This justification of excluding Mormons as Christians is that we have a different canon (authoritative list of sacred books) than do real Christians, in that we add books of scripture to the Christian Bible. The passage usually identified in support of this position is Rev. 22:18-19: “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.”
The naïve and casual reader of scripture might wish to apply this to the entirety of the Bible where it is found in the last chapter of the last book of the Bible. John’s Book of Revelation was a book unto itself, remaining such for centuries. Scholarly consensus does not date Revelation as the last book written. If Revelation was not the last book of the New Testament to be written, then obviously Rev. 22: 18-19 cannot be understood as an authoritative statement closing the canon of scripture.
The emptiness of the assertion deepens when it is realized that there was no Bible as a standard collection of bound works at the time Revelation was written. A standard collection simply did not exist. For centuries after the death of John the individual books that now compose the standard Bible were being circulated singly or in combination with several others, but never as a complete Bible.
Of the 362 biblical manuscripts dated prior to the tenth century, none contain the entire Bible.
When John warned against adding to the “prophecy of this book”, he was not referring to the collections of books bound together in one volume and known as the Bible.
The question worthy of an answer is "Why would Christians resort to such a weak argument to reject the Mormons?"
Regardless, we believe in Jesus Christ as our God and Savior. Our Eternal God in Heaven we worship alone, in the name of Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit. All our prayers are to Our Father in Heaven in this manner.
I am a Christian who has read, studied, and gone over the entire Bible over a long period of time (12 years.) I do know in whom I have believed.
I have had varied, interesting experiences with Mormons over the last couple of years. One, who I currently work with, is a fine man of utmost integrity and pleasant disposition, and I am very comfortable around him. I would trust him with my life in an emergency.
BethAnne on Blogstream is also an awesome woman. Her heart shows her to be a God-seeker. She is a peacemaker.
Stealthanachrid/Gecko, on the other hand, treated me with contempt and arrogance. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S BECAUSE HE'S LDS, I BELIEVE IT'S SIMPLY HIS PERSONALITY. He likes to "stir the pot."
I've also had experiences with what I call abusive churches--they DEMAND that I listen to everything the pastor says without question, and they try to control your schedule so you're a slave to the church authority.
The main issue I have with Mormons--and please don't take it as an attack on you--is that you call me an apostate. That's like saying to your husband, "You're not part of this house. You're not my husband."
If you are a Christian, you will not call me an apostate--unless you believe differently than I do.
Now that is a switch. We are the name-callers. You have not said my husband called you an "apostate" but that our church collectively calls you "apostate". I cannot address your particular offense but it is error. You are not qualified to be apostate, unless you initially formerly were a member in good standing. What I am saying is unless you were a member in good standing the label doesn't fit whether it is stated or not.
Are you a former member? In leaving you would have left the faith as we define it. But I gotta tell you: You are still Christian even then.
You have not made a personal statement concerning our Christian status. That would reveal something important about you where revealed.
My Christian friend, are we Christian?
Knowing my husband as well as I do after 35 years of marriage, I certainly understand your offense to him on other grounds. Zealots always offend. Zealots would make very controversial short lived Protestant ministers, yet the Apostles and Jesus Christ were aptly zealots of the faith. They were all killed because the Jews were told by them that they had corrupted the word of God and the Jews also were the presiding judiciary. Jesus and the crowd "stirred the pot". The doctrines of the Apostles and Jesus Christ were offensive because those teachings pointedly revealed the error and the corrupting influences of the day. The Jew that Christ spoke to were "Apostate" in every way. Nobody likes to be called names. Jesus insulted many who deserved it, if the Bible is read carefully those insults are seen.
Jesus did not call Gentiles such names. They didn't qualify.
I have another opinion regarding this topic. Even when Christianity became politicized for many hundreds of years, I believe that the truth of the Gospel never died out--that there have always been true Christians from the tiime of Pentecost until this present day. I may have misread (or read accurately) something about the Truth "disappearing." I would like to know what you have to say.
Incidentally, a very powerful Scripture is found in Matthew ch. 7:
"By their fruit you shall know them."
I wonder what you remarks have in support of rejecting Mormons on Biblical grounds? I see nothing.
Let's get into some deeper stuff now. Will you go there with me?
