Imbibing Revisionist History

[nrajeff]

In Fig's thread about the discovery that apparently humans existed 80,000 years ago, I commented:
From 325 A.D. to, say, 1800 A.D., the mainstream of Christendom--the powerful, influential sects who got to decide who was Christian and who was not--would have tried, convicted, branded a heretic, excommunicated, and possibly executed a fellow Christian who admitted believing that there were humans on Earth 80,000 years ago.

Father_JD seems to disagree with that ***essment:

Well have you imbibed revisionist historical "theories" that there were equally valid forms of Christianity and the bigger or more entrenched party merely "won out".

And I responded:

But if you are right, and the idea that a majority of Christendom was overrun by a cabal of corrupt leaders teaching false doctrines is a false, fabricated history, then what kind of respect can you have for the Reformers who fought that orthodoxy--an orthodoxy they risked their lives trying to bring down? And what the heck are your doing in a PROTESTANT church? Read what Wesley said about post-Constantine Christendom (The More Excellent Way, Sermon 89 is but one of several) and tell me that Wesley was a fellow "Imbiber of revisionist history."

So my question is this: Did John Wesley have a totally incorrect understanding of the history of post-Nicene Christianity? Did Wesley imbibe too much revisionist history?

[HickPreacher]

Some people think that all history has been rewritten and the human race is only 900 years old-- check this out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDtRajr8MYs

[BrianH]

Did John Wesley have a totally incorrect understanding of the history of post-Nicene Christianity? Did Wesley imbibe too much revisionist history?

Are you trying to imply that Wesley affirmed that there was a total apostacy in the sense of the idea as required by your church as a prerequisite for the so-called LDS "restoration"? If so, please tell us exactly what Wesley said IN CONTEXT that makes you think he believed that there was a total apostacy in the LDS sense.

(edit): oh and BTW, forgive me for going slightly off topic, but I have to wonder what cons***utes "revisionist history" to a Mormon...?!?! I mean ...heck the entire Book of Mormon is a "revisionist history" and it is the core foundational document of your entire religion so ...you know, this only makes me wonder.

thank you

-BH

.

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by HickPreacher

Some people think that all history has been rewritten and the human race is only 900 years old-- check this out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDtRajr8MYs

I became aware of the existence of this thesis as a chess player. The former chess champion, Gary Kasparov, is subscribing (supporting) to this idea of a young history of the human civilization. This hypothesis was developed by a Russian mathematician, Anatoly Fomenko. I have the first two volumes of his thesis, but I did not find the moment to read them yet. I have so many books to read.

Kasparov was interested about my organizational skills five years ago (a *** proposition in the Toronto area), but I prefered to stay with 'World Chess Network' at that time. I retired from chess two years ago.

About Fomenko:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Fomenko
About the New Chronology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)
Gary Kasparov on the history revision:
http://www.new-tradition.org/view-garry-kasparov.htm



History: Fiction or Science? [vol. 1]
by Anatoly Fomenko
http://www.amazon.com/History-Fictio..._bxgy_b_text_b

This hypothesis should be looked with a grain of salt. Do not take it too seriously.

Trinity

[HickPreacher]

Originally Posted by Trinity

I became aware of the existence of this thesis as a chess player. The former chess champion, Gary Kasparov, is subscribing (supporting) to this idea of a young history of the human civilization. This hypothesis was developed by a Russian mathematician, Anatoly Fomenko. I have the first two volumes of his thesis, but I did not find the moment to read them yet. I have so many books to read.

Kasparov was interested about my organizational skills five years ago (a *** proposition in the Toronto area), but I prefered to stay with 'World Chess Network' at that time. I retired from chess two years ago.

About Fomenko:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Fomenko
About the New Chronology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)
Gary Kasparov on the history revision:
http://www.new-tradition.org/view-garry-kasparov.htm



History: Fiction or Science? [vol. 1]
by Anatoly Fomenko
http://www.amazon.com/History-Fictio..._bxgy_b_text_b

This hypothesis should be looked with a grain of salt. Do not take it too seriously.

