dan@scgvaxd.UUCP (Dan Boskovich) (05/30/85)
After reading this reply to Ken Arndt's posting, I was compelled to make the following comments: >1. You reject the need to ask God for confirmation of the truth of His word >as recorded and interpreted by fallible men. The assumption that the >present Bible h.s been in its current form since it was passed down by word >of mouth, then written in Hebrew, then translated into Greek and >subsequently, English, is ludicrous! Considering the wide variety of Bible >translations, I suggest that a prudent person will study the Bible he/she >possesses and then turn to God for confirmation of His word. Your facts here are a little jumbled! That the scriptures were handed down by word of mouth is the assumption! There are over 5000 manuscripts (handwritten) of the New Testament, written in its original language (Greek) that date as far back as the 4th century. Less than 1 per cent textual corruption affecting not a single doctrine! Dead Sea scrolls dating back to first century contain various portions of the Old Testament (Hebrew) which confirm accuracy of copyists when compared to Massoretic manuscripts of the Old Testament dating about 900 A.D. >Obviously, one gets to KNOW this by studying the scriptures and then asking >God to confirm the truth of what he/she has read. No one can truly possess > testimony of Christ and His ministry based solely upon the testimony of >Others. Your testimony must be based on personal experience, study, prayer >And revelation or it will not withstand the batterings of a Godless world. >Just as few rational persons demand that you accept the word of an >`authority'' without confirmation, so we are exhorted to turn to the Lord >in prayer to receive answers to our questions. To quote a prophet whom you >vilify ``Search the scriptures - search the revelations which we publish, >and ask your Heavenly Father, in the names of His Son Jesus Christ, to >manifest the truth unto you, and if you do it with an eye single to His >glory nothing doubting, He will answer you by the power of His Holy Spirit. >You will then know for yourselves and not for another. You will not then be >dependent on man for the knowledge of God; nor will there be any room for >speculation.'' All very true except one thing I must add. The bible is not up for grabs for interpratation. As I have mentioned above, the New Testament documents are very reliable. The Word of God must be the final test for truth and the authority by which we stand upon. Subjective and experiential theology opens the door to chaos and confusion. Beyond the New Testament we have Jehova's Witnesses, Mormons, Christian Science, etc. There must be some criteria to determine which is right. They can't all be right since most contradict one another. Your statement, "One cannot accept the word of an authority without comfirmation", is true, but the application was wrong! The word of an authority would be a supposed prophet like Kimball, Mary Baker Eddy, Watchtower, the Pope, etc. Their words MUST be confirmed by the only reliable authority, The Bible! Peter confirmed this in his 2nd Epistle. He stated the fact that he was an eye witness to the majesty of Christ (referring to the Mount of Transfiguration) and then was careful to conclude, "But we also have the MORE SURE WORD of prophecy!" In other words, Peter made his own subjective experience subordinate to the objective authority of scripture! >Certainly God and Christ speak to those who listen. But all people, unless >they are chosen and ordained by God as prophets, receive revelation ONLY for >themselves and their immediate families, not for the whole of mankind. The >choice of whether or not to share or repeat personal revelation, is of >course up to the individual. Hebrews 1:1 says. "God who in times past spoke through the prophets, has in these times chosen to speak through His Son, Jesus Christ." God has given revelation to man three times. First, through Moses and Joshua, second, through Elijah and the prophets, and finally through Christ and the Apostles. The pattern has been established. Revelation, accompanied by confirming signs and wonders; then silence! God has recorded in His word all that man needs for Salvation and Worship. The Holy Spirit will lead us in our lives using the WORD to guide our paths. Can you imagine the confusion that would arise if God spoke directly to man today. What criteria could he possibly use to confirm that it is the voice of God. God ALWAYS confirms His revelations through specific signs and wonders. >>6. ``No I work with Mormans (sic). They are swell people. I like them a >>lot . . . . But they are wrong about God! And cursed for it!'' >This sounds remarkably like the rationalizations Christians h.ve used for >centuries to justify their unChristian treatment of other people. For >example, the never-ending and unjust persecution of the Jews has throughout >history been prefaced by similar remarks. Not to mention the American >treatment of the native Indians, blacks, American Japanese and German >descendants during WWII, Hispanics, etc, and the world-wide mistreatment of >other minorities. All prefaced by words which contain little of ``charity, >the pure love of Christ.'' (Moroni 