My Mormon Polythieism

[volgadon]

Here are the sources I refered to. Both are in Hebrew and can be found in the journal Tchumin.

Herzog's begins on p. 169 of vol. 2 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Bm3ANPR1QUkJ:www.bmj.org.il/files/481292540058.doc+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjkpKNu0ANYaVD9ibe4tf6TnO4IU-dCcLbeRzaiN-U6ISEdNBq20ligdxJngROeBu1yygsej_BBAB6cg7sk7iWwFwIFvBSv0R189Wr2TWnTzPRjPb32MU_CRqXjxrIKf2jgXNUt&sig=AHIEtbQ9bMAWkX5knM0kT3qCC0uLkamMMQ&pli=1

Ariel's is appended to Piksler and Nadals article from vol. 22, pp. 68-78. http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/natsrut/haim-2.htm

[Eugene]

Pahoran, I'm not asking you to rely on my credibility to define the informed Jewish view of Christianity vis-a-vis monotheism. I'm asking you to rely on the credibility of the chief rabbi of israel. That seems reasonable enough to me.

Volgadon, as Pahoran has said, I've only recently arrived and don't know any of the "players" here. As such, I'm not inclined just to take your word for it. You say that Isaac Herzog denied that Christians were monotheists; I'd greatly appreciate a source.

[Eugene]

Volgadon, you posted while I was posting so my post seems out of date already. I'll take a look.

[volgadon]

Here is a translation of one of Herzog's statements.

"The Christians consider themselves as believers in the singularity of God (monotheism), but our mind can't grasp how they reconcile belief in the singularity of God with belief in the Trinity. Indeed, one cannot deny that they have a concept of of a Creator and of providence also, but this concept is not consistent, and their status ultimately depends on whether or not the Noahides were forbidden belief in associates, this being the essence of their faith... Since it has been proven that they weren't commanded to avoid [belief in] associates, I would say that worshipping associates, that is, worshipping both the One God who is without beginning and end, Creator of heaven and earth, by adding to Him either a physical power, or a force of nature, or a man who has been elevated to Godhood by imagination run wild in such a way that the former is primary and the latter secondary; even if this is avodah zarah for Israel- punishable by the death penalty- this is not the case for the Noahides as it wasn't forbidden them at all."

[volgadon]

Jacob Ariel.

"It is also incorrect to state that by itself, belief in the Trinity does not define Christianity as avodah zarah, since this belief considers that a man is God too, in addition to the Lord himself, and this is avodah zarah for all intents and purposes."

[volgadon]

Volgadon, without any ostentatious name-dropping, has earned himself some credibility around here by demonstrating that he knows what he is talking about;

Nah, I'm obviously an ignorant ankle-biter.

[coolrok7]

(altersteve, post #147)

Mormonism does not teach that Elohim is the Father's name. The Church does not claim to know what His name is.

From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

Author: Meservy, Keith H.

Elohim (God; gods; Heavenly Father) is the plural form of the singular noun 'eloah (compare Arabic Allah ) in the Hebrew Bible, where it is used 2,570 times as compared to 57 times for its singular. But as one commentator has noted, why this "plural form for "God' is used has not yet been explained satisfactorily" (Botterweck, Vol. 1, p. 272).

SINGULAR USAGE. Elohim appears in the Hebrew Bible as a common noun identifying Israel's God: "In the beginning God [elohim ] created [singular verb] the heaven and the earth" (Gen. 1:1). It was also frequently used interchangeably with Jehovah, the proper name for Israel's God: "And Jacob said, O God [elohim ] of my father Abraham,…the Lord [Jehovah] which saidst unto me, Return unto thy country" (Gen. 32:9; see also Jehovah, Jesus Christ).

Latter-day Saints use the name Elohim in a more restrictive sense as a proper name-title identifying the Father in Heaven (see God the Father). The First Presidency of the Church has written, "God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-title "Elohim,' is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and of the spirits of the human race" (MFP 5:26; see also Doctrinal Expositions of the First Presidency, "The Father and the Son," appendices, Vol. 4).

'PLURAL USAGE. Ancient Israelites used elohim also as a proper plural form to refer to gods of nations other than Israel. At such times, the accompanying verbs and adjectives used were also plural. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3; here "other" is a plural adjective).

Occasionally, Latter-day Saints use Elohim in its plural sense as a common noun to refer to the plurality of gods known to exist (TPJS, pp. 371-74). However, despite their belief that many lords and gods exist in addition to Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost (D&C 121:28-32), they follow the example of Jesus and Paul, who worshiped the Father in Heaven (Matt. 19:17; 1 Cor. 8:4-6).

Bibliography

Botterweck, G. Johannes, and Helmer Ringgren, eds. "Elohim." In Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, rev. ed., Vol. 1, pp. 267-84. Grand Rapids, Mich., 1977.