You "believe that the truth of the Gospel never died out--that there have always been true Christians from the time of Pentecost until this present day."
Some Christians believe that.
As I stated earlier, as humans we are nearsighted. God's instruction to us did not begin with the mortal Christ, nor even later at pentecost. Pentecost derives from the Law of Moses as described in Deuteronomy. It has earlier rich tradition with God's chosen Jews. That shouldn't surprise anyone. Some of the most devout people have not been Christian at all! The Protestant believes them somehow lost forever because they are not. That is silliness.
Are you suggesting that where Pentecost is not part of their tradition, they do not recieve a witness of the Holy Ghost, that they do not have an insight and guidance from God? I assert that what you describe for Pentecost is not unique to Christians at all.
If you presume that Mormons believe that the Gospel "died out" you are mistaken. We have always said that all religions have a handle on a portion of the truth. The Great Apostasy was not the death of spiritual truth. Nor was Pentecost, as Protestants describe it, the Birth after the mortal death of Christ. What was lost with the Great Apostasy was the most plain and precious parts of The Gospel. It was the knowledge of many things deeply spiritual.
What would you know of truth that has long ago died out? What kind of certainty is there where it is long gone and so much has changed? Where you suppose perhaps "through the spirit" that none of it has, how can you test the voracity of any evidence to the contrary? You dismiss it out of hand, or are in constant search for it when what you thought was truth no longer is for YOU.
This is in fact where you have gotten yourself in trouble in the past with ministers! You question their sense of the truth, the fruits they bring! So, does one preacher have it but another not? How could that be?
What church has the true Gospel of Jesus Christ? This is exactly the question that took Joseph Smith into what we now call the sacred grove as a young man.
You say you are dedicated in your reading of the Bible. You obviously interpret what Paul has stated about Apostasy differently. This is startling to me that so many have when anyone can look around and see all the different and contrary fruit out there. Yet the Protestant calls all of it under their tent, the "Gospel".
Call it what you will, but in doing so - certainly call us Christian.
"What was lost with the Great Apostasy was the most plain and precious parts of The Gospel. It was the knowledge of many things deeply spiritual."
This is where I disagree.
The most plain and precious part of the Gospel is that Jesus Christ came to earth to be the perfect, sinless Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. Jesus died and shed his blood for the forgiveness of our sins. This forgiveness of sins is available to anyone who desires to receive it.
This one and only Gospel is completely contained in the Bible, which wasn't corrupted.
No sin is unforgiveable except rejecting God's mercy and grace and desiring to be in charge of your own life. This results in eternal separation from God.
You asked me about whether or not I consider you a Christian. I don't want to answer that right now because of what you said about the "most precious parts of the Gospel being lost." Forgivenesss of sins IS the precious part of the Gospel, and it never got lost.
If forgiveness isn't important, then this whole "Jesus" thing is a sham.
Then there is the challenge of squaring tolerance with your previous statements there.
I feel like I've had blasphemies spoken at me for what I believe about the awesome forgiveness available through Jesus Christ, due to this "apostasy" question that still hasn't been answered,
and ALSO due to professing Christians I have encountered who would desire me to be under a yoke of bondage to their human traditions and their own judgments.
Your profile shows no interest at all in Christianity. Why are you here complaining to me? I am not imposing Mormonism on you. You came here.
I have no argument with your faith, whatever it might be.
The subject here is the rejection of Mormons as Christians because of canonic reasons. If you care to remark further, provide a reasoned discussion concerning that subject.
"Your profile shows no interest at all in Christianity."
Many of my posts in my blog are directly about Biblical/Christian things.
Many of my posts are about life as I encounter it.
And something I've encountered on Blogstream is this Mormon difficulty with certain Christians, as written here, and on BethAnne's and Stealth/Gecko's blogs, and on "Theology For Dummies."
So I believe my interest in Chrisianity is very visible indeed.
YOU SAID:
"The subject is the rejection of Mormons for canonic reasons."
I don't like to argue over what I call "theology." For example, I don't care for "Theology For Dummies" because they often talk about things I consider unimportant.