Trinity

Yes --I posted this link because it is an example of a radical departure from the norm on the history of civilization- and Christianity. Likewise Mormonism has a whole different idea about certain aspects of world history and Church history. So in some ways there is a parallel between Fomenki and Mormonism.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by BrianH

Are you trying to imply that Wesley affirmed that there was a total apostacy in the sense of the idea as required by your church as a prerequisite for the so-called LDS "restoration"?

Wesley didn't need to go that far in order to be branded a heretic.

[BrianH]

As usual, that does not answer the question.

-BH

.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by BrianH

As usual, that does not answer the question.

-BH.

--'As usual,' you have tried to go off-topic with red herrings and diversions. The first post in this thread says what I mean, and asks what I want answered. It should be self-explanatory. Read it again and I am hopeful that I won't need to p**** each sentence for you.

[Bob Betts]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

--'As usual,' you have tried to go off-topic with red herrings and diversions. The first post in this thread says what I mean, and asks what I want answered. It should be self-explanatory. Read it again and I am hopeful that I won't need to p**** each sentence for you.

So my question is this: Did John Wesley have a totally incorrect understanding of the history of post-Nicene Christianity? Did Wesley imbibe too much revisionist history?

So, to answer your questions about what Wesley said, you want us to speculate about what he meant by what he said, and what he imbibed?

Would you like to speculate on what Joseph Smith meant when he responded to the question, "Are the Mormons abolitionists"? by answering, "No, unless delivering the people from priestcraft, and the priests from the power of Satan, should be considered abolition. But we do not believe in setting the Negroes free" (History of the Church, vol. 3, p.29)."

You're straining at a gnat with John Wesley.

Let's talk about revisionist history which matters, since this Forum is en***led Mormonism, and not John Wesley, nor Christianity.

I can prove from your own LDS scriptures that a complete apostasy never happened, which refutes LDS revisionist history, using the revisionist history of your scriptures, making your "restoration" by Joseph Smith, the myth of this age.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Bob Betts

I can prove from your own LDS scriptures that a complete apostasy never happened,....

And John, who supposedly also never died.

What else, Bob?

[Bob Betts]

Originally Posted by Russ

And John, who supposedly also never died.

What else, Bob?

Well, John not dying, according to D&C 7, having "this power and keys of this ministry until [Christ's] return," in verse 7, is in direct contradiction to the Preach My Gospel missionaries manual, on page 34, when it says, "After the deaths of the Apostles, the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth." Since the Apostle John allegedly never died, then the missionaries manual is obviously false.

Then, there's the three Nephites in 3 Nephi 28 who are granted the same privilege as John, to never die. All four were given the desires of their hearts (which was to be there mission): to preach (prophesy) and minister "unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindred, tongues and people" (D&C 7:3; 3 Nephi 28:30), to "bring the souls of men unto [Christ], while the world shall stand" (3 Nephi 28:9; D&C 7:2, 7).

So, with four priesthood holders, holding the keys to Christ's ministry until Christ's return, no universal apostasy could have happened.

The three Nephites were still around in A.D. 322, according to Mormon chapter 1, alluded to in verse 13 as "[Christ's] beloved disciples," though they were taken from the face of the whole land of Zarahemla. They still had the rest the world to go to.

Again, in Mormon 10:11, Moroni speaks of he and his father, Mormon, seeing them and being ministered to by them. The date recorded on that page is A.D. 401.

Then there's the simple fact (if you're Mormon) that Mormon and Moroni were both allegedly prophets, which implies that they both had the priesthood keys and authority, or else none of their writings could be inspired of God. Both "prophets" in their respective books, preach to the people who are with them.

And, that takes us right to the end of the BoM, A.D. 421, with no end to the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority, thus no apparent beginning of a complete apostasy. Especially with John and the three Nephites allegedly on the earth until the Lord shall return.

Either the BoM and D&C are wrong, or the Preach My Gospel manual is wrong. They can't have it both ways.

The LDS scriptures prove there never was a universal apostasy. Therefore, Joseph Smith was never needed to restore anything.

