The Long and Winding Road (To Ruin) or Eight Days a Week (Of Woe): Mormon Apostle Blames the Beatles for Society's Ills

[Shulem]

The second takes a leap of reasoned faith beyond traditional Christianity.

Oh, you mean like:

• King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.
• Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.
• Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.

Do you have that kind of faith, MG?

Bear your testimony you know those things are true.

[Limnor]

Others see it as the gospel being fleshed out into its fullness of restoration through the instrumentality of Joseph Smith by Jesus Christ and God the Father.

…

The second takes a leap of reasoned faith beyond traditional Christianity.

Regards,
MG

Could you please describe the reasoning that leads you to believe that a restoration of ancient doctrines—appendages, as Joseph admits they are—was required?

Because I don’t understand how you come to that conclusion—if those appendages were really ancient doctrines lost and in need of restoration then the Book of Mormon itself should be the one place they appear.

Instead it denies the legitimacy of adding them at all. The book says the gospel is complete and unchangeable as delivered by Christ, and that adding “more or less” to His doctrine “cometh of evil”.

I’ve got a follow-up question as well, but it isn’t about whether appendages can be meaningful to some, or whether ancient Christians had diverse beliefs, or whether God can reveal things “line upon line.”

The question is simpler and more historical:

What reasonable evidence leads you to conclude that Joseph’s later doctrines were once ancient, widely-held Christian teachings that disappeared—and therefore required restoration—when the book that introduces the Restoration does not identify anything that was missing at the time of publication?

[MG 2.0]

What reasonable evidence leads you to conclude that Joseph’s later doctrines were once ancient, widely-held Christian teachings that disappeared—and therefore required restoration—when the book that introduces the Restoration does not identify anything that was missing at the time of publication?

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history? That history and God's place in it ought to be standardized/uniform without adaption to cultures and conditions of groups of people?

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history? That history and God's place in it ought to be standardized/uniform without adaption to cultures and conditions of groups of people?

I'm saying that if God was to read the writing in the vignette of Facsimile No. 3 from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time it would read according to what the Egyptian priest actually wrote -- a standard/uniform interpretation rather than false readings tendered by Joe Smith, a Mormon prophet who didn't know jack about what it means. For example:

let it load and see here

Food for thought:

Jesus Christ = Jesus Christ, not Ronald McDonald

[I Have Questions]

What reasonable evidence leads you to conclude that Joseph’s later doctrines were once ancient, widely-held Christian teachings that disappeared—and therefore required restoration—when the book that introduces the Restoration does not identify anything that was missing at the time of publication?

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history? That history and God's place in it ought to be standardized/uniform without adaption to cultures and conditions of groups of people?

Regards,
MG

MG, are you saying that L. Tom Perry was lying when he said

The world changes constantly and dramatically, but God, His commandments, and promised blessings do not change. They are immutable and unchanging. —Elder L. Tom Perry

I admit I was surprised that L. Tom "the briefcase has all the answers" Perry that when Mormonism is full of examples of God's commandments changing when it suited the circumstances. So "Thou Shalt Not Kill" doesn't seem to have been important when Nephi cut off the head of an inebriated and sleeping innocent man. Nor did "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" apply to the early Prophets of the restoration. In fact there's a narrative that God Himself forced Joseph Smith to commit adultery. And then we have dithering Dallin H. Oaks unable to clarify when something is a permanent commandment and when it's only temporary. So I'm with you brother, it's all, very confusing.

[Limnor]

What reasonable evidence leads you to conclude that Joseph’s later doctrines were once ancient, widely-held Christian teachings that disappeared—and therefore required restoration—when the book that introduces the Restoration does not identify anything that was missing at the time of publication?

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history? That history and God's place in it ought to be standardized/uniform without adaption to cultures and conditions of groups of people?

Regards,
MG

No—that’s not what I’m saying at all, and your response doesn’t contain evidence. No one is demanding a standardized message across all cultures. I’m saying that if a later doctrine is claimed to be an ancient, universal “restoration,” then the earlier text that is presented as preserving that ancient gospel shouldn’t contradict it. The Book of Mormon presents Christ’s doctrine as fixed, complete, and specifically excludes later additions.

Joseph said the fullness of the ancient gospel was restored. If that’s true, then the Book of Mormon should contain those things that needed to be “restored.” Instead it gives a closed, complete doctrine and warns that adding more or less comes “of evil.”

[Gadianton]

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history?