7:47, I Corinthians 13). Actually, sometimes the truth sounds harsh but is best in the long run. The BIBLE says things like, "The wounds of a friend are better than the kiss of an enemy!, Open rebuke is better than secret love." And such statements as, "Every mans way is right in his own eyes!, Have mercy on some who are doubting, save others snatching them out of the fire, and on some mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh!" Lets not forget that Christ was crucified for telling people things that they didn't want to hear but were the truth. Are you going to lump Him into your above categories? >My Revelations 22: 18-19 actually reads ``For I testify unto every man that >heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto >these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this >book: > >And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, >God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy >city, and from the things which are written in this book.'' >First, this book is written by the Apostle John. It is a record of the >revelations he received from Christ. It is John who is actually writing >these words. Second, according to Bible scholars, this revelation was >written sometime between A.D. 64 and 96. John himself wrote another book, The >Gospel According to St. John, much later. Third, at that time the books of >the Bible were not compiled in the same order that they are in the current >Bibles. Therefore, John was obviously warning against anyone adding to or >subtracting from the revelations he had received and written while banished >upon the Isle of Patmos. This does not prevent God from adding to >revelation any time he pleases! It is not the chronological order that is in question here. The book of Revelation is a very special book. John was told to write down the things which he has seen, the things which are and the things WHICH SHALL COME TO PASS. This groups the Book into three sections. The first is the actual vision that John had of Christ as recorded in chapter 1. Second, the things concerning the church as recorded in chapters 2 & 3. Finally, John recorded the things that would happen in the future. The future of the Jews, the church, and the Gentile non-believing world was given to John by Jesus Christ as recorded in the book of Revelation. From the church age, through the terrible judgements poured out on the world in chapters 5 - 18, and finally the second coming of Christ, right on into the earthly Rule of Christ during the Kingdom Age (chapter 20), and into eternity. In other words, the prophecy has been delivered. From the time of John up to the very END. When the writer records his warning at the end of the book, he is warning people not to add to the PROPHECY of the book. Sure, there were other books written after Revelation. These were books of either an historical or corrective nature. The warning is directed to those who would add to the prophetic outcome determined in Revelation. In other words, the future of mankind and the world has been delivered through revelation and there is no need to add anything to it. >Furthermore, in the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Matthew refers to Jesus >as a Nazarene, or a native of Nazareth (Matthew 2:23). He further says that >this is a fulfillment of an earlier prediction. However, no such saying of >the prophets is found in any of the books contained in the Bible, which >suggests that some scripture has been lost. You might be interested to note >that there are many books of scripture mentioned in the Bible which we do >not currently h. Fue. Including the following: The Book of the Covenant >(Exo. 24:7); Book of the Wars of the Lord (Numb. 21:14); Book of Jasher >(Josh. 10:13); Book of the Statutes (I Sam. 10:25); Book of Enoch (Jude 14); >Book of the Acts of Solomon (I Kings 11:41); Book of Nathan the Prophet and >Gad the Seer (I Chron. 29:29); Books of Ahijah the Shilonite and the Visions >of Iddo the Seer (2 Chron. 9:29); Book of Shemaiah (2 Chron. 12:15); Story >of the Prophet Iddo (2 Chron. 13:22); Book of Jehu (2 Chron. 20: 34); the >Acts of Uzziah, by Isaiah the son of Amoz (2 Chron. 26:22); Sayings of the >Seers (2 Chron. 33:19); a missing epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (I >Cor. 5:9) a missing epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3:3); a missing epistle >to the Colossians, written from Laodicea (Col. 4:16); a missing epistle of >Jude (Jude 3). There are indeed many books that are not in the standard Protestant Bible. Before a book is admitted into the canon it must first pass a series of objective tests. This is how church leaders have been able to determine what should be in the bible and what shouldn't. First, many of the books you have mentioned were written B.C. The canon (Old Testament) was completed at the time of Christ. Surely if some books had been left out, Christ would have pointed this out, as He repeatedly quoted Old Testament passages. Some tests of a New Testament Book are as follows: 1. Written by an Apostle or a close associate of an Apostle. 2. Read and studied by early church. 3. NO contradictions to the whole of scripture. 