How do mormons get around galatians 1 verse 8

[Koontzy]

8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned..

How do they get around this verse??? My brother said that when he talked to some LDS members they just said that it was incorrectly translated???

Thx

 

[Alma]

8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned..

How do they get around this verse??? My brother said that when he talked to some LDS members they just said that it was incorrectly translated???

Thx

I really doubt that any Mormon would contend that this passage was translated incorrectly.

There's no need to "get around" this passage. The warning isn't against angels per se as much as it is against preaching a different gospel than the one preached by the original apostles. The premise of Mormonism is that the original gospel preached by the apostles was restored by the ministering of angels through Joseph Smith. We contend that the different gospel was introduced long before Joseph Smith and he was called to rectify that situation. Just consider the difference between the Sermon on the Mount and the creed of Nicaea. In the words of Edwin Hatch, the contrast is "patent." The gospel preached by the angels of Mormonism is the same gospel preached by Paul and the other apostles.

Alma

 

[drstevej]

The gospel preached by the angels of Mormonism is the same gospel preached by Paul and the other apostles.

Alma

Then explain why the JST of Romans 8:30 changes Paul's term justified to sanctified with absolutely no manuscript evdience supporting the change!

This change makes glorification based upon sanctification not justification... that is another gospel.

Try another explanation. Or kindly supply the manuscript support for the JST change!

 

[SayWhat???]

8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned..

How do they get around this verse??? My brother said that when he talked to some LDS members they just said that it was incorrectly translated???

Thx

OCs are quick to quote Galatians 1:8. They are not so quick to remember Revelation 14:6, which speaks of the last days, declaring that an angel would, in fact, bring the everlasting gospel to be preached unto all people.

So, analyzing both scriptures, the question is not whether or not an angel brought it, but whether it is the "everlasting gospel," as in Revelation, or "another gospel" as warned about in Galatians. The LDS believe that it was the everlasting Gospel, the same one preached by Christ, that the angel Moroni brought, and not another one.

I have a couple of questions for you about the verse in Revelation:

1. Why would an angel bring the everlasting gospel in the last days if it already existed in its fulness in the Bible (i.e. if there were no apostasy)?

2. The LDS interpret this verse in Revelation to refer to the restoration of the Gospel by the angel Moroni. If that is not the case, what exactly is this verse referring to?

 

[drstevej]

the question is not whether or not an angel brought it, but whether it is the "everlasting gospel," as in Revelation, or "another gospel" as warned about in Galatians.

see post #3

it's another gospel

 

[SayWhat???]

see post #3

it's another gospel

We could probably start another thread on justification/sanctification, but since I do not wish to hijack this one, let's jsut say that that one word does not another gospel make.

What about the questions I asked?

 

[drstevej]

We could probably start another thread on justification/sanctification, but since I do not wish to hijack this one, let's jsut say that that one word does not another gospel make.

What about the questions I asked?

That changes the gospel from what Christ has done for us to what He does in us! It makes good works the gospel.

It is very relevant to this thread. it may be uncomfortable for you that JS changes the bible to suit his theology.

Lds preach a false gospel, have a false priesthood, false ordinances and promote a second chance in their post-mortal theology.

Galatian 1:8 is a glove that fits JS

 

[gort]

We could probably start another thread on justification/sanctification, but since I do not wish to hijack this one, let's jsut say that that one word does not another gospel make.

What about the questions I asked?

Alas, but 3 different kingdoms does another gospel make.

<><

 

[CaliforniaKid]

Just consider the difference between the Sermon on the Mount and the creed of Nicaea. In the words of Edwin Hatch, the contrast is "patent."

I'm sorry, Alma, but I couldn't help but laugh when I read this. What in the world is this even supposed to mean? This is like saying we should compare the King Follett Discourse with the book of Job. Of course the "contrast is patent," because the two works are addressing completely different subjects and are written in completely different styles. They're not even in the same genre!

The Nicene Creed is a theological creed, intended to lay down the beliefs of the church about God. Rather like the Articles of Faith. The Sermon on the Mount is a sermon preached to promote a higher form of morality than the legalistic, rules-based one taught by the religious leaders of his day. How can you say the Creed is false because there are "patent" differences between the two? There are supposed to be differences. They're addressed to different audiences and intended for different purposes.

-CK

 

[SayWhat???]

That changes the gospel from what Christ has done for us to what He does in us! It makes good works the gospel.

