Mormon Studies Collection
Comments
-
I commend you for softening your stance since February. (Emphasis Mine.) >>George Somsel said:While not all Muslims share this position, there is a significant group which does
George Somsel said:We have an enemy of Jesus Christ which is on the march in the form of Islam. I do not say "radical Islam", but ALL Islam. We see expurgated versions of the Koran / Quran in English (we even have one in Logos). These have been cleaned up so as not to alarm those who speak English. Make no mistake about it, those who follow Islam do not guide themselves by the politically correct English versions. There was recently an article in the National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/260288/who-attacked-lara-logan-and-why-andrew-c-mccarthy) in which Andrew McCarthy asks "Who Attacked Lara Logan, and Why?" then answers the question he has posed. It lies in passages such as Surah 4:23-24. In these the offensive material has largely been toned down. They intend to subjugate the Christian world and brutalize any who will not submit to Islam. We have not faced such a danger since the Moors overran Spain and threatened France and also were knocking at the very doors of Vienna. They subjected much of the previously Christian world to Islam including Northern Africa (including Egypt), Asia Minor, and what is today Syria and Iraq. Will Europe and the United States be next? They will if we fight amongst ourselves.
I would encourage Logos to do its own translation of the Quran in a very faithful version -- assiduously avoiding softening the harsh parts. This would make clear to all the insidious nature of Islam. Its prophet is a false prophet, a prophet of Satan himself, and a paedophile. Its god is not the God of the bible but Satan himself since God would not countenance that set forth in the Quran. Islam is interested in submission (much like the Obama regime), not in conviction. Remember: "He who is convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."
0 -
Super Tramp said:Joshua G said:
If a person or religious organization practices the theology of Mormonism - could they not be considered Mormon?
Since infant baptism is a Catholic doctrine would all who practice infant baptism be called Catholic? What I think Ben is saying is, there is enough difference between the LDS church based in Utah and the RLDS church based in Missouri
That is why we can't go with a one-label-fits-all, shotgun approach.
This appears to be a false analogy. Using Protestantism (instead of infant baptism) would have been a better comparison. Much like Mormonism it too is very broad and includes many religious organizations.
0 -
I hope that the current versions would be on Logos too, but I doubt it. The publisher for official LDS books is Desseret Books, it is also the major publisher for most “un-official” books too. Desseret Books owns their own gospel study website, which it promotes. Logos is way better, in all aspects: more selection, don’t need to on the internet to use it, way better customer and tech support, a forum to ask questions about how to use the program; I could go on but the point is that if the book is not in Public Domain than Logos most likely won’t get it.0 -
Joshua G said:Super Tramp said:Joshua G said:
If a person or religious organization practices the theology of Mormonism - could they not be considered Mormon?
Since infant baptism is a Catholic doctrine would all who practice infant baptism be called Catholic? What I think Ben is saying is, there is enough difference between the LDS church based in Utah and the RLDS church based in Missouri
That is why we can't go with a one-label-fits-all, shotgun approach.
This appears to be a false analogy. Using Protestantism (instead of infant baptism) would have been a better comparison. Much like Mormonism it too is very broad and includes many religious organizations.
i get the basic point, either way.
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Joshua G said:
This appears to be a false analogy. Using Protestantism (instead of infant baptism) would have been a better comparison. Much like Mormonism it too is very broad and includes many religious organizations.
That was precisely my point. Your labels are applied too broadly to be of any use. There are Catholics who baptize by immersion. There are charismatic Catholics & Southern Baptists. There are Methodists and Baptists with openly gay worship leaders. The majority of Protestants believe in a "catholic" church (one universal worldwide body of believers.) Wikipedia calls Southern Baptists the largest Protestant denomination in America. Yet they will tell you they are neither Protestant nor a denomination. That is proof again why we can't trust labels other people stick to groups they don't belong to.
It serves no purpose in the forums to continually try to divide with labels. This thread is about the Mormon Studies Collection but a few posters just can't help but pull out their label makers. If there was a thread on banana pudding they would probably find reason to criticize Rome for it.
If we want honest labels try these:
- Living versus Dead (pretty easy to tell if somebody is lying about which side they belong to.)
- Male versus Female (not quite as easy to determine as the Live/Dead label)
- Righteous versus Sinner (this one unifies us all and will capsize the ship.)
- Logos users versus Not (how about we respect everyone here regardless of their label?)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Super Tramp said:
If there was a thread on banana pudding they would probably find reason to criticize Rome for it.