4. No inaccuracies of any kind. (Historical, geographical, etc.) 5. Quoted by church Fathers. These tests were also applied to some Old Testament books that exist today but have been rejected.(i.e. Apocrapha). Speaking of lost books, I fail to see what this has to do with so-called revelation going on today. >Finally, may I direct your attention to Deuteronomy 4:2, which reads ``Ye >shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish >ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which >I command you.'' > >Are you ready to reject all the books of the Bible which follow Deuteronomy, >Mr. Arndt? > >Tammi Wright >Ken Dellinger >(Both members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) I am ready to reject any books that would change the message of scripture as completed in the first century. Jude 3 & 4. warns us to earnestly contend for the faith which was ONCE AND FOR ALL delivered to the saints. The faith can not drastically change if it was ONCE AND FOR ALL delivered. God has spoken in these latter days through His Son. His Son spoke through His commissioned Apostles. When the Apostolic age ended so did special Revelation. Down through the church age, men have tried to add to the faith, add to the prophetic completion of Revelation, resulting in chaos and confusion. Jehovahs Witnesses tell us that Christ is not God, Mormons tell us that Christ is one of many Gods, Christian Scientists tell us that Jesus was a man who demonstrated the Christ in all of us. And there are a myriad of others who tell us their idea or revelation. The Bible tells us that there is ONE God. That Christ is the IMAGE of the invisible God! That the Word of God was made FLESH and lived among us! That man was separated from God through sin but God reconciled the world to himself in Christ. When a modern day prophet undermines these great truths, it is the true prophet of God's responsibility to call the church to a position of biblical authority. Dan
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (05/31/85)
In article <322@scgvaxd.UUCP> dan@scgvaxd.UUCP (Dan Boskovich) writes: > > God has given revelation to man three times. First, through Moses and Joshua, > second, through Elijah and the prophets, and finally through Christ and the > Apostles. The pattern has been established. Revelation, accompanied by > confirming signs and wonders; then silence! > > God has recorded in His word all that man needs for Salvation and > Worship. The Holy Spirit will lead us in our lives using the WORD > to guide our paths. > > Can you imagine the confusion that would arise if God spoke directly to > man today. What criteria could he possibly use to confirm that it is > the voice of God. Confusion? Just the opposite I should think! If God spoke to each man and then confirmed his word with some specific sign or wonder then each man would be his own revelation and his own prophet. The truth would be known! In fact, that's how God seems to work today. It just takes some perception to "see" God and his personal revelation. Sorry if that sounds like an electronic preacher talking. Personal revelation is the only sure-fire way for each man to confirm, for himself, that there is indeed a God. And what if one cannot believe his own perceptions? Just talk to your fellow man and compare notes with him. If you find similarities in experiences, then you will have adequate justification and evidence. Looking at the proliferation of religious sects and interpretations within Christianity today I see a lot more confusion than there needs to be. That's what happens when you have a revelation given to a specific few... differing interpretations of "THE TRVTH." Why it's the Tower of Babel all over again! Indeed the best justification is the method scientists use today to confirm their findings. Instead of the tests being repeatable and verifiable, we have experience with God being a daily occurance that is verifiable amongst ourselves. But woe unto he that interprets his own needs and concerns as those of God. Make sense? > God ALWAYS confirms His revelations through specific signs and wonders. Perhaps to the overall group. To the individual? I wonder. > Actually, sometimes the truth sounds harsh but is best in the long run. > The BIBLE says things like, "The wounds of a friend are better than the > kiss of an enemy!, Open rebuke is better than secret love." And such > statements as, "Every mans way is right in his own eyes!, Have mercy > on some who are doubting, save others snatching them out of the fire, and > on some mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh!" Words that are truly not wasted on the net. That's why I repeat them here. >> [Ken Arndt] >> First, this book is written by the Apostle John. I thought the identity of John of Patmos was still uncertain and under debate? Gotta go... -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!speaker - Speaker-To-Animals ARPA: trwatf!speaker@SEISMO "Money from da Buddah"
steiny@idsvax.UUCP (Don Steiny) (06/02/85)
