Has The Church'S View Of Grace/Works Changed?

[djholmess]

If you will recall, the first set of "tablets" that Moses received from God were destroyed (by Moses) because of the wickedness of the people. Moses then received a lesser "law" the second time to be a "schoolmaster".

Yet we have Exodus 34:1 saying the opposite.

And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest

[Vance]

Can you give me any OT verses that talk specifically about Adam, Noah or Abraham knowing/doing 1, 3, and 5, . . .

To my knowledge, there are none. But I don't know why they are expected especially when Jesus said, (Luke 11:52) Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

or is this just a BoM thing?

It is a New Testament and modern revelation thing.

[djholmess]

To my knowledge, there are none. But I don't know why they are expected especially when Jesus said, (Luke 11:52) Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

It is a New Testament and modern revelation thing.

So where does it say in the NT that Adam had faith in Jesus Christ and that he was baptised?

[Vance]

Yet we have Exodus 34:1 saying the opposite.

And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest

I don't see "the opposite" here. What was on the tablets? The ten commandments right? The "law of Moses" wasn't on the tablets, neither was the gospel. It wasn't the tablets nor what was on the tablets that constitute "the Gospel" or "the law of Moses". Those were in the revelation that Moses was bring with those tablets.

Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Vance

[djholmess]

However,

If you will recall, the first set of "tablets" that Moses received from God were destroyed (by Moses) because of the wickedness of the people. Moses then received a lesser "law" the second time to be a "schoolmaster".

The whole point of the verse I quoted from Exodus 34 was that THE SAME words were written on the second tablets so can you explain how Moses received a lesser law on the second tablets?

[Vance]

So where does it say in the NT that Adam had faith in Jesus Christ and that he was baptised?

Where does it say that he didn't or that he wasn't?

Where does it say that the Bible is a complete record?

[Vance]

The whole point of the verse I quoted from Exodus 34 was that THE SAME words were written on the second tablets so can you explain how Moses received a lesser law on the second tablets?

If you will look again, you will see that I didn't say that.

I could have been more clear, but that still doesn't change the fact that I didn't say that.

[djholmess]

The Gospel can be summarized as,

1) Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ,

2) Repentance (in other words, turning away from any disobedience/sin/ungodliness to obedience/righteousness/godliness)

3) Baptism, by immersion for the remission of sins

4) Reception of the Gift of the Holy Ghost

5) Enduring to the end

In believing God and doing these, our (previous) disobedience is forgiven and we are "imputed for righteousness".

That is the gospel that was given to Adam and Abraham and MOSES

However,

If you will recall, the first set of "tablets" that Moses received from God were destroyed (by Moses) because of the wickedness of the people. Moses THEN received a lesser "law" the second time to be a "schoolmaster".

Heb 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

Sorry for the CAPS but it's the only alteration I can do from an iPad.

The way you structured your post seemed to indicate you were implying that Moses initially was given the gospel on the first tablets but after Israels disobidience he was only given the laws that would be like a school master on the second.

If you didn't mean this then what is the relationship between the first plates and the second that you were referring to in your above post?

Edited July 27, 2012 by djholmess

[Vance]

The way you structured your post seemed to indicate you were implying that Moses initially was given the gospel on the first tablets but after Israels disobidience he was only given the laws that would be like a school master on the second.

I could have been more clear, but I didn't say that "the Gospel" or "the law" was on the tablets.

If you didn't mean this then what is the relationship between the first plates and the second that you were referring to in your above post?

The first time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets (ten commandments) and the gospel, but because of wickedness he broke the tablets. The second time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets(ten commandments) and the law, which "was added because of transgressions"

[zerinus]

Why we needed a Saviour...we cannot save ourselves. But once he came all who died as children are saved without any effort on their part.

Okay; and what has that got to do with what I had been saying?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Okay; and what has that got to do with what I had been saying?

I was seeking to extend your point...excuse me.

[wenglund]

Could you explain what you mean by gospel of Adam?

I mean the gospel that was revealed to and practiced by Adam.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

I was seeking to extend your point...excuse me.