If? There was and it was.
Unfortunately Rev 3:1 complicates the matter. As does Lk 20:38. [:P]Super Tramp said:If we want honest labels try these:
- Living versus Dead (pretty easy to tell if somebody is lying about which side they belong to.)
Fortunately there is One who is righteous enough to weigh down the other side and keep the ship afloat. [:)]Super Tramp said:- Righteous versus Sinner (this one unifies us all and will capsize the ship.)
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
fgh said:
Fortunately there is One who is righteous enough to weigh down the other side and keep the ship afloat.
[:)]....................just beautiful...........................[W]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
fgh said:
Fortunately there is One who is righteous enough to weigh down the other side and keep the ship afloat.
Wonderful! Thank you for the refreshing and Gospel-Centred Post! *smile* Peace to all! and .. Joy!
Ephesians 4:1-3
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Political rhetoric aside, You make a valid point. A point supported by Scripture. "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Islam is not interested in proselytizing infidels, (unless they are disturbed enough to wear exploding underwear.) Their struggle is a very earth-based, greed driven agenda. Most of the time, It is easy to identify , and avoid being drawn into radical Islam.George Somsel said:Islam is interested in submission (much like the Obama regime), not in conviction.
There are other professed Christian organizations who set out to deceive believers by re-writing the very Word of God. One such blasphemous organization claims the right, and the power to re-write the portion written by God's own finger, to accommodate their Idol/sun-worshiping, baptized paganism.
Please note that my animosity is not with the parishioners, but with the Head of the beast. ... The deceiver, not the deceived.
Acts 20:29-30
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
One such blasphemous organization claims the right, and the power to re-write the portion written by God's own finger,
Only one?? I maintain there are thousands of "Christian" organizations that claim they have an exclusive handle on the truth and the divine right to kick God off His throne and ignore His commandment to "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
Just a casual reading of forum threads will reveal many such usurpers. [:O]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
You know of another "Christian" organization that has re-written the 10 Commandments? Compare the rendering of the 10 commandments in the Catechism and the douay rheims to all other translations, and "original" transcripts. Strange, the part about bowing to idols is missing. They split the 10th commandment in order to appear to still have 10.Super Tramp said:Silver Hawk said:One such blasphemous organization claims the right, and the power to re-write the portion written by God's own finger,
Only one??
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
You know of another "Christian" organization that has re-written the 10 Commandments?
I know no poster in this thread has kept all 10 of the commandments.
John 8:7
Fortunately, I don't have to give account for the sins of others. So I don't concern myself too much with keeping tabs on them.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
You are dodging the issue. I did not question the ability of individuals to keep the Commandments. I questioned the right of an organization to alter what God wrote with his finger, To better serve their agenda.Super Tramp said:I know no poster in this thread has kept all 10 of the commandments.
(Eph 5:11) Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
You know of another "Christian" organization that has re-written the 10 Commandments? Compare the rendering of the 10 commandments in the Catechism and the douay rheims to all other translations, and "original" transcripts. Strange, the part about bowing to idols is missing. They split the 10th commandment in order to appear to still have 10.
You are dead wrong on this. What you are doing is to fault the Douay-Rheims translation because it doesn't translate as you would like. The Hebrew word תִשׁתַּחְוֶה which is translated as "bow down" is translated as "adore" in the Douay-Rheims. While חוה is usually translated as "bow down", the LXX translates it with προσκυνέω which can mean to "prostrate oneself" or "worship." Similarly, the Vulgate from which Douay-Rheims is translated renders it as adorabis which is "honor" or "adore" (translated by Jerome—4th and 5th cent). I think your opposition to the Catholic Church is blinding you to the truth.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
I questioned the right of an organization
I question your right to question an organization in a thread about another organization. You are dodging the thread topic!
...
Silver Hawk said:To better serve their agenda.
Oh, and I have no agenda, except maybe to return this thread to the original topic of the Mormon Studies Collection.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Whether you prefer "adore", "prostate oneself", "worship", or "honor", The command is to Not pay that homage to idols. That admonition has been removed from the translation.George Somsel said:תִשׁתַּחְוֶה which is translated as "bow down" is translated as "adore" in the Douay-Rheims. While חוה is usually translated as "bow down", the LXX translates it with προσκυνέω which can mean to "prostrate oneself" or "worship."
0 -
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!
May God grant you His peace Peter.
