- 1 Nephi 13:23
And he said: Behold it proceedeth out of the mouth of a Jew. And I, Nephi, beheld it; and he said unto me: The book that thou beholdest is a record of the Jews, which contains the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; and it also containeth many of the prophecies of the holy prophets; and it [The Bible] is a record like unto the engravings which are upon the plates of brass, save there are not so many; nevertheless, they contain the covenants of the Lord, which he hath made unto the house of Israel; wherefore, they are of great worth unto the Gentiles.
I heard a recent story about two Latter-day Saints arguing about whether the records of the Old Testament we have today were more numerous than the Brass Plates that the Nephites had. Now, the brass plates did only go up to Jeremiah, but Genesis to Jeremiah is 1020 pages (in the LDS edition of the Old Testament), and from Lamentations to Malachi is 164 pages. Let’s say, just for fun, that the Old Testament we currently have is 100% complete, well then the Nephites were only missing about 7% of the Old Testament.
Consider the other prophets quoted from the Brass Plates mentioned in the Book of Mormon that we do not have record of in the Old Testament: Zenos, Zenock, Neum, and Ezias (1 Nephi 19:10; Helaman 8:20) as well asRead Full PostGo to Comments
For the most part, mainstream Christianity views the Godhead from the perspective of the Nicene Creed (323 A.D.) which only looked at the ‘oneness’ of the Father and the Son, and the Athanasian Creed (which originated around 500 A.D.) which was the first creed to vocalize equality of the persons of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost into a ‘Trinity”. It is still a hotly contested issue to this day. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims it’s view of the Godhead from the eyewitness accounts of modern apostles and prophets.
Both views of God were brought to us by men. The Trinitarian view has evolved through time out of councils, debates and defined in creeds, the LDS view is claimed to have come from revelation. That said, let’s take a look and see what the scriptures have to say on the matter.
“The Book of Mormon teaches the doctrine of the Trinity better than the Bible.”
Believe it or not, while serving as a full-time missionary, this was a statement made by a woman that we were having a discussion with. She shared a few scriptures from the Book of Mormon that she though were some of the most beautiful Trinitarian scriptures. She asked us why we didn’t believe the doctrine of the Trinity if that is what our own book taught. Good question.
I took a minute to think about that since I had never been asked or even thought of that question before. After a moment, I mentioned how before the Book of Mormon was written, Joseph Smith had already claimed to see the Father AND the Son and that they were two separate beings. I suggested that it was possible that those whoRead Full PostGo to Comments
The Hebrew word covenant as we read in the Old Testament is: briyth (ber-eeth)
- to cut
- ‘from ‘barah’ (1262) (in the sense of cutting (like ‘bara” (1254);
- a compact (made by passing between pieces of flesh)
Let’s explore some instances from scripture where we have something being cut or divided and then a passing between the parts.
Dividing in creation
In the Creation the following things are divided:
- Light from the darkness.
- Waters from the waters.
- Water from the earth.
- Plants from the earth.
- Day from night.
- Animals from the sea and land.
- Woman from man.
- Man and woman from Eden/God.
- Sacrifice instituted.
The Red Sea
21 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.
22 And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.Read Full Post
My brethren and sisters, when those in charge of this work were planning the program, I urged upon them that they do not call this meeting for the Assembly Hall. I felt sure the congregation would be so small that we would all be unhappy. I am happily disappointed; and I am quite sure that neither the drawing power of Joseph Fielding Smith nor myself is the cause of this large attendance, but that the conviction in the hearts of the Latter-day Saints that all that pertains to temples and to temple work, to the salvation for the dead, is of tremendous worth.
I regret, of course, that Elder Joseph Fielding Smith is not here tonight. I am sorry for those of you who came to hear him speak, for you will have to come again, because he speaks tomorrow. He is filling an important engagement, and we simply exchanged evenings. I regret, however, for my own sake, that he is not here, because what I have to say needs as a background the splendid talk that he has for us. He will deal with the spirit and the mission of Elijah. I was asked to speak about temple worship. He was to take up the great generalization, the great body of principles upon which this work rests; and I was to take one small part of the application of the work, for my theme.
I feel just a little embarrassed to speak on temple worship without the background of Elder Smith’s discourse. I am embarrassed also because I realize how utterly impossible it is to deal with so vast and comprehensive a subject in theRead Full PostGo to Comments
The Proper Role of Government
by The Honorable Ezra Taft Benson
Former Secretary of Agriculture [The Eisenhower Administration – ed.] Published in 1968
Men in the public spotlight constantly are asked to express an opinion on a myriad of government proposals and projects. “What do you think of TVA?” “What is your opinion of Medicare?” How do you feel about Urban Renewal?” The list is endless. All too often, answers to these questions seem to be based, not upon any solid principle, but upon the popularity of the specific government program in question. Seldom are men willing to oppose a popular program if they, themselves, wish to be popular – especially if they seek public office.Read Full PostGo to Comments