Ignore zerinus he is an equal opportunity offender.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I mean the gospel that was revealed to and practiced by Adam.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Do we not believe that the same was given to Adam and Moses...both had animal sacrifice, marriage, obedience and so forth?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Ignore zerinus he is an equal opportunity offender.

Sometimes when in a defensive posture it is had to know which is which.

[djholmess]

The first time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets (ten commandments) and the gospel, but because of wickedness he broke the tablets. The second time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets(ten commandments) and the law, which "was added because of transgressions"

So is this just your intrepretation or has a prophet or apostle in your church taught this?

Btw what makes you think the 10 commandments were on the tablets?

[ERayR]

So is this just your intrepretation or has a prophet or apostle in your church taught this?

Btw what makes you think the 10 commandments were on the tablets?

I personally don't think they were on the tablets. I think he wrote them on his hand with a ball point pen.

[Vance]

So is this just your intrepretation or has a prophet or apostle in your church taught this?

Btw what makes you think the 10 commandments were on the tablets?

Well, from,

http://en.wikipedia....en_Commandments

We get this,

According to Jewish tradition, Exodus 20:1–17 constitutes God's first recitation and inscription of the ten commandments on the two tables,^[11] which were broken in pieces by Moses, and later rewritten on replacement stones and placed in the ark of the covenant;^[12] and Deuteronomy 5:4–20 consists of God's re-telling of the ten commandments to the younger generation who were to enter the promised land. The passages in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 contain more than ten imperative statements, totalling 14 or 15 in all. While the Bible itself assigns the count of "ten", using the Hebrew phrase asereth ha-d^ebarim ('the ten words', 'statements' or 'sayings'), the phrase does not appear in Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Vance

[djholmess]

The first time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets (ten commandments) and the GOSPEL, but because of wickedness he broke the tablets. The second time down the mountain, Moses brought the tablets(ten commandments) and the LAW, which "was added because of transgressions"

But is this just your intrepretation or do you have some revelation about this? What do you see as the difference between the gospel and the law given to Moses?

[KevinG]

Wasn't this thread about how/if the LDS interpretation of Grace and Works has changed? Why is it now becoming "throw EV interpretations against the wall of LDS theology and see what sticks?"

Not to get too personal DJ but you seem to have a tenuous grasp on LDS beliefs and then only what you have gleaned from critical sites. That doesn't make for a productive discussion of our faith.

[djholmess]

Wasn't this thread about how/if the LDS interpretation of Grace and Works has changed? Why is it now becoming "throw EV interpretations against the wall of LDS theology and see what sticks?"

Not to get too personal DJ but you seem to have a tenuous grasp on LDS beliefs and then only what you have gleaned from critical sites. That doesn't make for a productive discussion of our faith.

The only real input I've had in this thread over the last couple of days is to ask Vance some clarifying questions about things he has been saying. How else am I supposed to learn if not by asking questions?

Btw I haven't been on any 'critical sites' that I know of.

[wenglund]

Do we not believe that the same was given to Adam and Moses...both had animal sacrifice, marriage, obedience and so forth?

We, or at least I, believe there are covenant, ritual, and punishment differences and levels distinctions between the old law (under Moses) and the new laws (practiced in the beginning of times by Adam and in the meridian and end of times by Christ and the latter-day saints). Do you see it otherwise? If so, could you please explain why?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited July 29, 2012 by wenglund

[wenglund]

I think it of value to underscore a point made earlier in the thread by Vance. The letters Paul wrote, which have since been canonized, were not intended to be an exhaustive treatise on works and grace and salvation. He wasn't attempting to lay out a systematic theology or comprehensive delineation of doctrine. Rather, he was attempting to explain to people who were steeped in thousands of years of Jewish tradition, why it was no longer necessary for them to perform certain rituals like circumcision. It was clearly his intent to convince the saints who were resistant to transitioning from the old law to the new, that it was not only no longer unnecessary to perform certain works of the old law, but a waste of time since those works were satisfied in Christ.

This is the context in which Paul's writings should be interpreted, and certainly not used, as too often is the case, as a means for dismissing the gospel, with its attendant principles and ordinances and commandments, that Christ had set forth during his mortal ministry and later through revelation to his chosen leaders.