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
Whether you prefer "adore", "prostate oneself", "worship", or "honor", The command is to Not pay that homage to idols. That admonition has been removed from the translation.George Somsel said:תִשׁתַּחְוֶה which is translated as "bow down" is translated as "adore" in the Douay-Rheims. While חוה is usually translated as "bow down", the LXX translates it with προσκυνέω which can mean to "prostrate oneself" or "worship."
My guess is that you have never actually read it.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Looking at => http://www.logos.com/product/16021/mormon-studies-collection appears many more bidders are needed.
Appears sample links are off by are off; clicking on Origin of the 'Reorganized' Church and the Question of Succession opens Salvation Universal
Super Tramp said:I know no poster in this thread has kept all 10 of the commandments.
Thankful for God's wondrous Love and newness of life; personally striving to be a slave to righteousness, see Romans 6. Thankful for awesome study capabilities using Logos Bible Software that can have a library with many divergent views to research, study, ponder, and pray.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
You know of another "Christian" organization that has re-written the 10 Commandments? Compare the rendering of the 10 commandments in the Catechism and the douay rheims to all other translations, and "original" transcripts. Strange, the part about bowing to idols is missing. They split the 10th commandment in order to appear to still have 10.Super Tramp said:Silver Hawk said:One such blasphemous organization claims the right, and the power to re-write the portion written by God's own finger,
Only one??
not so simple, it would seem, Silver Hawk. Bible Study Magazine actually had a good article on the varied numbering of the Decalogue in their first year of publication (2009?). There is not a lot of nefarious plotting to the numbering as far as I can tell. Just kind of hard to determine 1-10 because scripture does not number them outright, and the first few commandments are not so clear cut. Even how the Jews numbered them is different. But as far as I know, all bible contain the same text.
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
But as far as I know, all bible contain the same text.
But there are two different passages that enumerate the Commandments. Both passages are found in "Protestant" Bibles Is the one passage any less inspired than the other? Who is to say which is the correct one?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
As does your opposition to Islam?George Somsel said:I think your opposition to the Catholic Church is blinding you to the truth.
0 -
Dan DeVilder said:
Bible Study Magazine actually had a good article on the varied numbering of the Decalogue in their first year of publication (2009?).
related blog article: http://www.biblestudymagazine.com/interactive/commandments/
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Personally learned a new word today. Searching my Logos library for decalogue finds many topics and articles:
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Looking at => http://www.logos.com/product/16021/mormon-studies-collection noticed The Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has two parts: "Lectures on Faith" and "Covenants and Commandments."
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
Compare the rendering of the 10 commandments
Did you know that there are at least 5 ways that the passage`s are divided in order to create 10 commandments? I had 5 versions in my parallel passages in L3 - a good example of why we need the capability to make our own parallel passages resources.
From Wikidepia:
Religious groups use one of three historical divisions of Exodus 20:1–17 into ten parts tabulated below:
- Phi. The Philonic division is the oldest, from the writings of Philo and Josephus
(first century), which labels verse 3 as number 1, verses 4–6 as number
2, and so on. Groups that generally follow this scheme include
Hellenistic Jews, Greek Orthodox and Protestants except Lutherans. Most
representations of the commandments include the prologue of verse 2 as
either part of the first commandment or as a preface. - Tal. The Talmudic division, from the third-century Jewish Talmud, makes verses 1–2 as the first "saying" or "declaration" (rather than "commandment"), and combines verses 3–6 as number 2
- Aug. The Augustinian
division (fifth century) starts with number 2 of the Talmudic division,
and makes an extra commandment by dividing the prohibition on coveting
into two. Both Roman Catholics and Martin Luther
adopted the Augustinian method. Roman Catholics use Deuteronomy by
default when quoting the Ten Commandments whereas Luther used the Exodus
version
Refer to the Douay-Rheims in your Logos library to correct your misinformation on the translation. Don't have It? You have just given a good example to why we need breadth in our libraries to check our "facts". Can't afford the resources? They are often available on the web. In this particular case: http://www.latinvulgate.com/which shows it parallel to the KJV.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 - Phi. The Philonic division is the oldest, from the writings of Philo and Josephus
-
Super Tramp said:Dan DeVilder said:
But as far as I know, all bible contain the same text.
But there are two different passages that enumerate the Commandments. Both passages are found in "Protestant" Bibles Is the one passage any less inspired than the other? Who is to say which is the correct one?
i dunno, lemme go consult my LXX . . .