[Eugene]

Volgadon, I've forgetten through disuse most of the Hebrew I was made to study in college and grad school, so I can't myself really translate the articles you've provided. Also, the Google machine translation is so stilted and choppy as to be worthless on this point.

I appreciate that you've supplied your own translation, but considering that you're a disputant here, I'm not inclined to rely on it, especially as you seem to be including the word "monotheism" in your translation without explicit textual warrant. Neither the word monotheism (מונותאיזם) nor polytheism (פוליתאיזם

) appear in either document you've supplied. As such, these documents would seem to be of dubious value in establishing your assertions concerning either Herzog's ofrAriel's beliefs. (NB: Ariel is also only the rabbi of a small city, hardly impressive or broadly definitive in contrast to Yona Metzger--or Jonathan Saks who shares Metzger's views)

Further, David Rosen (former Chief Rabbi of Ireland and advisor on interfaith relations to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel) has described Herzog's views rather differently than you did: "On the basis of the position of the Meiri (Bet Habehirah, Bava Kama, 113b) recognizing both Muslims and Christians as monotheistic believers bound by the minimal moral code, the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi in Israel, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kuk ruled (Iggeret 89; Mishpat-Cohen 63) that Muslims and Christians living in a predominant Jewish society must be treated as gerim toshavim, i.e., with full civil liberties, just as Jews. (Similarly, the First Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, Rabbi I.H. Herzog - "The Rights of Minorities according to Halacha" Tchumin 2, 5741)."

So your status as an ankle-biter stands. (jk)

I think that this will be my last post on this site. I'm really only interested in my real life discussion with Anakin7; I merely thought I'd pass my previously offered quotations along. That done, I'm done.

[coolrok7]

When it comes to the “Truth” concerning Jesus I’ll believe Him rather than Jews, Muslims (who don’t believe in Him as Christians) and Mormons who have a different version of Him based on the teachings of Joseph Smith on this point.

My main issue here is where Christians, in light of the Mormon charge of us being either modalists or polytheists (thread op, My Mormon Polytheism), who are Trinitarian, are misrepresented.

The idea being presented in the following is actually the modalistic view (an heretical view) of God which is not the Trinitarian view:

All I want is to get the simple, naked truth, and the whole truth. Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost is only one God! I say that is a strange God anyhow—three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization. . . .All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith)

Elder: . . .BUT WHAT DO WE LEARN ABOUT GOD FROM THE EXPERIENCE OF JOSEPH SMITH?

Brown: That he has a real body.

Elder: Yes, he does. THE CHURCHES ALSO TAUGHT THAT GOD THE FATHER AND JESUS CHRIST, HIS SON, WERE BOTH THE SAME PERSON. . . . (A UNIFORM SYSTEM FOR TEACHING INVESTIGATORS, Aug. 1961, p.12)

The Oneness of the Father and the Son: There has been much misunderstanding regarding the oft-repeated statement that Jesus and his Father are one. A careful reading of the seventeenth chapter of John should clarify this matter fully. As Jesus was about to be offered up, he prayed unto his Father and thanked him for his apostles, saying, “that they may be one, as we are.” (John 17:11). . .Now it is very apparent that Jesus was not speaking of oneness of personage, but oneness of purpose, . . .(John 17:24). . .Again it is evident that the oneness referred to has no reference to oneness of personage, for if Jesus and his Father were one in person, how absurd to think that Jesus would pray unto himself, . . . (A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, LeGrand Richards, p.22)

If Jesus were the Almighty God, he would not have prayed to himself, would he? Since Jesus prayed to God, . . .the two could not be the same person (You can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, p.39).

The dilemma then is who to believe on the issue, what is the correct view to hold as of the first century of the apostles, some of which penned what is now in the New Testament.

The Christian view would be the correct view to hold as described in what eventually became the New Testament joined to the Old Testament.

Any Christian’s view needs to be in line to the Old Testament prophetical pronouncements which is what the New Testament writers did in their writing, endorsed by Jesus Himself in the “it is written”, an obvious reference to the Old Testament.

Jews of the day (monotheists which was the correct view to hold according to them) were not accepting Jesus as the Messiah of Israel and therefore wrong. Later, Muslims borrowing from the Old Testament go to Abraham and his encounter with Hagar which bore Ishmael who was not the promised lineage through which Jesus came. Jesus was that Prophet to be listened to, not Muhammad, nor Joseph Smith:

The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. (Acts 3:13-26)

So even though Islam claims to be monotheistic (Islam got it the idea of monotheism from Judaism), neither one was and still isn’t correct. Jews are no longer in the covenant without Jesus, Islam never was. Both can be though if they accept the Biblical teaching about Jesus as Messiah in its full context.

