"None Can Preach the Gospel Like the Mormons Do"

[_consiglieri]

Such is the danger of plucking a verse from it's specific and broad context.

Always a danger to be guarded against.

I read the context of chapter 15 in First Corinthians to be a litany of arguments Paul is making against some Corinthian saints who have ceased believing in the resurrection.

Paul argues in verse 29 that their lack of belief in the resurrection conflicts with their own religious practices.

How do you read it?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_cafe crema]

consig

Although we talk a lot about scripture marking in the LDS Church (are other churches different in this regard?), and although it certainly serves a purpose, I am starting to feel that by marking scriptures we are simulteously defining what scriptures are important and what they mean, thereby making it more difficult to subsequently alter that understanding or see other passages of import.

Do you mean underlining or using a highlighter to mark scripture? If so, yes, I used to do that with my Bible. I also wrote particular verses in the back of my Bible. It is not something that was encouraged or discouraged in the church I was raised up in.

Personally, I find it more effective to try to ignore the numbering of the verses. I think it robs us of the flow of the text and meaning.

I would *love* to find a Bible that doesn't have verse breaks!

The Jerusalem Bible Readers edition has a single column format with the verse numbers in the side margin, so does my 1985 edition of the New Jerusalem Bible.

[_msnobody]

Last evening, I was visiting with my neighbors and the subject came around to Mormonism by way of Warren Jeffs.

One thing led to another and I ended up talking about the LDS belief in the spirit world, the preaching of the gospel there to all who haven't had the chance to hear it, and segued into the necessity of baptism and temple work for the dead.

Here is the fun part.

My neighbor (the wife who is in her 50's) had a strict and thorough religious upbringing in a Bible based Christian church. She has read the Bible through a number of times and has many passages committed to memory.

In talking about Jesus preaching to the dead, I mentioned 1 Peter 3:18-20 and 4:6. She went and grabbed a Bible (she has many lying about) and opened it to the passages and read them.

She was floored. She could not recall ever seeing these passages before, and was shocked that they should be right there in her KJV New Testament.

She had a similar experience when we moved on to 1 Corinthians 15:29.

I was wondering if anybody has thoughts as to why this would happen, and whether they have had similar experiences.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Why would this happen? Lack of familiarity with the text.

[_consiglieri]

Why would this happen? Lack of familiarity with the text.

Yes, that would be the obvious reason, except in this instance my neighbor (at least proclaims she) is very familiar with the text.

I think this sort of things happens with sufficient regularity to people who are very familiar with the text to not necessarily believe she is dissembling.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_consiglieri]

It all depends on the church one is raised in. An Orthdox Christian would tell you exactly what the passages in 1 Peter mean and it would have nothing to do with what Mormons think. In fact it's commonly on the painted walls of Orthodox churches. You will see a scene of Christ emerging from hell with the souls he has rescued following him.

I mentioned to her while leaving that this was not a new idea, but that main line churches have from their very beginnings recognized and taught the Descensus.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_MrStakhanovite]

I was wondering if anybody has thoughts as to why this would happen, and whether they have had similar experiences.

American Christians (in my experience) don’t typically “read” the Bible in any sort of systematic and thoughtful way. Many skim over the pages, looking for things that have a pastoral value for them, and don’t think to about making connections concerning doctrine. Also, many people can be profoundly unread, has she never googled the word Mormon to find out what her friends and neighbors believed?

I would have castigated her, furiously and dramatically at that. When you read the Bible you have to pour over a chapter/book many times, letting the text speak to you, and letting the author change you.

Most Churches don’t teach their congregants how to conduct a decent exegesis of the text, have no clue about their denominational history, or even aware what their Church’s statement of faith is, what confessions it holds to or what have you. How many Lutherans study the Heidelberg Catchechism?

[_why me]

LDS setting. I'm sure Bible Study is actual study in some places!

Your second point, about the consequences of the practice of underlining probably doesn't go far enough. Marking up texts is necessary to learning; to really read you have to work over a book! But this means more than just the underlining of "important" passages in yellow marker that my students have learned: one of the terrible anti-learning habits engendered in the destroyed classrooms of America. You need to write marginalia, do your own cross-indexing, develop habits that encourage rereading and critical reflection. And this may be harder in a religious setting where the object of study is given a kind of hands-off "sacred" status.

You may be correct but also you may be just a tad intellectualizing the reading process. Most adults have no clue on how to read a text. As you pointed out, most students underline and underline marking the margin with an exclamation mark for more importance. Critical reflection is not part of the bargain because it does take time. But the general population is certainly out of touch with the academic reading process found in the SQ3r method.

The reason why Consig's friend never saw what that passage said was because she interpreted it in a way that made that verse unimportant for understanding or she had a benign understanding of that verse.

[_why me]

American Christians (in my experience) don’t typically “read” the Bible in any sort of systematic and thoughtful way. Many skim over the pages, looking for things that have a pastoral value for them, and don’t think to about making connections concerning doctrine.

The LDS shine in reading scripture and pondering the meanings that the scriptures contain. No one can say that the LDS are discouraged from studying scripture and pondering the meanings of verses.

[_Hoops]

American Christians (in my experience) don’t typically “read” the Bible in any sort of systematic and thoughtful way. Many skim over the pages, looking for things that have a pastoral value for them, and don’t think to about making connections concerning doctrine. Also, many people can be profoundly unread, has she never googled the word Mormon to find out what her friends and neighbors believed?

I disagree profoundly. Mostly because I feel the need to disagree with you on SOMETHING so that we can trade insults.

Heidelberg Catchechism?

Don't know about this one, but I know a lot of Lutherans and Baptists who know the Heineken Catachism.

[_The Nehor]

This happens. I'm reminded of the conservative evangelical preacher steeped in the Bible who was sick and tired of Leftists trying to hijack his Bible by trying to talk about social justice and the care of the poor.

He decided to read his Bible through and create a definitive refutation of the whole thing. He came out of that study a different man.

The quest to take fresh eyes to the scriptures so we can smash the false justifications and understandings we've built up about the gospel must be continual.