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Refer to the Douay-Rheims in your Logos library to correct your misinformation on the translation. Don't have It? You have just given a good example to why we need breadth in our libraries to check our "facts". Can't afford the resources? They are often available on the web. In this particular case: http://www.latinvulgate.com/which shows it parallel to the KJV.
very enlightening, thank you!
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
Compare the rendering of the 10 commandments in the Catechism and the douay rheims to all other translations, and "original" transcripts. Strange, the part about bowing to idols is missing.
This is certainly off topic, but at least it's somewhat Logos related, so perhaps you could help me see what is missing; I seem to have gotten something in my eyes:
No, wait I do see something: 'mighty' is missing in the NRSV.
Silver Hawk said:You know of another "Christian" organization that has re-written the 10 Commandments?
The re-numbering -- not 're-writing' -- was done by Augustine, and, yes, I do know a large number of other Christian 'organizations' that use that numbering scheme. They're called Lutheran churches. Or have derived from Lutheran churches. I must have been well past 20 before I even knew there was another way of numbering. I'm not even sure it was mentioned during my theological studies; that's how much of a non-issue it is in Sweden. Everyone here uses the same numbering -- except the Jews, and, I presume, the Orthodox, who almost no one outside the respective groups knows anything about anyway.
Silver Hawk said:They split the 10th commandment in order to appear to still have 10.
Augustine didn't invent the idea of making this into one commandment. So does Talmud and Judaism. What you call the 10th commandment was split to replace what Jews call the 1st word: the part that begins with 'And God spoke'.
Now that we've learnt that you consider Lutherans to be "Christians" (with quotes), and Jews to have 're-written' the 10 commandments 'in order to appear to still have 10' (are they too 'idol/sun-worshipers'?), perhaps you could be so kind as to inform me where Scripture teaches exactly where each commandment starts? I'm having a hard time figuring out how to formulate such a search.
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
By the way, while the Catechism of the Catholic Church most certainly does include the words about graven images, Luther's Small Catechism does not.
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
fgh said:
By the way, while the Catechism of the Catholic Church most certainly does include the words about graven images, Luther's Small Catechism does not.
Wait, doesn't that mean that you accused the wrong church? And doesn't that mean that you bore false witness? And isn't keeping the commandments more important than how to number them? -- I guess not...
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
Praying for focus on using Logos Bible Software and discussion about resources for use in Logos Bible Software.
By the way, a thread about "Forum Guidelines: No Theology Debates" has many more replies.
Thankful for many, many friendly discussions about using Logos Bible Software and resource insights; albeit wallet is a wee bit smaller.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Silver Hawk said:
and the douay rheims to all other translations, and "original" transcripts. Strange, the part about bowing to idols is missing. They split the 10th commandment in order to appear to still have 10.
As the self appointed defender of the Douay / Rheims on this forum I hereby object to your comment. Please take the time and be so kind as to open your copy of the Holy Bible Translated from the Latin Vulgate (better known as the Douay / Rheims and available in all base packages of Logos 4) and compare the wording of your favorite Bible and that version in Exodus 20:1-18. I used the KJV and found some slightly different words [see below] but did not find them so far apart as to see any Doctrinally meaningful difference. In this section the versions are identical to a dynamic equivalence level. Yes, It maybe true that different people read Exodus 20 differently but the difference is not in the Bible text used!
Verse different words found (KJV) / (DR)
1 And God spake / AND our Lord spake
2 out of the house of bondage. / out of the house of servitude.
3 have no other gods / shalt not have strange gods
4 or any likeness of / nor any similitude
5 Thou shalt not bow down / Thou shalt not adore them
5 LORD thy God am a jealous God / Lord thy God mighty, jealous
6 shewing mercy / doing mercy
6 keep my commandments / keep my precept
7 that taketh his name in vain / that shall take the name of the Lord his God vainly.
8 sabbath day, to keep it holy / keep holy the sabbath day / thou Sanctify the sabbath day
9 do all thy work: / shalt do all thy works
10 nor thy cattle / nor thy beast
11 blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it / blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it.
12 that thy days may be long / that thou mayst be long lived
13 Thou shalt not kill / Thou shalt not murder
14 Same
15 same
16 shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor / shalt not speak against thy neighbor false testimony
17 nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s / nor any thing that is his
18 the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet / the voices and the flames, and the sound of the trumpetThe LXX (RE:Brenton) Has wife first in V17. Did not see where any of the versions told where one ended and the next began in the Ten Devine Suggessions (as they are now known in the New Age Church)
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, nor his field, nor his servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any of his cattle, nor whatever belongs to thy neighbour. Brenton, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament Translated into English
0 -
Thank you, David! *smile* Peace to you! .. and Joy in the Lord!