It is very relevant to this thread. it may be uncomfortable for you that JS changes the bible to suit his theology.

Lds preach a false gospel, have a false priesthood, false ordinances and promote a second chance in their post-mortal theology.

Galatian 1:8 is a glove that fits JS

For the sake of argument, let's imagine you are right. What do you make of Rev. 14:6 then?

 

[Alma]

Then explain why the JST of Romans 8:30 changes Paul's term justified to sanctified with absolutely no manuscript evdience supporting the change!

That’s the best you can come up with? You think that changing a word in an unofficial manuscript constitutes a different gospel?

In the first place, the JST is not a replacement of the Bible. It has no more authority than a commentary because it does not have canonical status. However, let’s assume for a moment that it were canonical, let’s look at the two accounts and see if the change constitutes a “different” gospel.

KJV> Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

JST> Moreover, him whom he did predestinate, him he also called; and him whom he called, him he also sanctified; and him whom he sanctified, him he also glorified.

I see the gospel defined by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-5:

“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures;”

I don’t see in that anything about sanctification, justification or even asking Jesus into your heart. It seems to me that the gospel is the good news that Jesus died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day. Joseph Smith claimed that the “fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

This change makes glorification based upon sanctification not justification... that is another gospel.

Not really, it just says that he who God sanctifies he also glorifies. To claim that glorification is based upon[i/] sanctification is to distort the text.

Try another explanation. Or kindly supply the manuscript support for the JST change!

It never ceases to amaze me that people who claim to know more about Mormonism than Mormons fail to perceive this profound distinction between their beliefs and Mormonism. Are you not aware that Joseph Smith did not claim to use any manuscripts other than a King James Bible in his revision? Are you not aware that Joseph Smith didn’t care how the extant manuscripts read? Are you not aware that Mormons don’t care either? If you can understand this one concept you’ll go far in being able to understand at least as much as new converts.

Alma

 

[Guyver]

I have never heard mormons call the JST a commentary. It was always taught to me as JS had questions about certain passages and he prayed about it and got revelations from God on the differant verses and what they where supposed to say. By the way it is Joseph Smith Translation not JS commentary.

 

[drstevej]

That’s the best you can come up with? You think that changing a word in an unofficial manuscript constitutes a different gospel?

In the first place, the JST is not a replacement of the Bible. It has no more authority than a commentary because it does not have canonical status. However, let’s assume for a moment that it were canonical, let’s look at the two accounts and see if the change constitutes a “different” gospel.

KJV> Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

JST> Moreover, him whom he did predestinate, him he also called; and him whom he called, him he also sanctified; and him whom he sanctified, him he also glorified.

I see the gospel defined by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-5:

“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures;”

I don’t see in that anything about sanctification, justification or even asking Jesus into your heart. It seems to me that the gospel is the good news that Jesus died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day. Joseph Smith claimed that the “fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”



Not really, it just says that he who God sanctifies he also glorifies. To claim that glorification is based upon[i/] sanctification is to distort the text.



It never ceases to amaze me that people who claim to know more about Mormonism than Mormons fail to perceive this profound distinction between their beliefs and Mormonism. Are you not aware that Joseph Smith did not claim to use any manuscripts other than a King James Bible in his revision? Are you not aware that Joseph Smith didn’t care how the extant manuscripts read? Are you not aware that Mormons don’t care either? If you can understand this one concept you’ll go far in being able to understand at least as much as new converts.

Alma

The JST demonstrates Joseph Smith's disdain for God's Word. The bogus Book of Abraham is more of the same.

Make up what you need to make Emma comply with your mistresses (D&C132).

The First Vision departs historic Christianity and leads to the false gospel of Mormonism.

This is no restoration and the "Personages" ... who could have sent them ?

Could it have been...... (insert the Church Lady wav)????

 

[drstevej]

JST Preface from the official lds site

JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION


SELECTIONS FROM
THE JOSEPH SMITH TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE
AND
EXCERPTS TOO LENGTHY FOR INCLUSION IN FOOTNOTES

Following are selected portions of the Joseph Smith Translation of the King James Version of the Bible (JST). The Lord inspired the Prophet Joseph Smith to restore truths to the Bible text that had become lost or changed since the original words were written. These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding. The passages selected for the Guide should help improve your understanding of the scriptures regardless of the language into which they are translated. Because the Lord revealed to Joseph certain truths that the original authors had once recorded, the Joseph Smith Translation is unlike any other Bible translation in the world. In this sense, the word translation is used in a broader and different way than usual, for Joseph’s translation was more revelation than literal translation from one language into another.

