Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Magyar

What's on the demons' teleprompter?

Recommended Posts

The Apostle John tells us, quite clearly, in his first epistle, fourth chapter that the key to knowing that a messenger is from God is that he will agree/teach/declare that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

We LDS sometimes use this as a proof-text for the validity of the angel Moroni, and indeed, the Book of Mormon itself, both of which testify that Christ came in the flesh. It counters nicely the wresting of Paul's words to the Galatians about a hypothetical angel with another gospel that are used against us by people who don't think too deeply.

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

And does not James testify that the devils believe and tremble?

What is the resolution of this conundrum?

Share this post


Link to post

The Apostle John tells us, quite clearly, in his first epistle, fourth chapter that the key to knowing that a messenger is from God is that he will agree/teach/declare that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

We LDS sometimes use this as a proof-text for the validity of the angel Moroni, and indeed, the Book of Mormon itself, both of which testify that Christ came in the flesh. It counters nicely the wresting of Paul's words to the Galatians about a hypothetical angel with another gospel that are used against us by people who don't think too deeply.

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

And does not James testify that the devils believe and tremble?

What is the resolution of this conundrum?

A couple of thoughts: God's messengers are proactive and respond to faith and stimulate hope and follow-through in building the kingdom. The demons in your example are reactive, at best stating a few facts, and add nothing to the kingdom; rather, the fruits of their belief was to drive the swine into the sea. God's messengers appeal to the faithful; those with another gospel do not.

Share this post


Link to post

The Apostle John tells us, quite clearly, in his first epistle, fourth chapter that the key to knowing that a messenger is from God is that he will agree/teach/declare that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

We LDS sometimes use this as a proof-text for the validity of the angel Moroni, and indeed, the Book of Mormon itself, both of which testify that Christ came in the flesh. It counters nicely the wresting of Paul's words to the Galatians about a hypothetical angel with another gospel that are used against us by people who don't think too deeply.

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

And does not James testify that the devils believe and tremble?

What is the resolution of this conundrum?

I've never used this as a litmus test. Moroni teaches that things of God (including his angels) lead men to follow Christ and obey him, not just believe that He is the Son of God. Doctrine and Covenants also gives some instructions on how to discern between different kinds of spirits, but I think Moroni's guidelines in Moroni 7 are the best.

Share this post


Link to post

Apparently, in John's day, a branch of Gnosticism was teaching that the man Jesus of Nazareth and the divine Christ were two separate entities. The Christ spirit possessed Jesus' body during his ministry and left immediately prior to Jesus' death. They taught that this is why he said "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" What they made of the resurrection, I don't know.

It seems likely that John was writing to combat this rather disturbing heresy.

Yours under the contextual oaks,

Nathair /|\

Share this post


Link to post

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

Sorry, but I don't see where you get the bolded part.

Matt 8:29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?

Mark 5:6 But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him,

7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.

Luke 8:28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.

How do you get there from here?

Share this post


Link to post

Because they were declaring that this flesh and blood man was the Son of God.

Share this post


Link to post

The Apostle John tells us, quite clearly, in his first epistle, fourth chapter that the key to knowing that a messenger is from God is that he will agree/teach/declare that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

We LDS sometimes use this as a proof-text for the validity of the angel Moroni, and indeed, the Book of Mormon itself, both of which testify that Christ came in the flesh. It counters nicely the wresting of Paul's words to the Galatians about a hypothetical angel with another gospel that are used against us by people who don't think too deeply.

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

And does not James testify that the devils believe and tremble?

What is the resolution of this conundrum?

Use more than one test. In investment language, diversify. In Kuhn's terms, seek for a comprehensive and coherent account, rather than putting everything on a single issue. In Alma's terms, keep looking till you find your mind expanding, your understanding grows, and you feel enlightened by how things fit together and make sense, and become fruitful. My FAIR essay lists 27 other Biblical keys. And there are more in the Book of Mormon and more in the D&C.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Share this post


Link to post

Because they were declaring that this flesh and blood man was the Son of God.

Strange, they never mentioned anything about "flesh and blood". :P

Share this post


Link to post

Unless all who witnessed the exchange believed they were talking with/seeing a spirit, it ought to have been quite obvious that the man from Galilee before them was a man of flesh and blood, a citizen of Israel, the carpenter's son. And that man whom they addressed, they called the Son of God.

Share this post


Link to post

The Apostle John tells us, quite clearly, in his first epistle, fourth chapter that the key to knowing that a messenger is from God is that he will agree/teach/declare that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

We LDS sometimes use this as a proof-text for the validity of the angel Moroni, and indeed, the Book of Mormon itself, both of which testify that Christ came in the flesh. It counters nicely the wresting of Paul's words to the Galatians about a hypothetical angel with another gospel that are used against us by people who don't think too deeply.

But in the Gospels, is it not written that the demons possessing the Gergasenes explicitly declared that Christ was come in the flesh?

And does not James testify that the devils believe and tremble?

What is the resolution of this conundrum?

One possible way is to realize that's its all bs. Problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
What's on the demons' teleprompter?

This is not a political board. Please do bring O'bama into the discussion.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

haa haa.... That was too funny, and what I also first thought cause it fits. :P

As to the question at hand, no matter the details, we should use more than one test.

Hey, you got the Handshake Test also. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

This is not a political board. Please do bring O'bama into the discussion.

Lehi

Make no mistake.

Share this post


Link to post

One possible way is to realize that's its all bs. Problem solved.

And that is a totally simplistic, juvenile, and unsatisfactory way of solving any literary or historical problem.

Share this post


Link to post

And that is a totally simplistic, juvenile, and unsatisfactory way of solving any literary or historical problem.

What I am trying to say is that things have a meaning. I don't have to believe that the Zohar is anything other than a 13th century pseudepigraphic work (albeit with some earlier elements) but I can't simply dimiss the passages for that. Whoever wrote them had a reason for doing so.

Share this post


Link to post

What I am trying to say is that things have a meaning. I don't have to believe that the Zohar is anything other than a 13th century pseudepigraphic work (albeit with some earlier elements) but I can't simply dimiss the passages for that. Whoever wrote them had a reason for doing so.

ahh but did not jesus say "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" as well? also incubator babies think about it.

Share this post


Link to post

ahh but did not jesus say "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" as well? also incubator babies think about it.

No, he said "ayba mnkwn daytwhy dla hth qdmya n

Share this post


Link to post

And that is a totally simplistic, juvenile, and unsatisfactory way of solving any literary or historical problem.

Works for me, why stress out trying to understand the meanings of verses about deamons, when they don't even exist? Kinda like seer stones, a waste of time and neurons. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...