Why Would We Trust The Cannon Of The Apostate Church?

[EllenMaksoud]

As I remember, Nicodemus is a third or fourth century work. It never really had a chance to be considered for canonization in the emerging Christian orthodoxy. I don't have the means to look it up right now, so someone should correct me here if necessary. In any case, the idea that Jesus was not really crucified is a proto-Gnostic idea that the Fourth Gospel was trying to refute.

If God created us, that is reason enough for him to bother with us. The question is like asking why a parent bother with their children.

Does God really need to prove anything to us? That would seem to be an even more fundamental question.

We adopted a 3 month old girl from Korea. She is adorable and 30 years old now. As a child she followed me around and watched every thing I did. When she could speak, once in a while she would ask, "Why do you love me?". It hurt me to hear her say that. No matter how I tried to explain, she was only satisfied for a little while.

I don'd ask Heavenly Father why he loves me. I know that he does, and in gratitude, I try my utmost to be sweet and obedient to him in all my ways. I understand belief, but I am not sure I understand religion.

[inquiringmind]

I would be an inglorious fool to not say that the atonement saved my life. Thank you for bringing that up.

Your welcome.

So you don't think there's anything to that idea in the book of Niccodemus (that Jesus didn't really die on the Cross), and you don't think it should be added to the cannon?

[EllenMaksoud]

What do you think of the Mormon concept of the atonement?

You wrote

Do you not feel that the concept of the atonement is essential to Mormonism?

Yes it is. Some times all this just feels like a bit much to take in.

[inquiringmind]

Thank you.

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind

[ERayR]

Your welcome.

So you don't think there's anything to that idea in the book of Niccodemus (that Jesus didn't really die on the Cross), and you don't think it should be added to the cannon?

No I don't

Yes I don't think it should.

[Ahab]

I understand belief, but I am not sure I understand religion.

That may be because religion means something different for many different kinds of people, with each kind being distinguished by their own religion. And despite reports to the contrary, everyone has a religion even if they don't think they do.

From wikipedia: Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to the supernatural, to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values.

So regardless of how people are related to the supernatural, or to spirituality and, ALWAYS, to moral values... whether good or evil... everybody has their own kind of religion and the more you understand someone the more you can understand both what and who they worship.

[inquiringmind]

Does anyone think this belongs in the Cannon?

Say He is Allah, The One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begets not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him. (Al Qur'an 112:1-4)

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind

[Ahab]

Does anyone think this belongs in the Cannon?

Say He is Allah, The One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begets not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none. Like unto Him. (Al Qur'an 112:1-4)

"The" Cannon (I think you mean canon)?

There's more than one canon, depending on which religion or group you're talking about.

As for us LDS, No, that wouldn't be appropriate for our canon, even if you consider Allah to be another name for our Father, becuase he does beget and was begotten and there are many like unto him.

[ERayR]

Does anyone think this belongs in the Cannon?

Say He is Allah, The One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begets not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him. (Al Qur'an 112:1-4)

I know next to nothing about the Qur'an and even less about Arabic but it is my understanding that Allah is Arabic for God. If this is correct then what is wrong with the above statement. One might not totally agree with it in entirety but there are some christian denominations you could find it almost verbatim.

About the only thing I would change is to remove the 'He begets not'.

[tagriffy]

Eternal progression is possible only because of the atonement, othewise we would never even be restored to the condition of Adam and Eve before they fell, much less move beyond that to become as perfect as our Father in heaven. It's only because of the atonement that repentance does any good, otherwise we would never be cleansed from our sins no matter how many times we tried to do something right because we would have still be accountable for doing things wrong. There's a whole lot to the atonement that you don't seem to be aware of, much less comprehend.

I'm going to have to get back to you on this. My original notes on the subject seem to be have been lost, and I need to refamiliarize myself with the material that got me thinking that the atonement doesn't quite square with eternal progression. When I'm ready, I'll start a new thread on the topic.