[Libby]

From "Answers to Gospel Questions", Chapter 9 (Translated Beings—Part II)

According to the Pearl of Great Price, when Enoch was translated, the inhabitants of the city Zion were also taken and were also translated. How many others have been given this great honor we do not know, but there may have been many of whom we have no record. Prominence has been given to the case of Elijah as well as to Enoch, and the purpose of granting to prophets this great blessing is that they may minister upon the earth. Moreover, the Lord, of necessity, has kept authorized servants on the earth bearing the priesthood from the days of Adam to the present time; in fact, there has never been a moment from the beginning that there were not men on the earth holding the Holy Priesthood. (Moses 5:59.) Even in the days of apostasy, and apostasy has occurred several times, the Lord never surrendered this earth and permitted Satan to have complete control. Even when the great apostasy occurred following the death of the Savior's apostles, our Father in heaven held control and had duly authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers. These servants were not permitted to organize the Church nor to officiate in the ordinances of the gospel, but they did check the advances of evil as far as the Lord deemed it necessary. This truth is made manifest in the statement of the Lord in the Doctrine and Covenants wherein the following appears:

Wherefore, I will that all men shall repent, for all are under sin, except those which I have reserved unto myself, holy men that ye know not of. (D. & C. 49:8.)

We know that John the Revelator and the three Nephites were granted the privilege of remaining on the earth in the translated state, to "bring souls unto Christ." We know that this was the request of John (D. & C., Sec. 7.) and likewise the desire of the three Nephites. (3 Nephi 28:4-18.)

It is reasonable to believe that they were engaged in this work as far as the Lord permitted them to go during these years of spiritual darkness. There are legends and stories which seem to be authentic, showing that these holy messengers were busy among the nations of the earth, and men have been entertained by them unawares. (Hebrews 13:2.) We may also well believe that these translated prophets have always been busy keeping constraint upon the acts of men and nations unbeknown to mortal man.

(Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5 vols. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957-1966], 2: 44.)

So the periodic periods of apostasy on the earth had more to do with the falling away of the organized church and the removal of the priesthood keys than it did any permanent removal of "authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers.

[Bob Betts]

Originally Posted by Libby

From "Answers to Gospel Questions", Chapter 9 (Translated Beings—Part II)

According to the Pearl of Great Price, when Enoch was translated, the inhabitants of the city Zion were also taken and were also translated. How many others have been given this great honor we do not know, but there may have been many of whom we have no record. Prominence has been given to the case of Elijah as well as to Enoch, and the purpose of granting to prophets this great blessing is that they may minister upon the earth. Moreover, the Lord, of necessity, has kept authorized servants on the earth bearing the priesthood from the days of Adam to the present time; in fact, there has never been a moment from the beginning that there were not men on the earth holding the Holy Priesthood. (Moses 5:59.) Even in the days of apostasy, and apostasy has occurred several times, the Lord never surrendered this earth and permitted Satan to have complete control. Even when the great apostasy occurred following the death of the Savior's apostles, our Father in heaven held control and had duly authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers. These servants were not permitted to organize the Church nor to officiate in the ordinances of the gospel, but they did check the advances of evil as far as the Lord deemed it necessary. This truth is made manifest in the statement of the Lord in the Doctrine and Covenants wherein the following appears:

Wherefore, I will that all men shall repent, for all are under sin, except those which I have reserved unto myself, holy men that ye know not of. (D. & C. 49:8.)

We know that John the Revelator and the three Nephites were granted the privilege of remaining on the earth in the translated state, to "bring souls unto Christ." We know that this was the request of John (D. & C., Sec. 7.) and likewise the desire of the three Nephites. (3 Nephi 28:4-18.)

It is reasonable to believe that they were engaged in this work as far as the Lord permitted them to go during these years of spiritual darkness. There are legends and stories which seem to be authentic, showing that these holy messengers were busy among the nations of the earth, and men have been entertained by them unawares. (Hebrews 13:2.) We may also well believe that these translated prophets have always been busy keeping constraint upon the acts of men and nations unbeknown to mortal man.

(Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5 vols. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957-1966], 2: 44.)

So the periodic periods of apostasy on the earth had more to do with the falling away of the organized church and the removal of the priesthood keys than it did any permanent removal of "authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers.

I'll repeat the LDS scriptures, which contradict what Joseph Fielding Smith stated:

According to D&C 7:7, Christ gave John "this power and keys of this ministry until [Christ's] return." This contradicts the much more recently published Preach My Gospel manual, against the decades old Answers to Gospel Questions.