[altersteve]

(altersteve, post #147)

From the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

I'm aware that many Latter-day Saints use the title "Elohim" to refer to the Father. But the Church has never claimed that this is His actual name, nor do we insist that ancient Isrealites used the terms "Elohim" and "Jehovah" the same way we do.

[volgadon]

Volgadon, I've forgetten through disuse most of the Hebrew I was made to study in college and grad school, so I can't myself really translate the articles you've provided. Also, the Google machine translation is so stilted and choppy as to be worthless on this point.

A pity.

I appreciate that you've supplied your own translation, but considering that you're a disputant here, I'm not inclined to rely on it, especially as you seem to be including the word "monotheism" in your translation without explicit textual warrant. Neither the word monotheism (מונותאיזם) nor polytheism (פוליתאיזם

) appear in either document you've supplied. As such, these documents would seem to be of dubious value in establishing your assertions concerning either Herzog's ofrAriel's beliefs.

I placed monotheism between brackets. The Hebrew term is actually ahdut ha-Bore (אחדות הבורא). Singularity of the Creator. It is one of the native Hebrew terms for monotheism. Rabbinic writings tend to use their own theological terms rather than recent loanwords. In other words, there is plenty of textual warrant. I'm surprised that you don't know the term.

(NB: Ariel is also only the rabbi of a small city, hardly impressive or broadly definitive in contrast to Yona Metzger--or Jonathan Saks who shares Metzger's views)

Ramat Gan a small city? I take it you've never been. Ramat Gan is a pretty large part of the greater Tel-Aviv metropolitan area and rather important in my country.

Shall I list its major institutions?

The Diamond Exchange District.

Sheba Medical Center.

The Maccabiyah Village.

Ramat Gan Stadium, which is where our national football (you call it soccer) team plays.

Bar-Ilan University.

Shenkar.

Ramat Gan College.

Wertzberger College.

The Academic Center for Business and Law in Ramat Gan.

The Museum of Israeli Art.

The Museum of Oriental Art.

The Diamond Museum.

Many other museums.

Two orchestras.

Five theatres.

Two galleries.

A national park.

Numerous public gardens.

The Safari.

The Ayalon shopping mall.

Shall I go on?

Jacob Ariel was nominated for the post of chief rabbi but lost to Metzger. Ariel was the Mafdal Party's candidate of choice for that post. The main reason he lost was his close involvement with the Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip.

Metzger, OTOH, was involved in a major legal and moral scandal in the course of which he was even declared as unfit to run for the post of chief rabbi of any city. When he agreed to drop out of the running for chief rabbi of Tel-Aviv the scandal was hushed up, which ironically removed any obstacles from him running for chief rabbi of Israel. Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron, former Rishon le-Zion, was staunchly opposed to Metzger, considering him corrupt and immoral. He even went so far as to call his appointment profaning the name of God. Bakshi-Doron wasn't the only rabbinic authority to protest Metzger's conduct, so perhaps you might not want to declare so loudly that he is "impressive" and "broadly definitive."

Jacob Ariel's stature in the orthodox Jewish world is just as impressive as Metger's, perhaps more so.

[mfbukowski]

That Volgadon.

Pretending he knows something about Israel, with his vague undetailed generalizations.

Cheech.

[volgadon]

That Volgadon.

Pretending he knows something about Israel, with his vague undetailed generalizations.

Cheech.

I am that transparent.

[Calm]

That Volgadon.

Pretending he knows something about Israel, with his vague undetailed generalizations.

Cheech.

Next thing you know, he'll be pretending he actually lived there.

[frankenstein]

There is no central head of the Jewish faith that speaks for all Jews across the world like pope or the Lds prophet. So how about we get back to point about the LDS and polytheism.

And I'd we take it for fact thatLDS Doctrine is only in the scriptures and declarations, then it would appear that the prophet burned alive in the BOM was a believer or originator of the Trinity.

[volgadon]

Further, David Rosen (former Chief Rabbi of Ireland and advisor on interfaith relations to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel) has described Herzog's views rather differently than you did: "On the basis of the position of the Meiri (Bet Habehirah, Bava Kama, 113b) recognizing both Muslims and Christians as monotheistic believers bound by the minimal moral code, the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi in Israel, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kuk ruled (Iggeret 89; Mishpat-Cohen 63) that Muslims and Christians living in a predominant Jewish society must be treated as gerim toshavim, i.e., with full civil liberties, just as Jews. (Similarly, the First Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, Rabbi I.H. Herzog - "The Rights of Minorities according to Halacha" Tchumin 2, 5741)."

I'm not sure how this shows that Herzog didn't believe that Christians were polytheists. He found a loophole which allowed him to rule that they weren't idolaters, an important theological nuance with far-reaching legal implications.

So your status as an ankle-biter stands. (jk)

Oh good, I'm honoured by the epithet.

