Another true prophecy

[Pahoran]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

[blooit]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

Not only that, they deny that such an answer can even come from the Holy Ghost at all. This is frightening when you think about it. A God that can divide the Red Sea, would not give us an absolute way of knowing truth from error? - sad thought

[TheLiberal]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

Yes, the passage cited means that sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost. More correctly, it means sectarians generally deny the Holy Ghost. I don't believe the passage means that sectarians deny the Holy Ghost by questioning our testimonies, but rather deny the possibility of present-day revelation across the board. It means, they do not incorporate a desire for the Holy Ghost to guide their expositions, but rather speak from their own learning.

[jadams_4242]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

Well how would anyone whom does not have the companionship know the differance anyway?

[Cold Steel]

The Book of Mormon contains many great prophecies that have come true despite the unbelief of the professors. One, that the United States would become a land greater than all others, and that we would have great cities, people and wealth. And it prophesied concerning the rise and growth of the church. It's one thing to make prophecies; it's quite another to actually get them to come to pass.

In our society, the Holy Ghost cannot be trusted by anyone. Most evangelicals are led by the Holy Spirit, for example. The preachers tell us so every time they're on television or radio. The Holy Spirit also is leading those who handle deadly snakes and those who babble in tongues; the Holy Ghost, meanwhile, is leading those who say all prophecies were fulfilled by the time of Christ and those who say there is still prophecy to be fulfilledâ??oh, and those who say we should be worshiping on Saturdays, not Sundays, and those who say we should be worshiping on Sundays, not Saturdays. Both the Greek and Roman churches also are led by the Holy Spirit, BTW.

How the Holy Spirit can be disseminating all this contradictory information remains a mystery. Until it's resolved, priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning. Meanwhile, they will deny the true utterings of the Spirit and continue on teaching the precepts of men, which are the creeds that govern them. "They teach for commandments the doctrines of men, having a form of godliness, but denying the truth thereof."

[Balzer]

Why must it necessarily be so that a person denies the Holy Ghost when/if that person does not believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet?

Respectfully,

Balzer

[cinepro]

How the Holy Spirit can be disseminating all this contradictory information remains a mystery.

Does the Holy Ghost ever disseminate contradictory information to LDS? Or just non-LDS?

[Nyal]

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

OK, so the prophecy predicts:

1. And they shall contend one with another; Folks with differing views arguing.

2. and their priests shall contend one with another, Priests with differing views arguing.

3. and they shall teach with their learning, The priests and company will teach their points of view based on what they know.

4. and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. They will stray from the truth (according to the author of BoM).

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and peoples, Nephi correctly predicted that people would argue, would share their opinion with students/listeners, and these opinions differ from the opinion of Nephi. Surely, only the most hard hearted holy ghost denier could doubt the BoM now!

[Pahoran]

2 Nephi 28

OK, so the prophecy predicts:

1. And they shall contend one with another; Folks with differing views arguing.

2. and their priests shall contend one with another, Priests with differing views arguing.

3. and they shall teach with their learning, The priests and company will teach their points of view based on what they know.

4. and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance. They will stray from the truth (according to the author of BoM).

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and peoples, Nephi correctly predicted that people would argue, would share their opinion with students/listeners, and these opinions differ from the opinion of Nephi. Surely, only the most hard hearted holy ghost denier could doubt the BoM now!

Excellent attempt at watering down there, Nyal.

Just so you know: "deny the Holy Ghost" certainly entails "stray from the truth," but the two concepts are not lexical equivalents; rather, the latter is a downstream consequence of the former. No, what we have here is Nephi pairing two concepts: "teach with their learning" and "deny the Holy Ghost." The pairing of these suggests a relationship: the priests teach their book-learned information, the "wisdom from below," horizontally transmitted human wissenschaft, which Paul would later call logismoi, and by so doing they reject the "wisdom from above," the truths that cannot be known by any man except God reveal them -- by the power of the Holy Ghost.

If the only way to deal with this prophecy is to trivialise it to the point of banality, then I must be on to something.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Cold Steel]

Why must it necessarily be so that a person denies the Holy Ghost when/if that person does not believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet?

In this case the prophet is saying that religious professors would deny the power of the Holy Spirit. When Joseph Smith attempted to tell a local minister about his vision, he said that the minister scoffed and said such things no longer happened and that it was all of the devil.

Not all priestcraft deny the Holy Spirit, but they all claim to be led by the Holy Spirit. If the LDS church is the restored church of Jesus Christ, then the true Spirit of God will lead men to the church, and not away from it.

Living prophets undermine established orders, just as living claimants to the throne threaten a kingdom. No one minds dead claimants, but living ones are dangerous. Too many people have become cardinals, priests and popes to welcome a true prophet. The same thing was true when it came to what the Jews did to both John and to Jesus. Once John was dead, he was a true prophet, but Jesus still had to be dealt with. The Jewish hierarchy knew that if Jesus had divine authority, then they had none, even though Jesus urged people to show them respect at the same time He, Himself, condemned them.