So the JST is just Joseph's musings ???.....

.... this preface from the LDS site makes it hard not to deal with the changes to the Bible as anything but official LDS thinking.

 

[fatboys]

The JST demonstrates Joseph Smith's disdain for God's Word. The bogus Book of Abraham is more of the same.

Make up what you need to make Emma comply with your mistresses (D&C132).

The First Vision departs historic Christianity and leads to the false gospel of Mormonism.

This is no restoration and the "Personages" ... who could have sent them ?

Could it have been...... (insert the Church Lady wav)????

Steve, it saddens me that you have to fall back on anti mormon tactics to prove an unprovable. Lets say that everything you have said is true. So what. Are we going to hell because we believe in do not follow your flavor of Christianity? If so, so be it. If a restoration did not take place, it does not affect you one little tiny weenie bit. But if a restoration took place, then it will affect you a little. You will know you were wrong, but still you will end up where you want to. For your expectations of the next life will be realized. You will not be married, you will not be in hell. You will be in a wonderful and glorious place alone. There is just more than your expectations.

 

[fatboys]

JST Preface from the official lds site



So the JST is just Joseph's musings ???.....

.... this preface from the LDS site makes it hard not to deal with the changes to the Bible as anything but official LDS thinking.

Steve I would have no trouble at all if the JST was cannonized. But it is not. It was never considered as binding on us as a people. Musing or not, they are not doctrinal changes.

 

[drstevej]

But if a restoration took place, then it will affect you a little. You will know you were wrong, but still you will end up where you want to. For your expectations of the next life will be realized. You will not be married, you will not be in hell. You will be in a wonderful and glorious place alone. There is just more than your expectations.

... no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.... Every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are ... I cannot go there without his consent.... He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven (vol. 7, p.289).

... I am an Apostle of Joseph Smith.... all who reject my testimony will go to hell, so sure as there is one, no matter whether it be hot or cold ... (vol. 3, p.212).

I will now give my scripture - "Whosoever confesseth that Joseph Smith was sent of God ... that spirit is of God; and every spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of Anti-christ ... (vol. 8, p.176).

 

[drstevej]

Steve I would have no trouble at all if the JST was cannonized. But it is not. It was never considered as binding on us as a people. Musing or not, they are not doctrinal changes.

These restored truths clarified doctrine and improved scriptural understanding.

Better tell the LDS church website then. Obviously they didn't consult you.

 

[fatboys]

... no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.... Every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are ... I cannot go there without his consent.... He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven (vol. 7, p.289).

... I am an Apostle of Joseph Smith.... all who reject my testimony will go to hell, so sure as there is one, no matter whether it be hot or cold ... (vol. 3, p.212).

I will now give my scripture - "Whosoever confesseth that Joseph Smith was sent of God ... that spirit is of God; and every spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of Anti-christ ... (vol. 8, p.176).

Steve get your nose out of your list of quick anti mormon replys and listen. It does not matter one little bit if everything you have said here was revealed and taught by church leaders. And it would not make one little bit of difference if I believed what was taught. It is not doctrine. It is not binding on us. Why do you continue to bring these things up? Are you bored? Are you having a bad day? I have tried to explain to you what was meant in these quotes, but you continue to hash and rehash them.

Lets just take your last quote. If Joseph Smith was called of God as we believe him to be, then nothing and I mean nothing is at all wrong with what Brigham Young is teaching. It all boils down to if Joseph Smith was a prophet. You believe him to be false, I disagree and know him to be called of God. I have studied and prayed to find out if he was a prophet. As I have said, if he was false, then he was false. But if he was true, you had better search it out. Do not search using the anti forum. Yes you have read pro LDS works, but you steeped yourself in anti long before you seen anthing positive. That is a hard habit to break my friend.

 

[Paul G]

... I am an Apostle of Joseph Smith.... all who reject my testimony will go to hell, so sure as there is one, no matter whether it be hot or cold ... (vol. 3, p.212).

It’s is quite an easy thing to organize a talk to make it say what is needed to fit one’s bias by limiting the content of a sentence then joining it to thought further on in the talk. If you read the quote in context he is being sarcastic of the rants of the eastern demoniational churches which he calls the "Christian world"

This is spin doctoring of the form that one can hear on CNN every night between the left the right commentators of politics

Paul