[tagriffy]

We adopted a 3 month old girl from Korea. She is adorable and 30 years old now. As a child she followed me around and watched every thing I did. When she could speak, once in a while she would ask, "Why do you love me?". It hurt me to hear her say that. No matter how I tried to explain, she was only satisfied for a little while.

I don'd ask Heavenly Father why he loves me. I know that he does, and in gratitude, I try my utmost to be sweet and obedient to him in all my ways. I understand belief, but I am not sure I understand religion.

Good response! I think you've just answered your own question about why God would try to prove anything to the unwilling.

[mfbukowski]

How many times in The Book of Mormon, and in the Doctrine and Covenants does it say that Christ was crucified?

And doesn't it say somewhere that he visited the Western hemisphere AFTER his crucifixion and resurrection?

Didn't Lehi's visions speak of the crucifixion?

How much would be left of the Book of Mormon if you remove all reference to the crucifixion and resurrection?

Are you saying these are non essentials?

Not sure what you are talking about, really.

I am talking about whether or not the crucifixion was essential to Mormonism.

Let's talk about taking all this to hypotheticals, not worrying about the facts, and just going on principles of belief. Let's even make it a little silly just to show the point- and take this to another planet, with another "Christ" and another atonement where the method of execution was the firing squad.

Would the atonement be "valid" in such a case? Of course. Crucifixion was not essential. Was it essential that Jesus die? Could there have been some way to accomplish the atonement without his death? I am not sure- but clearly it was his spiritual accomplishment of raising us from our fallen state to a state in which we could achieve exaltation through repentance which is important- NOT the fact that he was crucified.

However he did it, was up to God- that part is not essential

What is important is THAT he did it -however he did- so that we can return to our father. If he ate from the tree of life and that reversed the fall, it would not matter. All that is important is that Christ, SOMEHOW got us to where we needed to be to return to the Father.

That's my point- that's all. The method of how he did it is not really relevant to anything.

[inquiringmind]

About the only thing I would change is to remove the 'He begets not'.

A pretty important little thing, don't you think?

And wouldn't any Christian, of any denomination (but especially any Latter Day Saints who believe we're all begotten of a heavenly Father and Mother before we're born of our earthly parents) have to disagree with that one little statement?

And what would you think of this Hadith being added to the Cannon of scripture?

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews , when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).Sahih Muslim, 41:6985, see also Sahih Muslim, 41:6981, Sahih Muslim, 41:6982, Sahih Muslim, 41:6983, Sahih Muslim, 41:6984, Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:56:791,(Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:177)

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind

[canard78]

I know it's considered politically incorrect to say anything against Islam, but the Koran was supposedly recited by Mohammed and recorded by his disciples within his lifetime.

If the book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants are true revelation from God, how could Mohammed have been a true prophet when he said he heard this from the angel Gabriel?

"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs." (Koran 4:171)

"They do blaspheme who say: God is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One God. If they desist not from their word, verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them." (Koran 5:73)

And how could anything resembling the Gospel be true if Jesus wasn't the one who really died on the cross?

Our prophets have that he was inspired:

In 1978, under the direction of President Spencer W. Kimball, the first presidency made the statement that: “The great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1988/01/i-have-a-question?lang=eng

[inquiringmind]

That's my point- that's all. The method of how he did it is not really relevant to anything.

If Jesus was a real man who lived in the flesh 2,000 years ago, it's historically relevant.

Either He was crucified under Pontias Pilate or He wasn't, and if the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and The Doctrine and Covenants are truly inspired, it cannot be true to say that He wasn't (which is what certain Hadiths say, and what all Muslims I'm aware of interpret the Quran to say.)

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind

[inquiringmind]

Our prophets have that he was inspired:

https://www.lds.org/...estion?lang=eng

I think you're reading way too much into that statement.

A Quaker (who believes in the inner light that lights all men) could say much the same thing, but he wouldn't mean that Mohammed was a prophet (or anything like it.)