In 3 Nephi 28, the three Nephites are given the same privilege as John the beloved, requiring the power and keys to Christ's ministry. How is that not a clear contradiction to what Preach My Gospel says, "After the deaths of the Apostles, the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth."

John and the three Nephites possessed the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority, according to D&C 7:7 and 3 Nephi 28:6-9. But, they couldn't possess them if the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth, according to the manual.

Which is it. It can't be both.

JFS said, "It is reasonable to believe..." That simply means he was speculating, because he didn't know.

3 Nephi 28 goes much further in describing their activities, than Joseph Fielding Smith, who withheld many of the details of what the p***ages in question actually state:

29 And it shall come to p***, when the Lord seeth fit in his wisdom that they shall minister unto all the ascattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them.
30 And they are as the aangels of God, and if they shall pray unto the Father in the name of Jesus they can show themselves unto whatsoever man it seemeth them good.
31 Therefore, great and marvelous works shall be wrought by them, before the agreat and coming day when all people must surely stand before the judgment-seat of Christ;
32 Yea even among the Gentiles shall there be a agreat and marvelous work wrought by them, before that judgment day.

JFS minimized their responsibilities, by SPECULATING that Christ had "authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers." Yet, the BoM scriptures make their works sound much more grandiose, requiring the keys and authority to prophesy and preach and minister, and bringing the souls of men to Christ, with the convincing power of God, doing great and marvelous works.

JFS is obviously covering up the magnitude of their priesthood responsibilities with his diminutive speculation.

Libby, you quoted JFS saying, "These servants were not permitted to organize the Church nor to officiate in the ordinances of the gospel."

Then YOU stated, "So the periodic periods of apostasy on the earth had more to do with the falling away of the organized church..."

Yet, those men were organizing the church according to verse 18, "But this much I know, according to the record which hath been given—they did go forth upon the face of the land, and did minister unto all the people, uniting as many to the church as would believe in their preaching; baptizing them, and as many as were baptized did receive the Holy Ghost."

How is that not organizing the church?

I thought that the priesthood keys and authority were necessary to bring souls of men to Christ, unite them to the church, baptize them and lay hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost? And, they were supposed to do all this with the convincing power of God, doing great and marvelous works.

Did they have the keys and authority, and did they build the church, according to Nephi's testimony in verse 18, or not? Which is it?

You also stated, "So the periodic periods of apostasy on the earth had more to do with the falling away of the organized church and the removal of the priesthood keys..." But, they HAD the keys, given by Christ in D&C 7:7, and 3 Nephi 28:6-9.

You finished by stating, "than it did any permanent removal of 'authorized servants on the earth to direct his work and to check, to some extent at least, the ravages and corruption of the evil powers.'"

That might be true, only if you ignore verses 18, and 29-32.

[Libby]

Bob, I only have a minute, but just wanted to say that there is a difference between "ministering" and "organizing a church". There were always priesthood holders to minister and baptize, but none with the authority to organize Christ's Church (until Joseph Smith). Organizing a church would require a Prophet and Apostles and keys to perform Temple ordinances, etc.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Libby

Bob, I only have a minute, but just wanted to say that there is a difference between "ministering" and "organizing a church". There were always priesthood holders to minister and baptize, but none with the authority to organize Christ's Church (until Joseph Smith). Organizing a church would require a Prophet and Apostles and keys to perform Temple ordinances, etc.

Libby, I don't agree with that based on what Bob posted earlier:

"...minister unto all the people, uniting as many to the church as would believe in their preaching; baptizing them, and as many as were baptized did receive the Holy Ghost."

"Uniting... to the church."

"Believe in the preaching."

"Baptizing them."

"Received the Holy Ghost."

That is organizing and building a church. That is making Mormons.

[Bob Betts]

Originally Posted by Libby

Bob, I only have a minute, but just wanted to say that there is a difference between "ministering" and "organizing a church". There were always priesthood holders to minister and baptize, but none with the authority to organize Christ's Church (until Joseph Smith). Organizing a church would require a Prophet and Apostles and keys to perform Temple ordinances, etc.

Libby, according to LDS scriptures, as I've already pointed out, John and the three Nephites were the Apostles, with priesthood keys. And, Mormon and Moroni were successive prophets, with the priesthood authority, all the way up to A.D. 421. Prophets and apostles in the BoM, performing ordinances. What's missing, Libby?

