Here is the post: “Christians’ Rejection of the Bible.”
And here is a short synopsis from me as I have been studying Jeremiah 5.
- Many Jews thought the prophets were windbags (see the text).
- Many Protestants think the prophets are windbags.
- Probably, the same percentage claiming Mormonism as their cultural religion think the prophets are windbags.
- I let the words of Prophet Jeremiah wound me weekly. But I think Prophet Thomas S. Monson is a windbag except when he quotes KJV biblical scripture.
But don’t feel bad, LDS friends. I think every Protestant minister is a windbag when he or “she” is not heralding the Scriptures.
And to be honest, young Jeremiah in his twenties creates all kinds of emotions within me.
The elderly President Monson in his sing song voice puts me to sleep. 🙂
Thanks for your notice, Todd. My own sentiments are similar.
Woops. I posted before I saw your President Monson sing song comment. My sentiments on that point are not similar.
I also find myself wondering what “zeal” means, from your perspective.
As an aside, I think one of my former roommates has played basketball with you, Todd, up in IF. Apparently, one of his buddies is in your congragation.
Some zeal to point out the elephant under the carpet in the big wide parlor of Christianity.
All this “Christianity” in the Western Hemisphere – and how many of them really care about what is in the Bible?
Well, I’d love to take credit for the zeal, but I’d have to defer to Brigham Young and rightfully Joseph Smith on this one.
From my perch, Joseph wanted more wisdom than what he saw of God’s overabundance of revelation in the Bible.
Well, he got ideas . . . eternal matter, separate gods, a pantheon, celestial sex, tiered afterlife according to works, ecclesiastical structure, secluded rituals, tight authority, etc. and etc. and etc.
But none of it can be claimed as new revelation.
To this day, I think Joseph’s use of the KJV translation is one of his foulest hypocrisies. He rejected all the fundamental doctrines by the KJV translators revealed in their translation, and yet he claims to be the lover of the Prostestant KJV and the restorer of it.
“From my perch, Joseph wanted more wisdom than what he saw of God’s overabundance of revelation in the Bible.”
Perhaps. Revelation in the Bible is certainly abundant, yet I would contest that the Protestant concept of a Bible “overabundant” in revelation stems from attempts to extrapolate information from a text that is not definite or comprehensive enough to support their doctrine.
Joseph Smith said it well: “The teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.”
He didn’t want additional wisdom. He simply wanted clarification of the wisdom he already had (I suppose one could argue that that constitutes more wisdom). Instead of following the examples of his contemporaries and peers who ran back through the Bible assured that it must clarfiy itself, he went to the Source of revelation (as the Bible instructed him to do), and then accepted the revelation which the Source elected to give him.
I reference to the “new revelation” that at the same time is not “new revelation,” I’d agree with you that they all have some parallel in what people in various times and places have previously believed, but the way it all fit into the economy of God is unparalleled and indeed required restoration.
I think LDS understand passages much more differently today than American evangelicals ever did in the early 1800s.
Of course they do, but that’s not the point. The point is the reason why they understand passages differently.