The statement is false because you (intentionally?) misrepresent the breadth of God's revelation from the Mormon perspective. God hasn't revealed anything to 99.9% or more of the people of this planet. God revealed everything, including the temple and all the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood to Adam in the Garden of Eden. While this may be somewhat speculative from an official standpoint today, it seems to be what everyone from Bruce R. McConkie to Hugh Nibley believed. From there it's a little murky as to when God restored the temple ordinances up until the New Testament. For instance, Hugh Nibley believed Noah retained Adam's leather temple garment (or something like that). After the New Testament and the Church of the Devil, the Catholic Church, according to Mormonism, rose to power and stamped out the very last of what God had revealed in purity, baptism, the priesthood, and the temple ordinances were revealed to Joseph Smith.

And yes, it's the exact same thing to the tiny groups of people involved. Don't believe me? Read the Sacrament prayer in Moroni to see the exact prayer the Nephites used and compare it to today.

I don't why you're being coy about the apostasy and restoration. My dad had a priesthood manual from the 60s or 70s that was something like 400 pages long delving into the Great Apostasy in general and I read much of it before my mission. The same author who wrote "Jesus the Christ" wrote the book "The Great Apostasy".

[MG 2.0]

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history? That history and God's place in it ought to be standardized/uniform without adaption to cultures and conditions of groups of people?

Regards,
MG

No—that’s not what I’m saying at all, and your response doesn’t contain evidence. No one is demanding a standardized message across all cultures. I’m saying that if a later doctrine is claimed to be an ancient, universal “restoration,” then the earlier text that is presented as preserving that ancient gospel shouldn’t contradict it. The Book of Mormon presents Christ’s doctrine as fixed, complete, and specifically excludes later additions.

Joseph said the fullness of the ancient gospel was restored. If that’s true, then the Book of Mormon should contain those things that needed to be “restored.” Instead it gives a closed, complete doctrine and warns that adding more or less comes “of evil.”

Chapter and verse?

I'm still hearing you say that the gospel as taught in the Book of Mormon ought to run exactly parallel with no variance to the gospel as we have it today. My argument is "Why would we expect that?" (fleshed out a bit earlier in thread).

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Are you saying that God reveals the exact same thing from beginning to end to every group of people in every place and at every time throughout human history?

The statement is false because you (intentionally?) misrepresent the breadth of God's revelation from the Mormon perspective. God hasn't revealed anything to 99.9% or more of the people of this planet. God revealed everything, including the temple and all the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood to Adam in the Garden of Eden. While this may be somewhat speculative from an official standpoint today, it seems to be what everyone from Bruce R. McConkie to Hugh Nibley believed. From there it's a little murky as to when God restored the temple ordinances up until the New Testament. For instance, Hugh Nibley believed Noah retained Adam's leather temple garment (or something like that). After the New Testament and the Church of the Devil, the Catholic Church, according to Mormonism, rose to power and stamped out the very last of what God had revealed in purity, baptism, the priesthood, and the temple ordinances were revealed to Joseph Smith.

And yes, it's the exact same thing to the tiny groups of people involved. Don't believe me? Read the Sacrament prayer in Moroni to see the exact prayer the Nephites used and compare it to today.

I don't why you're being coy about the apostasy and restoration. My dad had a priesthood manual from the 60s or 70s that was something like 400 pages long delving into the Great Apostasy in general and I read much of it before my mission. The same author who wrote "Jesus the Christ" wrote the book "The Great Apostasy".

Views towards the apostasy have changed as we have learned more. Books and essays have been written about it.

I look at the Restoration as more or less a 'reboot' of a 1.0 program that has been corrupted along the way. Moving to a 2.0 then a 3.0 and so on. Adjustments are made along the way. We refer to it now as the ongoing restoration.

Earlier I argued that it would be actually unreasonable to expect that the 'gospel' would be seen/understood in exactly the same way throughout history.

As an obvious example, the implementation of the doctrines/ordinaces concerning sealing of families, baptisms, etc , and the means to do this at wide scale haven't existed until now. Example upon example might be given for the gospel being implemented differently at different times and in different places.

As I've said many times, critics are unable to think/look outside of the box and look at the larger picture.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

As I've said many times, critics are unable to think/look outside of the box and look at the larger picture.

I'm too busy reading the hieroglyphic writing on the vignette of Facsimile No. 3 and shaking my head on how wrong Joseph Smith was and how corrupt Mormon scripture is. That is my BOX! Will you come into the box and read too?

How do you feel about that?