Preach My Gospel claims that all the Apostles died. But, four did not.

Preach My Gospel states that the deaths of all the Apostles, triggered the universal apostasy, because the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority taken from the earth.

Preach My Gospel does NOT say, "Some priesthood keys and authority were taken from the earth," so that the four living priesthood holders could do everything but organize churches and perform temple ordinances. Preach My Gospel claims, without stipulations, that the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth, triggering a COMPLETE and UNIVERSAL apostasy. That's all inclusive, no exceptions.

In Mormonism, the authority to prophesy, bring souls to Christ, baptize them both in water and the Holy Ghost, requires priesthood keys and authority, which the four Apostles and two prophets had, according to D&C 7:7 and 3 Nephi 28:6-9, and the books of Mormon and Moroni.

Therefore, at least the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority required to bring souls to Christ, baptize them both in water and the Holy Ghost, were NOT taken from the earth, making Preach My Gospel wrong, and the doctrine of a COMPLETE and UNIVERSAL apostasy, false.

Otherwise, all of the prophesying, evangelizing (bringing souls to Christ), and baptizing in water and the Holy Ghost that those four living Apostles, along with what the prophets Mormon and Moroni had performed, were performed WITHOUT ANY priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority. Therefore, the ordinances they performed were invalid.

You can't have it both ways.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Bob Betts

Libby, according to LDS scriptures, as I've already pointed out, John and the three Nephites were the Apostles, with priesthood keys. And, Mormon and Moroni were successive prophets, with the priesthood authority, all the way up to A.D. 421. Prophets and apostles in the BoM, performing ordinances. What's missing, Libby?

Preach My Gospel claims that all the Apostles died. But, four did not.

Bob, you need to understand the difference between the Priesthood, and Priesthood keys.

Priesthood is the authority and the power which God has granted to men on earth to act for Him.

Priesthood Keys are the right to preside and direct the affairs of the Church within a jurisdiction. They define the boundaries of authority and boundaries of the exercise of Priesthood authority. In other words, though I hold the priesthood, I do not possess the priesthood keys to be the leader of the church, unless I am specifically ordained to that office and given those keys to exercise my priesthood in that capacity.

In the Church, all men who are ordained Apostles and sustained as members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have all priesthood keys conferred upon them. (See D&C 27:13; D&C 110:11–16; D&C 112:30.) But they do not have the right to exercise all those keys individually.

The President of the Church is the only person on earth who has the right to exercise all the keys of the Priesthood in their fulness. (See D&C 132:7.) He receives authority by setting apart by the Twelve Apostles.

In the early Church, Peter was the one chosen by the Lord to hold these keys:

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matt. 16:19)

The most precious thing lost in the Apostasy was the authority held by the Twelve—the priesthood keys. For the Church to be His Church, there must be a Quorum of the Twelve who hold the keys and confer them on others.

When Peter and the other apostles were killed, the keys were not given to another. They were lost. And though John still held the priesthood, he did not have the right to exercise his priesthood keys, as that right rested with Peter, and the Quorum of the Apostles as a quorum.

If you are going to try to criticize our own doctrine of the Priesthood, you should become more familiar with it.
Here are a couple of excellent articles that will give you a greater understanding of our doctrine of the Priesthood.

I dare say it would benefit LDS people as well. I found it very informative for me.

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.js...____&hideNav=1

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.js...___&hideNav=1#

Thanks.

[Libby]

Thanks, Fig.

Good articles.

[nrajeff]

I appreciate Fig's and Libby's explanations about what essentially is the difference between a total loss of authorized leaders to run and lead the church, and a total loss of inspired, faithful Christians.

I need to back for a minute and address an ***ertion FJD made--an ***ertion that I didn't take the time to confront:

Well have you imbibed revisionist historical "theories" that there were equally valid forms of Christianity and the bigger or more entrenched party merely "won out".

I have never believed that there were equally valid forms of Christianity. I think that some forms are and were more valid than others. The part that you got right was the part about the more entrenched party winning out.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Bob Betts

Libby, according to LDS scriptures, as I've already pointed out, John and the three Nephites were the Apostles, with priesthood keys. And, Mormon and Moroni were successive prophets, with the priesthood authority, all the way up to A.D. 421. Prophets and apostles in the BoM, performing ordinances. What's missing, Libby?