In short, to some degree, the debate and prooftexting of Paul in relation to the works/grace/salvation issue misses the whole point of Christ's gospel--which is to bring us to Christ and enable us to become like him. The debate is, itself, in certain respects ironically a dead work.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Vance]

The only real input I've had in this thread over the last couple of days is to ask Vance some clarifying questions about things he has been saying. How else am I supposed to learn if not by asking questions?

No worries here.

Admittedly I am inferring that the "transgression" Paul credits for the addition of the Law of Moses was the wickedness the people were engaging in when Mose descended the mountain the first time with the tablets.

Whether it was that "transgression" or another is not the important thing. The important thing is that Paul recognized that the Gospel was given first, but due to "transgression", the Law of Moses was added. And he uses this point to support his argument that the works of the Law of Moses was irrelevant toward salvation.

Here is a summary of what we believe about the Law of Moses as found here,

http://classic.scrip...s.org/en/bd/l/9

The name assigned to the whole collection of written laws given through Moses to the house of Israel, as a replacement of the higher law that they had failed to obey. The law of Moses consisted of many ceremonies, rituals,and symbols, to remind the people frequently of their duties and responsibilities. It included a law of carnal commandments and performances, added to the basic laws of the gospel. Faith, repentance, baptism in water, and remission of sins were part of the law, as were also the Ten Commandments. Although inferior to the fulness of the gospel, there were many provisions in the law of Moses of high ethical and moral value that were equal to the divine laws of any dispensation. The law of carnal commandments and much of the ceremonial law was fulfilled at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The law functioned under the Aaronic Priesthood and was a preparatory gospel to bring its adherents to Christ. See JST Ex. 34: 1-2; Rom. 3: 20; Gal. 3: 19, 24; Eph. 2: 14-16; Heb. 7: 11, 18-19; Heb. 9: 7-14; 2 Ne. 25: 24-30; Mosiah 12: 27 to 13: 32; 3 Ne. 9: 17; 3 Ne. 15: 1-8; D&C 84: 23-27.

One of the major questions the early Church in Palestine had to decide was about the obligation of Christians to the ceremonial law of Moses. The matter was partially solved by the conference held in Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 15 and Gal. 2. The Jewish Christians in particular had difficulty giving up the ritual of the law of Moses. The Nephites, on the other hand, seemed to have had much less of a problem doing so (see 3 Ne. 15: 1-5).

The law as given through Moses was a good law, although adapted to a lower spiritual capacity than is required for obedience to the gospel in its fulness. However, the Jewish leaders had added many unauthorized provisions, ceremonies, and prohibitions to the original law, until it became extremely burdensome. These innovations were known as the “traditions of the elders.” By N.T. times among the Jews the law had become so altered it had lost much of its spiritual meaning almost to the point that the law was worshipped more than the Lord. It is this form of the law that is so harshly spoken against by Jesus and by Paul (see Matt. 15: 1-9; Mark 7: 1-13; Gal. 2: 16-21). There is no evidence that the law of Moses had become as altered among the Nephites as among the Jews, and this may partially explain why the Nephites had less trouble in giving it up when the Savior came.

I hope that is helpful.

Edited July 30, 2012 by Vance

[djholmess]

No worries here.

Admittedly I am inferring that the "transgression" Paul credits for the addition of the Law of Moses was the wickedness the people were engaging in when Mose descended the mountain the first time with the tablets.

whether it was that "transgression" or another is not the important thing. The important thing is that Paul recognized that the Gospel was given first, but due to "transgression", the Law of Moses was added. And he uses this point to support his argument that the works of the Law of Moses was irrelevant toward salvation.

Here is a summary of what we believe about the Law of Moses as found here,

http://classic.scrip...s.org/en/bd/l/9

I hope that is helpful.

This does clarify things some what. I have a couple of questions though.

1) It seemed at first that you were saying that the law given through and alongside the second tablets was different than what God intended to give alongside the first tablets.

The above quote however doesn't specifically identify what or where the 'higher law that they failed to obey' came from.

So was there a difference, if so can you show any verses from Exodus-Deuteronomy that show this distinction?

2)Where does Paul say the gospel was given first?

3) Your quote also mentioned that baptism in water was a part of the Law of Moses, where is this in the OT?