The fulfillment of Nephi's prophecy was fulfilled in Joseph Smith's day and it's still being fulfilled. They pay lip service to God, but their hearts are far from Him.

[Mormon Questioner]

This is an incredibly poor example of a prophecy that came true. You have to do better than that, even the one about America becoming great (which is also pretty poor) is better than this.

Joseph (or whoever might have written the book) could have easily come up with this prophecy, just as easily as it being an ancient prophecy. There were plenty of priests and men doing exactly that in the time of Joseph.

Here let me show you how easy it is.

There will come a time when men will try to marry men, and women will try to marry women. This will be an abomination, and they will be cursed for turning away from the truth.

See how easy it is?

But I guess the point of your post wasn't really that this was fulfilled, it was just stated as fact. The point was are these people denying the holy ghost. I think the answer would be that they are not "DENYING THE HOLY GHOST" in all caps where they will be turned out into outer darkness, but instead that they are denying that the holy ghost can testify of truth.

[Heartleap]

There are many people who are not LDS that are led by the Holy Spirit and have revelations, visions and prophecies from God and through Christ in them have power to, baptize bless others and heal the sick. God gives his gifts to all that have faith in him. From personal experience of the things mentioned I believe your prophecy mentioned is false. We do not deny the Holy Spirit, he is what spurs us on. We do not give lip service to God, he is in our thoughts constantly and what we live for. We go to the streets and feed the hungry and heal the sick. We love the unlovely as they are beautiful in the eyes of God. God is drawn to us as much as we are drawn to him in love. You may believe that this is the same for you but do not tell us non LDS that we deny the Holy Spirit when we know better, it is a lie.

Heartleap...

[Heartleap]

This is an incredibly poor example of a prophecy that came true. You have to do better than that, even the one about America becoming great (which is also pretty poor) is better than this.

Joseph (or whoever might have written the book) could have easily come up with this prophecy, just as easily as it being an ancient prophecy. There were plenty of priests and men doing exactly that in the time of Joseph.

Here let me show you how easy it is.

There will come a time when men will try to marry men, and women will try to marry women. This will be an abomination, and they will be cursed for turning away from the truth.

See how easy it is?

But I guess the point of your post wasn't really that this was fulfilled, it was just stated as fact. The point was are these people denying the holy ghost. I think the answer would be that they are not "DENYING THE HOLY GHOST" in all caps where they will be turned out into outer darkness, but instead that they are denying that the holy ghost can testify of truth.

What if the truth I recieved from the Holy Ghost does not agree with the truth that the LDS recieve? His presence is very strong for me.

Heartleap...

[Hoops22]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

Sounds more like he made it up. What a convenient way to head off any potential and future criticism.

[spinner]

Excellent attempt at watering down there, Nyal.

Just so you know: "deny the Holy Ghost" certainly entails "stray from the truth," but the two concepts are not lexical equivalents; rather, the latter is a downstream consequence of the former. No, what we have here is Nephi pairing two concepts: "teach with their learning" and "deny the Holy Ghost." The pairing of these suggests a relationship: the priests teach their book-learned information, the "wisdom from below," horizontally transmitted human wissenschaft, which Paul would later call logismoi, and by so doing they reject the "wisdom from above," the truths that cannot be known by any man except God reveal them -- by the power of the Holy Ghost.

If the only way to deal with this prophecy is to trivialise it to the point of banality, then I must be on to something.

Regards,

Pahoran

How do you propose this prophecy could have been proven false?

Banality is correct, the events 'prophesied' here are so utterly banal that the failure of this 'prophecy' to come true would perhaps constitute no small miracle.

[Corky Wallace]

Living prophets undermine established orders...

Disruption, persecution, vicious rumors, perhaps mistakes of a fallible instrument of the Lord, loyal followers who testify of the truth revealed by God through His mouthpiece...

Warren Jeffs.

[Mudcat]

Yes, the passage cited means that sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost. More correctly, it means sectarians generally deny the Holy Ghost. I don't believe the passage means that sectarians deny the Holy Ghost by questioning our testimonies, but rather deny the possibility of present-day revelation across the board. It means, they do not incorporate a desire for the Holy Ghost to guide their expositions, but rather speak from their own learning.

Emphasis mine. You may find some folks that agree with you on this matter. I am certainly not one of them.

On what evidence would you make this assertion?

[mfbukowski]

Not only that, they deny that such an answer can even come from the Holy Ghost at all. This is frightening when you think about it. A God that can divide the Red Sea, would not give us an absolute way of knowing truth from error? - sad thought

Very sad indeed! In fact I would argue as an abstract princple that if there is a God who cares what his children do, he would HAVE to provide a mechanism for them to know what he wants them to do, or it would be unjust to punish them for NOT knowing what he wants.