Preach My Gospel claims that all the Apostles died. But, four did not.

Preach My Gospel states that the deaths of all the Apostles, triggered the universal apostasy, because the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority taken from the earth.

Preach My Gospel does NOT say, "Some priesthood keys and authority were taken from the earth," so that the four living priesthood holders could do everything but organize churches and perform temple ordinances. Preach My Gospel claims, without stipulations, that the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth, triggering a COMPLETE and UNIVERSAL apostasy. That's all inclusive, no exceptions.

In Mormonism, the authority to prophesy, bring souls to Christ, baptize them both in water and the Holy Ghost, requires priesthood keys and authority, which the four Apostles and two prophets had, according to D&C 7:7 and 3 Nephi 28:6-9, and the books of Mormon and Moroni.

Therefore, at least the priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority required to bring souls to Christ, baptize them both in water and the Holy Ghost, were NOT taken from the earth, making Preach My Gospel wrong, and the doctrine of a COMPLETE and UNIVERSAL apostasy, false.

Otherwise, all of the prophesying, evangelizing (bringing souls to Christ), and baptizing in water and the Holy Ghost that those four living Apostles, along with what the prophets Mormon and Moroni had performed, were performed WITHOUT ANY priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority. Therefore, the ordinances they performed were invalid.

You can't have it both ways.

Peter, James and John were given the key of this Ministry.
D&C 7:7 And I will make thee to minister for him and for thy brother James; and unto you three I will give this power and the keys of this ministry until I come.

Bob confused the Three Nephites as being apostles, and this was not so.

When Jesus, before parting from the Nephites, asked his disciples what they desired of him after he went to the Father, nine asked to come to him in his kingdom at a good old age when their labors on the earth were over (3 Nephi 28:1–2). Three, on the other hand, were reluctant to express their desire. Jesus therefore said to them, “I know your thoughts, and ye have desired the thing which John, my beloved, who was with me in my ministry, before that I was lifted up by the Jews, desired of me … for ye have desired that ye might bring the souls of men unto me, while the world shall stand” (3 Nephi 28:6, 9; cf. D&C 7:2).


Who appeared to Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration? What was the purpose of their appearance?

Larry E. Dahl, ***ociate professor of Church history and doctrine, Brigham Young University. Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist, and perhaps others appeared to Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration, where the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 16:19) were conferred upon them. There is evidence that they also were endowed with power from on high and instructed in the affairs of the kingdom of God.

Matthew (Matt. 17:1-13), Mark (Mark 9:2-13), and Luke (Luke 9:28-36) all give an account of the event. From their accounts in the King James Version of the Bible we learn:

1. Approximately one week after Peter had been told that he would be given the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:19), Jesus took Peter, James, and John “up into a high mountain apart.” (Mark 9:2.)

2. There Jesus was transfigured before them—his face shone as the sun and his raiment became “white as light.” (Matt. 17:2.)

3. Peter, James, and John saw Moses and Elijah (“Elias” is the Greek rendering of the Hebrew Elijah; see Luke 4:25-26; 1 Kgs. 17) talking with Christ. Luke tells us that Moses and Elijah spoke of the Savior’s “decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.” (Luke 9:31.)

4. A bright cloud “overshadowed them” and “they feared as they entered into the cloud.”

5. The Father spoke “out of the cloud” saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”

6. As they came down from the mountain, the Savior charged them to tell no one of the experience until after his resurrection. In response to the disciples’ question about Elias that “must first come,” Jesus confirmed that “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things.” He also confirmed that John the Baptist, in his role as an Elias, had already come and had been killed at the hands of those who would yet kill the Son of Man. (See JST, Matt. 17:14 to confirm that Christ had reference to John the Baptist, “and also of another who should come.”)

Adding to and clarifying the gospel writers’ accounts, we have Peter’s reference to the transfiguration in his second epistle (2 Pet. 1:16-18), the Prophet Joseph Smith’s inspired translation of the Bible, testimony from the Doctrine and Covenants, and commentary by Joseph Smith and other modern prophets.

