Pastor Jeff has just put out his latest video commenting on the contents of the Book of Mormon, in which he discusses the book of Alma, which is the longest book in the Book of Mormon. In this one he doesn’t say too many controversial things, so I will be brief in responding to it. At around 5:20 minutes into the video he starts commenting on a reference in the Book of Mormon to Jesus having been born “at Jerusalem,” and expressing surprise at it:
Alma 7:
10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.
That is a common criticism of the Book of Mormon, which I had previously responded to and discussed in an earlier blog post which can be seen here.
At around 7:20 minutes into the video he expresses surprise at a reference in the Book of Mormon indicating the presence of spiritual gifts, or gifts of the Holy Ghost, in the Old Testament times, before the time of Christ:
Alma 9:
21 Having been visited by the Spirit of God; having conversed with angels, and having been spoken unto by the voice of the Lord; and having the spirit of prophecy, and the spirit of revelation, and also many gifts, the gift of speaking with tongues, and the gift of preaching, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the gift of translation;
The Bible, however, teaches that spiritual gifts existed in the Old Testament times, and that all the Old Testament prophets spoke as they were “moved by the Holy Ghost”:
2 Peter 1:
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Timothy 3:
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
They are just not mentioned to have occurred in such a dramatic fashion as on the day of Pentecost. At around 12:16 minutes into the video he starts discussing the LDS understanding of the Fall of Adam, and whether it was a good thing or a bad thing—which he makes a big fuss about. In LDS theology, the Fall of Adam was a necessary and a required occurrence; but that does not mean that it was not a genuine “Fall” either. It was a real “Fall” (and a transgression), which caused mankind to become “carnal, sensual, and devilish”. The Book of Mormon fully affirms that:
2 Nephi 9:
6 For as death hath passed upon all men, to fulfil the merciful plan of the great Creator, there must needs be a power of resurrection, and the resurrection must needs come unto man by reason of the fall; and the fall came by reason of transgression; and because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord.
7 Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement—save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the first judgment which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more.
Mosiah 16:
3 For they are carnal and devilish, and the devil has power over them; yea, even that old serpent that did beguile our first parents, which was the cause of their fall; which was the cause of all mankind becoming carnal, sensual, devilish, knowing evil from good, subjecting themselves to the devil.
4 Thus all mankind were lost; and behold, they would have been endlessly lost were it not that God redeemed his people from their lost and fallen state.
Mosiah 27:
25 And the Lord said unto me: Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters;
26 And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.
Alma 22:
14 And since man had fallen, he could not merit anything of himself; but the sufferings and death of Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the grave shall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king.
Alma 34:
9 For it is expedient that an atonement should be made; for according to the great plan of the Eternal God there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish; yea, all are hardened; yea, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish except it be through the atonement which it is expedient should be made.
Alma 42:
14 And thus we see that all mankind were fallen, and they were in the grasp of justice; yea, the justice of God, which consigned them forever to be cut off from his presence.
15 And now, the plan of mercy could not be brought about except an atonement should be made; therefore God himself atoneth for the sins of the world, to bring about the plan of mercy, to appease the demands of justice, that God might be a perfect, just God, and a merciful God also.
So it was indeed a transgression and a “Fall,” which caused all of mankind to become “carnal, sensual, and devilish,” and which necessitated the Atonement of Jesus Christ to redeem them from their fallen state—on condition of faith and repentance. The way in which Greg Matsen has talked about it (in an earlier discussion with him), makes it sound as though we don’t believe it was a real Fall. It was a genuine Fall (and a transgression); but in our theology, we believe it was a necessary and a required event, in order to give mankind the experiential knowledge of good and evil. I have previously discussed that subject in an earlier blog post which can be seen here.
And lastly, at around 43:00 minutes into the video he objects to the use of the word “epistle” in the book of Alma in these words:
“One thing that did jump out at me in these chapters, where these letters are being exchanged, is they are called epistles. Now that term is probably familiar to a lot of us, just from the New Testament, because Paul and Peter and James and a lot of the Apostles sent epistles to various churches, or regions in the first century; and as a result of that being a prominent genre in the New Testament, I have done a lot of studies of epistles. And it really is important to point out that an epistle is a very specific genre, it is not just a letter, it actually has very specific characteristics pertaining to what makes it more formal, as opposed to casual; and certain sections that exist within the letter that makes it an epistle. But one of the main characteristics of an epistle is that it is didactic, or there is some moral teaching, that is interwoven into that specific way of exchanging letters. And as I was reading through what the Book of Mormon is calling these epistles exchanged between the Nephites and the lamanites, they don’t look like epistles to me, they just seem like letters. They might have a certain formal quality to them, but they most certainly aren’t didactic, there is no teaching that is taking place. So it seems to me like a bit of a mislabeling, that they are being called an epistle. And again I am just giving my perspective, as someone who has studied that genre within the New Testament.”
He has got that badly wrong I am afraid, very badly wrong! An “epistle” is just a letter, nothing more. A Google search would quickly sort that out for him. The fact that in the KJV they are called epistles doesn’t make any difference to that. In most modern translations, the words translated as “epistle” in the KJV are translated as “letter”. Just to give an example, in Colossians 4:16, the word “epistle” occurs twice in the KJV:
Colossians 4:
16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
The same word in the same verse is translated as “letter” in the following modern Bible translations:
AMP, CSB, CEB, CJB, CEV, DARBY, DLNT, ERV, EHV, ESV, ESVUK, EXB, GW, GNT, HCSB, ICB, ISV, PHILLIPS, LSB, LEB, TLB, MSG, MOUNCE, NOG, NABRE, NASB, NASB, NCB, NCV, NET, NIRV, NIV, NIVUK, NLV, NLT, NRSVA, NRSVACE, NRSVCE, NRSVUE, NTE, RGT, RSV, RSVCE, TLV, VOICE, WEB, WE.
And even in the KJV there is one instance in which the word “epistle” is used in a “non-didactic” sense, in exactly the same way in which it is used, and which he is objecting to in the Book of Mormon:
Acts 23:
31 Then the soldiers, as it was commanded them, took Paul, and brought him by night to Antipatris.
32 On the morrow they left the horsemen to go with him, and returned to the castle:
33 Who, when they came to Caesarea and delivered the epistle to the governor, presented Paul also before him.
34 And when the governor had read the letter, he asked of what province he was. And when he understood that he was of Cilicia;
35 I will hear thee, said he, when thine accusers are also come. And he commanded him to be kept in Herod’s judgment hall.
That “epistle” was a letter delivered by the soldiers escorting Paul to Felix the “governor,” explaining the circumstances of Paul’s arrest. You can read the full story in Acts 23. It was not a “didactic” letter. And in Galatians 6:11, Paul refers to his epistle to the Galatians as a “letter”:
Galatians 6:
11 Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.
Paul would normally dictate his epistles, and other people would write it down for him. But in the case of Galatians, apparently he wrote it down himself! It was a laborious and tedious task to write things down in those days; they weren’t so lucky as we are today. So people would normally employ scribes to write things down at their dictation, rather than write it down themselves. That is how Paul produced most of his epistles. So basically there is no difference between an epistle and a letter—even in the KJV. They both mean the same thing. The Book of Mormon is written in the idiomatic language and style of the KJV.
No comments:
Post a Comment