2 Corinthians 5:6-9
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Ben said:
The CoC/RLDS Temple neither practices the liturgy nor the theology. But as you know, that goes beyond the purpose of this board.
A serious question for you Ben. I understand why Anglicans and Lutherans object to the term "Protestant" as they see themselves as a middle-way between Catholic/Orthodox and Protestants. [And yes, I also know why people argue that historically "Protestant" had to include Lutherans - but language changes over time.]
I have always thought that the term "Mormon" included everyone who used the Book of Mormon as scripture. Is this not the appropriate definition from within the "Mormon community?" If it isn't what term is appropriate for all the groups that use it? Thanks.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Super Tramp said:
That was precisely my point. Your labels are applied too broadly to be of any use.
I applied the term "Mormon" to a group who openly practice a form of Mormon theology and use the Book of Mormon as Scripture. How is that too broad?
Super Tramp said:It serves no purpose in the forums to continually try to divide with labels. This thread is about the Mormon Studies Collection but a few posters just can't help but pull out their label makers. If there was a thread on banana pudding they would probably find reason to criticize Rome for it.
Labels exist because division exists. When there exists no division, I'll stop using labels. I do not feel that I am crossing any irrational or inappropriate lines.
EDIT: I think you may be confusing labels and stereotypes.
0 -
Labels are used as tools to promote division. The Jewish converts and the Gentile converts claimed discrimination in the early church based on their labels. Paul used the label of Pharisee to stir up division with the Sadducee. Peter was rebuked for being hypocrytical when the Jews visited and he refused to mix with the Gentiles.Joshua G said:Labels exist because division exists. When there exists no division, I'll stop using labels. I do not feel that I am crossing any irrational or inappropriate lines.
There is obviously a meaningful difference between the Reorganized LDS church and the traditional LDS church. Eastern Orthodox worshippers have a different Pope than Roman Catholics. Not all charismatic churches are Pentecostal.
The stereotyping going on here is when you stick the wrong label on somebody and they happen to care about being misidentified. When I moved to Michigan I thought I would find no prejudice north of the Mason-Dixon line. I was quite mistaken. I referred to a co-worker as Hispanic and she went ballistic. I was educated very quickly that she was Puerto Rican and not related to Mexicans in any way. (The plant workforcw was 30% Mexican and one Puerto Rican.[:S]) People are sensitive about being misidentified.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Super Tramp said:
The stereotyping going on here is when you stick the wrong label on somebody and they happen to care about being misidentified.
People are sensitive about being misidentified.
I can agree here. Do the Community of Christ members not consider themselves "Mormon"?
0 -
Super Tramp said:
I referred to a co-worker as Hispanic and she went ballistic.
ohhh yeaaaah. the old "are you Hispanic, Latino/a, Spanish, or . . . it does get confusing, even for Spanish-speaking people from carribbean, central- and south american countries. had many conversations about this when I lived in miami.
next time, refer to her as "Boricuan" and on the sly, tell her you think "red beans and rice are da bomb--black beans and rice just don't compare." you'll be back in like Flynn.
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
0 -
Joshua G said:Super Tramp said:
The stereotyping going on here is when you stick the wrong label on somebody and they happen to care about being misidentified. People are sensitive about being misidentified.
I can agree here. Do the Community of Christ members not consider themselves "Mormon"?
I imagine they do but probably not any more than Catholics consider their Pope a godly leader and their church the correct one. When the Japanese government processes census data they classify Mormons, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Baptist and even Unitarians as "Christians." The Unitarians probably object stronger than you do to that all-inclusive label. (That is kind of humorous considering their all-inclusive stance. [:D] I knew a Unitarian mayor who became a good friend in spite of our differences.)
Labels are only useful when self-applied. My black co-workers would call themselves the "n" word but if anyone else called them that there was going to be a problem. If I call a US President a "liar," it is an accusation. If he calls himself a "liar," it is a confession. There is a big difference in how the two identical labels are received. So until a person labels themselves as "lost" or "heretical" in doctrine they are not going to be open to attempting change. Just my 2¢
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Super Tramp said:
Wikipedia calls Southern Baptists the largest Protestant denomination in America. Yet they will tell you they are neither Protestant nor a denomination.