As for the rejection of Mormons as Christians, I will answer your basic question "Are Mormons Christain?" When I stand before God at the Judgment, God will not ask if I was a Methodist, Mormon, Catholic or Baptist. He will know me as a good tree that bore good fruit, or he will not know me and send me to the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Being a good tree--A disciple of Christ--means having roots grounded in Christ.
Mormons can be Christians--absolutely--but God looks at the heart of a man, not a label.
I hope you will be more open than your husband has been to me - I start by saying that you may believe what you want - but when in error regarding "christian" matter you should want to be updated. I know I would and if my thoughts were in error I would want correction. With that in mind I will state - and you can do what you want - be informed or deny but it won't change the true facts.
I must say without hesitation that you speak in ERROR on your posting – Joseph Smith did make changes and additions to the Book of Revelations along with many other books in the Bible. Please read an excerpt from an article and feel free to read the entire if you want to learn so more facts about your prophet. I know you may not like what you read, but it is fact and in Mormon History also. Please read the following and draw from it what you want – I know you will.
“EXTENT OF THE CHANGES. Joseph Smith made extensive corrections and additions to the books of Genesis, Exodus, Psalms, Isaiah, Matthew, Luke, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, and Revelation. He also made many alterations in the writings of the Old Testament prophets and in Mark, John, Acts, and several of the epistles. He made no changes in Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Obadiah, Micah, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Malachi, Philemon, 2 John, and 3 John. He made some corrections in all other books of the Bible, and rejected the Song of Solomon as not being inspired scripture.”
· You may find the entire article here:
·
· Joseph Smith Translation (JST) of the Bible
Joseph Smith's work with the Bible has been known by various titles. The revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants call it a "translation" (D&C 37:1; ...www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/bible/jst_eom.htm
feel free to endulge yourself in more information regarding Joseph Smith Jn. and changes to the Word of God. Best regards, Lookin'
With that auspicious beginning, my reply is: I'm afraid not.
Need I say, your comment is insulting? I do not expect you to be more disciplined in your speech with me than you have been with him...unless your problem is a guy thing. Be yourself and I will be myself and with the abuses you have previously heaped on my husband, you may find yourself blocked by me as well when repeated here.
You distorted what I wrote. God bless the prophets in all time who have corrected the corruptions of their day. Prophets have always contributed scripture. They are an ordained instrument of God. Wherever history speaks of men and women so positioned, that is what they are busy doing. In correcting people, some of them get crucified. Some of them get shot. But God has always sent another.
YOUR Comment in your posting: When John warned against adding to the “prophecy of this book”, he was not referring to the collections of books bound together in one volume and known as the Bible.
The question worthy of an answer is "Why would Christians resort to such a weak argument to reject the Mormons?"
----
Was what I was referring to - nothing more and nothing else - there were additions to Revelation, among other - so let God's plagues stand to the persons whom they relate to - Enough said.
As far as blocking me - that is your choice - I found with Stealth - He didn't like it when I disagreed with him and he found it easier to block me, that is how I looked at what he did. That stops all communication and maybe that is how he handles things but I prefer to discuss things as Adults and not take my ball and run away. Either way - I hope that you keep the dialogue open but it is your blog and you have the right to have it the way you decide. It is each of our rights to do what we want on our own blog. Discuss or block - choices are made with each of us. May God bless you with wisdom either way you choose.
You seem to have issues with a God who continues to call Prophets. That does make sense, it's a reality unlike your own, unlike the Bible though.
Didn't Jesus explain that his coming did not "destroy the Prophets" though he did satisfy the earlier law of Moses. With the law of Moses satisfied, are we now left to join with any or no church that we might be inclined to do or not do? And we do it or not do it as if the Prophets are destroyed? That is your stated position.
It seems among Protestants visiting me, there isn't much in personal commitment that is significant. Excepting the need to hammer anything unlike what they believe.
Your information regarding aspects of me is amazing being that we have not previously spoken. If you have concluded that you know what I will say before I say it - we have nothing to discuss. My part of the conversation has already been concluded, as you are already answering for me. Maybe that is why you have problems with me and other people, not of your faith. Have a great day.
For future reference, I don't know that ridiculing my husband as you introduce yourself encourages friendship. You might want to try to mimic the friendly tones of others who regularly visit here.
I told you now didn't I. Will come back again when the place smells rosey again.