[inquiringmind]

BTW: If you take that statement to mean that Mohammed was inspired in the sense that prophets are inspired, it would mean that John Calvin was too.

[mfbukowski]

LOL, You speak a da Arabi?

Finally someone that really ... gets it... One of my favorite places in the Qur'an is surah 4:34, where it plainly says that a husband may strike a rebellious wife. (Hah, why would the dude bring a stick to a gun fight!)

YET! in the hundreds of Muslims I know here is in the US, only one ever felt that it gave him liberty to do so.

It was at that point that Islam really started to fall apart on me. If I can not sit down and read the Qur'an and get direction for my life, what use is it?

I can go right into the Bible or Bom and shortly get something that will improve me as a person should I choose to obey it.

Really that is the bottom line.

God is so great we can at best make some feeble attempts to see how things really are, but even then we can't get that close.

The bottom line is that we become better people.

It's really all mysterious, and since we can't ever really fathom all of it, sometimes even the attempt feels silly!

[EllenMaksoud]

Our prophets have that he was inspired:

https://www.lds.org/...estion?lang=eng

I like it that the GA recognizes Islam. To be clear, I am not trying to convert anyone to Islam, but to build a base of knowledge that will dispel the hate, inshallah. Sure the terrorists are awful, but the women and children and the devout are not.

[EllenMaksoud]

Really that is the bottom line.

God is so great we can at best make some feeble attempts to see how things really are, but even then we can't get that close.

The bottom line is that we become better people.

It's really all mysterious, and since we can't ever really fathom all of it, sometimes even the attempt feels silly!

Alhumduallah

[mfbukowski]

Your welcome.

So you don't think there's anything to that idea in the book of Niccodemus (that Jesus didn't really die on the Cross), and you don't think it should be added to the cannon?

You are confusing the crucifixion with the atonement.

Anybody (at that time) could get crucified. It wasn't that hard!

[inquiringmind]

I like it that the GA recognizes Islam. To be clear, I am not trying to convert anyone to Islam, but to build a base of knowledge that will dispel the hate, inshallah. Sure the terrorists are awful, but the women and children and the devout are not.

No, the women and children are not.

And the devote men I've worked with were in many ways very nice, honest, and honorable.

I would have trusted most of them more than most Americans where I was living at the time, but the interesting thing is that even they had a virulent hatred for Jews, and referred to suicide bombers as martyrs.

I remember when a news broadcast came over the T.V. or Radio at the place where I worked (not sure whether it was a T.V. or Radio because I wan't in the kitchen) concerning a suicide bombing on a bus in Israel (before 911), and they said something like "peace be upon the martyrs."

These were good, honest, hardworking (and usually very nice) people, and I have to believe that this moral blind spot had something to do with their religion.

BTW: The first time I heard about that Hadith was when they tried to convert me.

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind

[mfbukowski]

If Jesus was a real man who lived in the flesh 2,000 years ago, it's historically relevant.

So?

That's like saying that the date of the Gettysburg address is somehow relevant to our salvation. That SOMETHING happened is essential- Christ somehow took us from our fallen state but exactly when and how is not important.

[Calm]

I have to believe that this moral blind spot had something to do with their religion.

More likely culture.

Not all Muslims respond that way in my experience. It has a great deal to do with where they were brought up and what sect of Islam they belong to. Just as there have been more violent oriented sects of Christianity and more peaceful ones, so it is with Islam.

[inquiringmind]

You are confusing the crucifixion with the atonement.

Anybody (at that time) could get crucified. It wasn't that hard!

I'm not confusing anything with anything.

According to the Bible, James was killed by the sword, Stephan was stoned,and Jesus was crucified.

According to the Book of Mormon Jesus was crucified.

According to Muslim Hadiths (and the Muslim interpretation of the Quran) Jesus wasn't crucified (in fact, I believe the Hadiths say He didn't die at all, but was translated to heaven.)

All three cannot be true..

Edited May 31, 2013 by inquiringmind