Altogether, I have been a member of an SBC congregation for about 15 years, and I have never heard this claim.
However, that is beside the point of this thread. I am personally pleased that Logos is producing Mormon materials—just wish they could give us resources that were more up-to-date. If you seek to criticize a group, do so from their own sources, not from the dreams of an outsider.
Having served as Pastor of both SBC and IFB Churches, I can truthfully tell you that the critics on both sides of this divide are just plain ignorant.
0 -
There is other material about/by mormons in Logos. Check it out if you want something more up to date
0 -
This scholarly study might be a good addition to Logos alongside the Mormon Studies Collection:
The Refiner's Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844 by John L. Brooke (Cambridge University Press, 1994)
0 -
nicky crane said:
There is other material about/by mormons in Logos. Check it out if you want something more up to date
was aware of more up-to-date material about Mormons, but did not know of anything by Mormons. Have to check that out. Material by outsiders—even ex-Mormons— is always suspect until it can be checked against primary sources.
0 -
Labels get used in different ways.
My understanding is that CoC members do not refer to themselves as Mormon, which they generally reserve for the Utah-based church. They have never done in their one Temple (more of a Protestant-style sanctuary) what LDS do (see my previous comment about liturgy), and they have generally rejected most distinctive differences separating LDS from Protestants.
Moreover, there's been a concerted PR effort to get newspapers and such to avoid the term "Mormon fundamentalist" for small polygamist groups, since they all split off 100 years ago, and anyone LDS is excommunicated for polygamy. However, they do claim the term "Mormon." Problem is, you'll likely never meet one, so it does not do favors to conflate very small backwoods polygamists with, say, Harry Reid or Mitt Romney or any other Mormon you're likely to actually meet on a day-to-day basis.
So there may well be groups in the restorationist-Book-of-Mormon tradition who aren't legitimately called Mormons, some who want to retain it (but others dispute the legitimacy), and so on.
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."- G.K. Chesterton
0 -
Jack Caviness said:nicky crane said:
There is other material about/by mormons in Logos. Check it out if you want something more up to date
was aware of more up-to-date material about Mormons, but did not know of anything by Mormons. Have to check that out. Material by outsiders—even ex-Mormons— is always suspect until it can be checked against primary sources.
Checking against primary sources is laudable and necessary, but there's also the question of worldview. When crossing major cultural/religious/linguistic lines, we always need to be careful to ask how an insider understands this. I can pull some quote from a source, have it be accurate, and still completely misunderstand its meaning within the community it belongs to. Much apologetic material fails to do so. An interesting article on this is Mosser and Owen, "Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It", Trinity Journal (Fall '98,
p179-205), and imo, all of the Mormon material published by Logos falls to their criticism."The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."- G.K. Chesterton
0 -
The Logos wiki Almanac of the Christian World has never really taken off; It has five listings for Mennonites, one for Mormons. (Just noticing; no real point)
It is worth obtaining the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd edition, either in Logos or in print (now quite affordable). As an sample, the entry for Baptists.
Baptists. One of the largest Protestant and Free Church communions, to be found in every Continent. [JACK, SOME HISTORIANS SAY YOU CANNOT BE BOTH, CITING PERSECUTION OF FREE CHURCH COMMUNIONS BY CALVIN AND ZWINGLI. THESE HISTORIANS WOULD LIKELY PLACE BAPTISTS IN THE FREE CHURCH OR RADICAL REFORMATION FAMILY OF DENOMINATIONS]. Its total membership in 2002 was over 45 million, with a much larger community strength. The origins of the Baptists in modern times have been traced to the action of John *Smyth, a *Separatist exile in Amsterdam who, in 1609, reinstituted the Baptism of committed believers as the basis of fellowship of a gathered Church. But Smyth was under *Mennonite influence, and Baptist beginnings have also been traced back to the *Anabaptist wing of the Continental *Reformation (esp. in Zurich), to the protests of medieval sects against prevailing baptismal theory and practice, and to the period of the early Church and the NT. Smyth and his associates were concerned to reestablish the Baptism of believers according to its NT meaning, in the interests of a true doctrine of the nature of the Church.