In the Prophet’s inspired translation of Mark’s record, we learn that John the Baptist was also present on the Mount of Transfiguration. JST, Mark 9:3 reads:

“And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses, or in other words, John the Baptist and Moses; and they were talking with Jesus.”

Robert J. Matthews, who has done extensive work with the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible comments upon this verse:

“Considerable discussion has been stimulated by this comment, since the presence of the Baptist at the Mount has never before been suggested. Furthermore, it is certain that Elijah the Prophet was present at the Mount, and the term Elias (the Greek form the Hebrew name Elijah) has generally been understood to have reference to him. For this reason many have wondered if this p***age has somehow been printed erroneously. However, NT 2, folio 2, page 24, reads exactly as the printed Inspired Version for this p***age. Likewise, the Bernhisel copy, page 74, reads with precisely the same wording, thus corroborating the present text of the printed Inspired Version. This discussion is not intended to be a doctrinal explanation of the matter, but simply a presentation of evidence that the published account gives the text in the original m****cript. ...

“There can be no mistake that the Elias at the Mount of Transfiguration was Elijah the prophet. What role John the Baptist might have had there is not known.” (Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible, Provo: BYU Press, 1975, pp. 180, 367.)[/B]

[Richard]

Elder Bruce R. McConkie gives us the following explanation about John the Baptist being on the Mount of Transfiguration:

“It is not to be understand that John the Baptist was the Elias who appeared with Moses to confer keys and authority upon those who then held the Melchizedek Priesthood, which higher priesthood already embraced and included all of the authority and power John had held and exercised during his ministry. Rather, for some reason that remains unknown—because of the partial record of the proceedings—John played some other part in the glorious manifestations then vouchsafed to mortals. Perhaps he was there, as the last legal administrator under the Old Covenant, to symbolize that the law was fulfilled and all old things were done away, thus contrasting his position with that of Peter, James, and John who were then becoming the first legal administrators of the New Kingdom.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965, 1:404.)

The Elias on the Mount of Transfiguration, then, was Elijah, although John the Baptist was also present. Elijah was the last prophet to “hold the key of … the fulness of the Melchizedek Priesthood.” He restored this authority so that the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood could be administered properly. (See History of the Church, 6:251-52.)

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that Peter, James, and John were not only observers on the Mount, but were important participants. He said, “The Savior, Moses, and Elias, gave the keys to Peter, James, and John, on the mount, when they were transfigured.” (History of the Church, 3:387.) The Prophet’s statement that the disciples were also transfigured is, perhaps, an explanation of Luke’s saying, “they entered into the cloud.” (Luke 9:34.)

The Father speaking from the cloud, and Peter’s statement that Jesus “received from God the Father honour and glory when there came such a voice” (2 Pet. 1:17), evidences that the Father may also have been present. We have Moses’ testimony that, to stand in the presence of God, mortals require transfiguration. (See Moses 1:11.)

Many of our questions about the Mount of Transfiguration might be answered if we had a complete record. Doctrine and Covenants 7 is part of John’s record, “translated from parchment, written and hid up by himself.” [D&C 7] (History of the Church, 1:35-36.) What else John has to say in his record about his experience on the Mount of Transfiguration is unavailable to us, for the record is “hid up.” Elder Joseph Fielding Smith shared his belief that Peter, James, and John “received their endowments on the mount” (see Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954-56, 2:165) and Elder Bruce R. McConkie has suggested that “while on the Mount. ... they received the more sure word of prophecy.” (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965-73, 1:400.) Indeed, there must have been much happen of which we are ignorant.

This, in fact, is affirmed by the Lord in Doctrine and Covenants 63:21: “When the earth shall be transfigured, even according to the pattern which was shown unto mine apostles upon the mount; of which account the fulness ye have not yet received.” [D&C 63:21] This verse not only affirms but demonstrates that our New Testament record of the experiences on the Mount of Transfiguration is incomplete—by revealing that the Apostles there saw the future transfiguration of the earth.

When we are privileged to receive the full account, we may find that several other personages, in addition to those thus far mentioned, were present, and that much more was said and done than we currently know about. In the meantime, we can be anxiously engaged in stretching our minds toward understanding and our souls in worthy application of that which we have already received.

[Richard]

Church History.

