pearl of great price and and that time the pearl of great price, especially with the book of Abraham was taken to be a literal translation from the Egyptian into English and now the church doesn't even hold that position.
How many times have we heard from Mormons that the general conference addresses that they hear from the prophets and apostles are the living Scripture, under which they live. That that is the conduit of revelation given by God for modern people by modern prophets.
I have an article on MRN.word on official doctrine. My essential thesis is that Mormonism oscillates between maximal wisdom and minimalism. Minimalism when they get in trouble next of holism when they want to emphasize that they have living oracles that can deliver revelations of greater or equal weight as their standard works into Marshall were going to continue looking at some of the things that BH Roberts said in response to this statement that was released by a group of Presbyterians in Utah. 10 reasons why Christians cannot fellowship the Mormon church. Thank you for listening you would like more information regarding Amicus research ministry. We encourage you to visit our website www.mrm.org you can request a free newsletter Mormonism research. We hope you'll join us again as we look at another viewpoint is