I think that this will be my last post on this site. I'm really only interested in my real life discussion with Anakin7; I merely thought I'd pass my previously offered quotations along. That done, I'm done.

Ah, so that is who you are. A shame that you won't be defending your position.

[volgadon]

Next thing you know, he'll be pretending he actually lived there.

I am shameless.

[altersteve]

There is no central head of the Jewish faith that speaks for all Jews across the world like pope or the Lds prophet. So how about we get back to point about the LDS and polytheism.

And I'd we take it for fact thatLDS Doctrine is only in the scriptures and declarations, then it would appear that the prophet burned alive in the BOM was a believer or originator of the Trinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity didn't exist until several hundred years after the death of Christ. No prophet in the Book of Mormon believed or was the originator of it.

[frankenstein]

The doctrine of the Trinity didn't exist until several hundred years after the death of Christ. No prophet in the Book of Mormon believed or was the originator of it.

Mosiah 15

[thesometimesaint]

Context my friend.

I like this explanation

Christ is referred to as the Father and the Son, even though he is a separate being from God the Father. Abinadi explains why Christ is the Father.

First, Christ is referred to the Father because he possesses the same attributes as His father. As Mosiah 15:3 says, "The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God." Just as I inherited brown eyes from my father, Christ inherited the power of God. In D&C 93:4, Christ further explains, "The Father because he gave me of his fullness."

Christ is referred to as the Father because of his function in creating heaven and earth. Helaman 14:12 explains that Christ is the "Creator of all things from the beginning."

Lastly, Christ is the Father because He is the father of our reborn-souls. The people under the reign of King Benjamin were given a new name because of their change in hearts (see Mosiah 5:7).

Abinadi also explains why he is referred to as the Son.

"Because he dwelleth in the flesh he shall be called the Son of God." (Mosiah 15:2)

[coolrok7]

"My Mormon Polytheism" by Anakin7 is the thread op. Once again you can own it for yourself but Tinitarians are not modalists nor polythiests regardless of the charge by the Mormonism of Joseph Smith and those who follow after his teaching which they are of course free to do so.

When one chooses to argue based on what Jews and Muslims say, they are both guilty of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, a place of standing I choose not to be a part of. I choose to believe as a Christian that Jesus is the one that saves me and all believers as God (only the Son) in the flesh:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. . . .And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-2, 14)

[volgadon]

When one chooses to argue based on what Jews and Muslims say, they are both guilty of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, a place of standing I choose not to be a part of. I choose to believe as a Christian that Jesus is the one that saves me and all believers as God (only the Son) in the flesh:

Has nothing to do with the number of Gods you worship. Even if they reject Jesus they can still count.

Edited January 16, 2012 by volgadon

[Pahoran]

Has nothing to do with the number of Gods you worship. Even if they reject Jesus they can still count.

But that doesn't mean, in the little world of EV polemics, that they are entitled to an opinion on any subject.

I once pointed out to Rob Bowman that his activities are interestingly parallel to those of Demetrius the Silversmith in Acts 19. His first reaction was to express astonishment that I would compare a group of Christians finding bogus arguments and rousing the rabble against a religion they don't like to a group of pagans finding bogus arguments and rousing the rabble against a religion they don't like; the two things are obviously completely unlike each other, right?

Regards,

Pahoran

[coolrok7]

We can count too. They claim to be monothiests which is one God, which implies there is no other true God. The Trintarian view is stated the same way, one God with no other true God or G/gods but with further revelation as recorded in the New Testament, the Father, Son, Holy Spirit as in the baptismal statement used in the last command of Jesus to His disciples in the procedure of making other disciples.

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; who spake by the Prophets. And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. (The Nicene Creed in the Missouri Synod Lutheran hymnal)

We are not polytheists as we are being incorrectly charged with by Mormons specifically here. We are also falsely accused of being modalists as well.

I would also remind you that Joseph Smith in the BofM quotes directly from the above so-called abominable creed above using the "very God" term which was defending the Deity of Jesus in which Arius of Alexandria. He was denying the eternal nature of Jesus before His birth as a man in order to suffer death.

Spirits don't die or have bodies of flesh and bone as Jesus claimed to have in the resurrection in Luke 24 (Jesus took on a human form in the incarnation in order to suffer death. God is spirit- John 4:24 without the importation of the whole father/mother God in heaven having spirit babies teaching of Mormonism in the eternal progression teaching which Biblical Christians reject based on Biblical teaching/understanding in context.

[volgadon]

<font color="#000000">(<span class="bbc_underline"><span class="bbc_underline"><u>Similarly, the First Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, Rabbi I.H. Herzog</u></span></span> </font>

Ah, I think I see what you mean. The thing is, in Hebrew, even during the Mandate the chief rabbinate has always been ha-Rabbanut ha-Rashit le-Israel, that is, the chief rabbinate of Israel.

Edited January 16, 2012 by volgadon