"You better do this and this or you go to hell, but I'm not going to tell you what this and this is" doesn't sound very just, does it?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

Yes

[cinepro]

What if the truth I recieved from the Holy Ghost does not agree with the truth that the LDS recieve? His presence is very strong for me.

Heartleap...

Theologically speaking, that would be impossible. Someone would have to be "misunderstanding" their inspiration, or the source from whence it came.

[cinepro]

For some reason, this thread made me think of this SugarBeet article:

LDS Church Patents Holy Ghost

[_Frost]

I agree with Mormon Questioner: that's a pretty weak prophecy. I'm always skeptical when people claim prophecies to come true, especially if those prophecies are vague or philosophically loaded.

Claim: God says that X is the best way to live.

Prophetic Claim: God says people will stray from X in the future.

Conclusion (when people do not live according to X): people have strayed from X, which is what God said. Prophecy verified.

Pretty simplistic. People have disagreed with each other before history even began, so to say they will continue to disagree and argue is like saying people will forever continue to be people.

Sometimes I'm not sure about the spirit. I think the whole trinitarian thing is completely unnecessary, so whatever "spirit" is out there is simply the way in which God acts in this universe. Feel free to disagree. I do believe, though, that it is suspicious that everybody claims to have the spirit on their side. I don't like that. It's propaganda. I suppose at times it might be true, but the wise probably won't come out and say it - they will prove it by the things they do.

[William James]

Here is the relevant passage:

2 Nephi 28

4 And they shall contend one with another; and their priests shall contend one with another, and they shall teach with their learning, and deny the Holy Ghost, which giveth utterance.

On one point almost all the enemies of the Gospel, whether secular or sectarian, have always seen eye to eye: the testimony we bear and share cannot possibly come from the Holy Ghost. It must be mere emotion, or something.

Does this mean that our sectarian critics are actually denying the Holy Ghost? Is this what Nephi is talking about?

Regards,

Pahoran

The "prophecy" might well strengthen the faith of those who already believe, but it has no value to those who do not consider the BoM the authentic word of God. If the goal is to use this passage to convince non-believers, I think you have to concede that it is a circular argument: the BoM is true, so the prophecy is true, so the BoM is true, etc.

Another important point: even assuming it is the authentic word of God, it has the tremendous problem of ambiguity. TBMs will almost certainly interpret it to mean that those who disagree with them are necessarily denying the Holy Ghost. We need to look at this issue with a little more broad-mindedness. My life experience has been that there have been times when I thought I was feeling the HG giving me a spiritual conviction about something, and at a later point in my life, I felt essentially the same feeling giving me the opposite conclusion. Even TBMs generally concede that there is simply no objective fool-proof test to determine whether a perceived spiritual experience is a God-given revelation. If there were, I highly doubt we would find ourselves in a world where the number of versions of the "Gospel" is roughly equal to the number of people who believe in a gospel. I say these things not to destroy the notion of revelation or authentic spiritual experience, but rather to emphasize the need for humility on the subject. While we may hold to our own convictions based upon our own perceived spiritual experience, we should be extremely wary of denying the possibility that we could be in error.

Some people are much more prone to spiritual experience than others. Some people dream up spiritual experiences out of whole cloth because they want so much to have them or to fit in with their social circle. Others misinterpret the genuine spiritual experiences they do have. Still others seem to have great difficulty having any spiritual experiences even though they are not bad people. That people would deny the "Holy Ghost" is a very rational result to expect in the face of the general unreliability and non-uniformity of human spiritual experience. While I myself truly believe in spiritual revelation from God, I cannot fault those people who, for one reason or another, have difficulty believing despite their desire to be good and their willingness to give of themselves. All I feel that I can reasonably ask of those people is that they strive to do their best and be open to the possibility that there is a God who cares about them and will communicate with them.

There are, of course, a number of people who are blatantly selfish and who have no desire to believe or even seriously entertain the notion of God because they do not want to inconvenience themselves. For the people who do not even have a desire to seek after the truth, I have no sympathy for their philosophy. But for those who are trying, but who have not had the fortune of finding it, leniency is in order, and I believe we should be careful not to presume bad faith on their part.

[mfbukowski]

For some reason, this thread made me think of this SugarBeet article:

Hey if they can copyright "christian" we can take "holy ghost"

[Pahoran]

Sounds more like he made it up. What a convenient way to head off any potential and future criticism.

Of course it sounds to you like that; you reject the Book of Mormon, so naturally you view everything about it as suspect.

Wasn't Joseph clever, to know how his then-future missionary message would be received by your denomination and its priestly caste!

Regards,

Pahoran