The first Baptist Church in England consisted of certain members of Smyth’s Church who returned to London in 1612 under the leadership of Thomas *Helwys. From this a number of other Churches sprang in Stuart and Commonwealth times. *Arminian in theology with a connectional polity, they came to be known as ‘General Baptists’. In 1633 the adoption of believers’ Baptism by a group of *Calvinistic London Separatists, who were members of the Church which had Henry Jacob as pastor, led to the rise of ‘Particular Baptist’ Churches in many parts of the country. About the same time *immersion became their usual mode of Baptism, instead of *affusion or sprinkling, again in obedience to the NT. These Particular (Calvinistic) Baptist Churches were independent or congregational in polity but gave regular expression to their inter-Church relationships through Associations, which have continued to be a vital part of Baptist Church life.
Many Baptists were associated with the more radical spiritual and political movements of the 17th cent. They were pioneers in the quest for freedom of conscience and religious liberty. After the *Restoration they moved close to the *Presbyterians and *Independents and became recognized as one of the *Three Denominations of Protestant Dissenters. John *Bunyan was an outstanding figure among them and was important not only for his writings but because he encouraged a pattern of local Church membership which could include Baptists and Paedobaptists. From the mid-17th cent. there were Baptist Churches in the American colonies. The settlement of Roger *Williams at Providence, Rhode Island, and the Church formed there in 1639 on Baptist principles is generally regarded as the beginning of American Baptist history. A small 17th-cent. group who became known as Sabbatarian or Seventh Day Baptists, and whose descendants are still represented in both England and North America, regarded the Fourth *Commandment as requiring rest and worship on the seventh, not the first, day of the week.
In the 18th cent. many of the General Baptist Churches in England came under *Unitarian influences and ultimately ceased to maintain their witness to believers’ Baptism. But Dan Taylor (1738–1816), under the stimulus of the Evangelical Revival, in 1770 formed a ‘New Connexion’ among them, which maintained a vigorous life, and a century later united with the main stream of Baptist witness. The *Baptist Missionary Society, formed in 1792 by ministers of the Northamptonshire Association of Particular Baptists at the call of William *Carey, initiated the modern movement of missionary expansion among Protestant Churches. Northamptonshire Baptists had been stirred by reports of the *Great Awakening in New England. This revival quickened the Baptist Churches of America and led to the beginnings of the rapid and spectacular growth of Baptists in that continent. Baptist preachers were in the van as the frontier was carried westwards. As a result of their missionary zeal Baptists became the largest religious community in many of the southern States, and among the *Black Churches of the USA about two-thirds of the members are Baptists. By 2002 there were over 33 million Baptists in North America. They are organized in several Conventions, the Southern Baptist Convention being the largest and most conservative. American Baptists have been noted for their vigorous missionary work, Adoniram *Judson of Burma being their pioneer. Other notable American Baptists have included the historian K. S. Latourette (1884–1968), Martin Luther *King, and Billy *Graham. In South America there are nearly 1.4 million Baptists with another 449,000 in Central America and the Caribbean.
The rigid Calvinism of the 18th cent. was gradually modified not only in America, but also in England, though not without some protests. There remained in England a number of ‘Strict Baptist’ Churches, strongly Calvinist in theology, where Communion was, and indeed still is, restricted to baptized believers. In the 19th cent. most other Baptist Churches welcomed all believers to Communion, many also adopting ‘open membership’ after the Bunyan pattern. The increase in their numbers more than kept pace with the growth in population, and from their ranks came outstanding preachers such as Robert *Hall, C. H. *Spurgeon, Alexander *Maclaren, and John *Clifford. The Baptist Union, formed in 1813, was gradually transformed into the Baptist Union of Great Britain. Its modern development owed much to the leadership of J. H. *Shakespeare, who was secretary for over 25 years (1898–1924). In Britain there are some 195,000 Church members. Baptists in England and three Baptist Associations in Wales shared in the Free Church movement and are members of the *Free Churches Group, Churches Together in England, the *Council of Churches for Britain and Ireland (as they were of the *British Council of Churches), and of the *World Council of Churches. The Baptist Union of Wales is a member of CYTUN (Churches Together in Wales). The Baptists of *Scotland were much influenced by the life and teaching of Archibald McLean (1733–1812). He and his followers kept close to the NT in both doctrine and practice and were at one time known as ‘Scotch Baptists’ or ‘*Sandemanian Baptists’. Their work provided one of the sources of the *Disciples of Christ. Baptists have been numerous in *Wales since John Myles (or Miles, 1621–84) organized the first Church at Ilston (1649) and Vavasour Powell (1617–70) acted as the leader of a band of itinerant evangelists. Their most famous preacher was Christmas Evans (1766–1838). There has been a considerable emigration of Baptists from Wales to the USA. Baptists in *Ireland trace their roots back to Churches founded by Baptist officers and chaplains in Oliver *Cromwell’s army and by settlers who remained there after the Restoration. These Churches, mainly of Particular Baptists with a leavening of General Baptists, survived through the 18th cent., later receiving support from English Particular Baptists.
