Restoration a Continuing Process!

 

I came across the above video—an interesting conversation between Pastor Jeff and BYU professor Kerry Muhlestein, in which Kerry for the most part gives good answers to Pastor Jeff. At around 3:35 into the video Pastor Jeff poses the following question:

One thing that will help me understand the Pearl of Great Price, and sort of the context here is, how much of the current prophetic voice that is active—you know, going from Joseph Smith to Brigham Young, to Russell Nelson right now—how much weight does that hold, relative to Joseph—sort of the first restored guy, and all that he brought?

To which Kerry gives the following answer:

Great question! And I think even you could maybe find in the Old Testament a parallel—so if we were to say, you have got all sorts of prophets who teach wonderful things that we believe; and yet even they would say, Okay, there is a difference between Moses, and the prophets to follow after, right? You get these from a Latter-day Saint perspective. We call it dispensations. And you get these dispensation leaders: Abraham is one, right? Moses is one—where God is, in our point of view, each time restoring something, where things have been kind of lost—and we are getting off track … but so for us, we would agree it has to be a closed cannon until God calls another Prophet like unto Moses—and that is a phrase in the Doctrine of Covenants—a prophet “like unto Moses”. … and so that is the weight that Joseph Smith carries; he does hold a different place than all of his prophetic successors—partially because he is also called as a translator; and translates ancient scripture like the Book of Mormon, or the different books in the Pearl of Great Price … because he was called to restore that truth, and start things out again, in a way that would be similar to Moses …

Except that Kerry hasn’t got that bit quite right. While it is true that Joseph Smith began the process of the Restoration, and laid the groundwork and foundation of it, and stands at the head of the new dispensation, and occupies a special place in it; all of his successors have held the same identical priesthood keys, authority, and powers of receiving revelation that he did; and subsequent Presidents of the Church since Joseph Smith have received many great revelations—two of which have been published and canonized (D&C 136, 138); and there remain many more which are yet to be published and canonized, when the time for it is right. The canon is not “closed”, and all of them are prophets “like unto Moses”. They all have had, and still have the keys to receive revelation as Joseph Smith did, and add scripture to the canon. And it has been prophesied that there yet remain much more scripture and sacred texts to be restored, translated, and published than was revealed through Joseph Smith; and it will all be done through his successors—by means of the priesthood keys and authority that he restored. And the Restoration itself is an ongoing and continuing process; it did not end with Joseph Smith. There remains far more yet to be revealed and restored, than was done through him—and it will all be done through his successors, by means of the priesthood keys and authority that he restored. There will not be another “dispensation”.

More on Frank Turek vs. Hayden Carroll

 

My attention was drawn to the above video posted on Twitter/X by Frank Turek (link) which provides a more complete account of the exchange between him and Hayden Carroll, which I had previously commented on. In most of the exchanges Frank Turek asks good questions, and gives reasonable answers; while Hayden Carroll asks pointless questions, or gives pointless or irrelevant answers—focusing on Sola Scriptura, or infallibility and inerrancy of scripture—which are irrelevant to the discussion. LDS theology and doctrine has no issues at all with Sola Scriptura, nor with the infallibility and inerrancy of scripture—as previously noted. Towards the end of the video Frank asks a couple of questions that merit further discussion. At around 6:45 minutes into the video he asks the following question:

“Let me just say this, are golden plates a miracle?”

The answer is, the way in which they were revealed to Joseph Smith was a miracle. Joseph Smith did not find the plates by accident. They were revealed to him by an angel, who told him where to find them, and also how to translate them. That was a miracle.

The way in which the translation was done was also a miracle. Joseph Smith did not know the language in which the plates were written. It required a miracle for him to be able to read, and to translate them—and to do so in such a short period of time—and into a superb, perfect English which he was not naturally capable of, nor educated enough to be able to accomplish. That was also a miracle.

The way in which the plates were shown to three of the witnesses by an angle—with the voice of God himself being heard speaking out of heaven, and testifying to their truth—was also a miracle.

And the truth of the Book of Mormon can ultimately be known only by the testimony of the Holy Ghost—through a careful and prayerful study of the book. That is also a miracle (although it may not appear as such). Then at around 9:31 minutes into the video Frank asks the following question:

“The question is if Evangelical Christianity were true, would you become a Christian?”

That is an incoherent question—in a number of ways. Firstly, his question implies that “Evangelical Christianity” is the only form of Christianity that there is! How about Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox etc. forms of Christianity. Are they not “Christian?” Only Evangelicals are Christian? That is the implication of his question.

Secondly, what does he mean by “Evangelical Christianity” being “true?” What makes a particular Christian church, religion, or denomination “true”—as distinct from any other? What criteria does he apply, and who gets to decide? I have no difficulty accepting any Christian church or denomination as “true,” in so far as they declare belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and acknowledge him as the Savior and Redeemer of the world. That is commendable. But when they reject the Restoration of the gospel in the latter days, and try to close the Canon, and shut the mouth of God, and deny him the right to speak whenever he wants to, I have a problem with that. That is blasphemy—shutting the mouth of God, and denying him the right to speak anytime he wants to.

And the last comment he makes at the end of the video (pointing to Galatians Chapter 1), is that Mormonism is “another gospel”! Not so! Mormonism is the true gospel—the same that was taught by Peter and Paul, James and John, and Jesus Christ. It is a Restoration (by divine revelation, and angelic ministration) of that original and true gospel—which fell into Apostasy in the first century; and lost its legitimacy; including divine, priestly, and Apostolic authority. It is his abominable, heretical, Evangelical, and Calvinistic theology that is “another gospel”.