*** This week's Time magazine had an article that verified in the authentic hand of one of the wittnesses to Joe Smith's revelation that Joe Smith encountered a "white salamander", not an angel. I believe the line of the Mormon church is that the Mormons were unfairly prosecuted. However, Joe Smith was once arrested for "money digging." Joe Smith alledgedly had "seer stone." He would put the stone in a hat to block out the light and the stone would become translucent. It would reveal to him where gold and other treasures were buried in the earth. People would pay Joe a small sum (very small, apparently) and he would tell them where to dig for treasure. He was arrested for this and the judge concluded that Joe was so simple minded that he acutally believed his own line and that he could not punish him too heavily. (How would you like to have to explain to a police officer that your name really IS Joe Smith?) It was this same stone that eventually pointed Joe to the golden tablets where, inscribed (in reformed Egyptian), were several coda to the Old Testiment. Now you might wonder how Joe, who could not even write, could read reformed Egyptian. Well, that same wonderful stone acted as translator. Joe spend some time, face buried in hat, reading off the translation to his wife, who could write and wrote it down. I read this account in "Mormonism - Shadow or Reality," by Gerald and Sandra Tanner. The Tanners run a newspaper in Salt Lake City called the "Salt Lake City Messanger." Much of the information was gathered from newspapers and court records of the time. The Tannrs are former Mormons who have spent years researching the historical records of the Mormons and have written several books on their findings. The Mormons have said that the court records were falsified because of religious prosecution. The new evidence seems to bear out the court account. pesnta!idsvax!steiny Don Steiny - Computational Linguistics 109 Torrey Pine Terr. Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 (408) 425-0832
dan@scgvaxd.UUCP (Dan Boskovich) (06/06/85)
In article <953@trwatf.UUCP> root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) writes: > >Confusion? Just the opposite I should think! If God spoke to each man >and then confirmed his word with some specific sign or wonder then each >man would be his own revelation and his own prophet. The truth would >be known! In fact, that's how God seems to work today. It just takes >some perception to "see" God and his personal revelation. Sorry if >that sounds like an electronic preacher talking. And if I ask God to confirm that what I am doing is right (lets say I want to divorce my wife) by a specific sign (make the lights go off) and there is suddenly a power outage...... Yes, Confusion! I could have looked in Gods word to find that God hates divorce but allows it under specific circumstances. And that men are to love their wives as Christ loved the church...that is, UNCONDITIONALY! etc. etc. But rather, I sought personal revelation which ended up in confusion! >Personal revelation is the only sure-fire way for each man to confirm, for >himself, that there is indeed a God. And what if one cannot believe his >own perceptions? Just talk to your fellow man and compare notes with him. >If you find similarities in experiences, then you will have adequate >justification and evidence. > This opens the door to every nut with a so-called revelation from God. Using this logic, how could we dispute a Jim Jones or the nut who killed his child because God told him the child would rise from the dead. Every modern prophet has a new revelation that completly contradicts the others. Are you saying that God actually gave personal revelation to Mary Baker Eddy, Joseph Smith, Watchtower, Armstrong, etc. Which one is right? Are they all right? I think there is a better way. God gave us all the Revelation we need in the Bible. The Holy Spirit confirms this to us and leads us along using Gods written word as a guideline. We don't need revelation from God to tell us which house to buy or which job to take. We are capable of making rational decisions for ourselves with the mind that God gave us. The scriptures can serve as a guideline for all of our daily decisions. For example, I wouldn't take a job as a male stripper because I believe God's word clearly teaches that that would be sinful. He doesn't have to tell me that in a dream! >Looking at the proliferation of religious sects and interpretations >within Christianity today I see a lot more confusion than there needs >to be. That's what happens when you have a revelation given to a >specific few... differing interpretations of "THE TRVTH." Why it's >the Tower of Babel all over again! Wrong! Thats what happens when you add to that Revelation! Denominational difference are minute compared to those who have subscribed to another source of authority. >Indeed the best justification is the method scientists use today to confirm >their findings. Instead of the tests being repeatable and verifiable, we >have experience with God being a daily occurance that is verifiable amongst >ourselves. But woe unto he that interprets his own needs and concerns as >those of God. The best way to confirm Christianity is to read God's word, believe it, then experience it in your own life. The bible talks about man's spiritual longing, his guilt over sin, and Gods forgiveness in Christ. What better way to confirm Gods word than to experience all of these in your own life. Dan