In 1834 a Baptist Church was formed in Hamburg under the leadership of J. C. Oncken (1800–84) and from this came an extensive Baptist movement in Europe, spreading to Slavic-speaking people. Baptists were generally persecuted in Tsarist *Russia. They increased in numbers during the early years of the Soviet regime but later suffered from the general restrictions on religious freedom. In recent times their numbers have grown significantly, and they form the largest Protestant community in the countries of the former USSR, with some 332,000 Church members.
Baptist Churches were formed in *Australia and *New Zealand in the early 19th cent., and in the 20th cent. Baptist work expanded throughout Asia, Africa, and South America. Recent growth in Africa has been notable, with a membership of over 5.2 million. In 1905 the Baptist World Alliance was formed at a congress in London as a forum for international co-operation. It has several Commissions which deal with a variety of denominational concerns, including ecumenical relations. Its present headquarters is in McLean, Virginia.
In spite of their variety and individualism, most Baptists have remained strongly attached to the truths of evangelical Christianity. In their worship they follow in general the Reformed tradition. Their polity is a modified form of independency, with Churches held together in associations. Their ministers, or pastors, receive, in most countries, a careful training. Their oldest college in Britain (Bristol) traces its history back to the 1679 bequest of Edward Terrill. Regent’s Park College, of which H. Wheeler *Robinson was principal from 1920 to 1942, is now a Permanent Private Hall of *Oxford University. Many colleges and universities in America and elsewhere are under Baptist auspices. In ecumenical relationships Baptists have been hesitant about schemes for organic union, partly because of their concern to preserve their witness to believers’ Baptism and the freedom of the local Church from external rule as the ‘gathered community’; but they have been eager for partnership and co-operation with other Christians. Although only about 20 Baptist Conventions or Unions are members of the World Council of Churches, they comprise nearly 40 per cent of the world Baptist constituency.
[Bibliography Omitted.]
Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. (2005). The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. rev.) (155–156). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
0 -
Here is the bibliography from the Oxford Dictionary of Christianity brief article on Mormons.
The Mormons use the AV of the Bible, with certain retranslations by Smith. The Book of Mormon first pub. at Palmyra, NY, 1830; A Book of Commandments, comprising revelations to Smith and others, pub. at Independence, Mo., 1833; it was enlarged as Doctrine and Covenants (Kirtland, Oh., 1835); The Pearl of Great Price, which comprises selections from Smith’s writings, was first pub. in Liverpool, 1851; all these works are available in many edns. The large lit. on the Mormons incl. B. R. McConckie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City, 1958; 2nd edn., 1966); N. F. Furniss, The Mormon Conflict 1850–1859 (New Haven, Conn., 1960); J. B. Allen and G. M. Leonard, The Story of the Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City, 1976; 2nd edn. [1992]); L. J. Arrington and D. Bitton, The Mormon Experience: A History of the Latter-day Saints (New York and London, 1979); R. Gottlieb and P. Wiley, America’s Saints: The Rise of Mormon Power (New York [1984]; repr. San Diego, New York, and London [1986]). J. Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of a New Religious Tradition (Urbana, Ill., and Chicago [1985]); P. L. Barlow, Mormons and the Bible: The Place of Latter-day Saints in American Religion (New York and Oxford, 1991); D. M. Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy (Salt Lake City, 1994); A. L. Mauss, The Angel and the Beehive: The Mormon Struggle with Assimilation (Urbana and Chicago, 1994); D. J. Davies, The Mormon Culture of Salvation (Aldershot [2000]); id., An Introduction to Mormonism (Cambridge, 2003).
On Joseph Smith, see Lucy Smith (mother), Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet and his Progenitors for many Generations (Liverpool, 1853); F. McK. Brodie, No Man Knows my History (New York, 1945; 2nd edn., 1971; London, 1963); R. L. Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism (Urbana, Ill., and Chicago [1984]), with bibl.
Cross, F. L., & Livingstone, E. A. (2005). The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. rev.) (1122–1123). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
0