To act for God in organizing his Church and administering all the ordinances, Joseph Smith received the Melchizedek Priesthood in the divinely established way. Authority and responsibility for specific ***ignments are essential (D&C 18:9, 27-32, 35-37; 27:12; see Keys). In addition, Joseph Smith and others received and taught the significance of each ordinance and key. Since no one on earth possessed that authority at the time, the Prophet Joseph Smith and his ***ociate Oliver Cowdery received both instruction and ordination from God and from his messengers.

The Prophet and Oliver Cowdery received the Aaronic Priesthood on May 15, 1829, under the hands of John the Baptist. He informed them that he acted under the direction of Peter, James, and John, who held the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and that that priesthood would be given to them (JS—H 1:72). Although the precise date of this restoration is not known, it is certain that it occurred after May 15, 1829, and before August 1830 (D&C 27:12). The documents available and the date of the formal organization of the Church give support to a time of restoration before April 6, 1830. Many students have concluded that late May or early June 1829 is the most probable time frame (HC 1:40n-42n; Porter, pp. 5-10).

Sometime before June 14, 1829, the Lord instructed Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery concerning their ordination as elders, which is a Melchizedek Priesthood office (HC 1:60-61). Furthermore, when Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph and Oliver, they ordained them also as apostles (D&C 27:12) and committed to them "the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times" (D&C 128:20; cf. 27:13).

Several records document the occurrence and significance of this visitation. An early confirmation of the receipt of apostolic powers is evidenced in an 1829 revelation recorded in the hand of Oliver Cowdery in which the Lord stated, "I command all men every where to repent & I speak unto you even as unto Paul mine apostle for ye are called even with that same calling with which he was called" (Cowdery, 1829; cf. D&C 18:9). In his 1832 History of the Church the Prophet Joseph Smith declared that he had received "the holy Priesthood by the ministering Angels to administer the letter of the Gospel" and that he had been given "a confirmation and reception of the high Priesthood after the holy order of the son of the living God power and ordinance from on high to preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit the Keys of the Kingdom of God conferred upon him and the continuation of the blessings of God to him" (Jessee, p. 3).

Oliver Cowdery on many occasions bore witness that he "was present with Joseph when an holy angel from God came down from heaven and conferred, or restored, the Aaronic Priesthood and…was also present with Joseph when the Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred on each other, by the will and commandment of God" (Anderson, p. 22).

Joseph Smith said that Peter, James, and John made their visit "in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river" (D&C 128:20).

On April 3, 1836, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery knelt in prayer in the Kirtland Temple and received another profoundly important vision in which certain Melchizedek Priesthood keys were restored. Moses appeared and committed the keys of the gathering of Israel. Elias gave to them keys of the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham. Finally, Elijah stood before them as promised by Malachi and Moroni and bestowed the keys of sealing families together (D&C 110:11-16; 2:1-3).

[Bob Betts]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

Bob, you need to understand the difference between the Priesthood, and Priesthood keys.

Priesthood is the authority and the power which God has granted to men on earth to act for Him.

Priesthood Keys are the right to preside and direct the affairs of the Church

D&C 7:5 I [JESUS] say unto thee, Peter, this was a good desire; but my beloved [JOHN] has desired that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done [AS AN APOSTLE].
6 Yea, he [JOHN] has undertaken a greater work; therefore I will make him as flaming fire and a ministering angel; he shall minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth.
7 And I will make thee to minister for him and for thy brother James; and unto you three [INCLUDING JOHN] I will give this power and the keys of this ministry until I come.

John had the priesthood keys, and the authority of Christ, and the calling of an Apostle, and the right and the power, and the promise of Christ to never taste death, and to bring the souls of men unto Christ, until Christ's return.

What am I missing, fig? John had everything you said an Apostle would need. This, if the story were true, would be a special calling, out of the ordinary of your everyday, Mormon priesthood rules and regulations.

within a jurisdiction.

Verse 3 "...and shalt prophesy before nations, kindreds, tongues and people." There's the jurisdiction, fig. What am I missing?

They define the boundaries of authority and boundaries of the exercise of Priesthood authority. In other words, though I hold the priesthood, I do not possess the priesthood keys to be the leader of the church, unless I am specifically ordained to that office and given those keys to exercise my priesthood in that capacity.

Well, D&C 7 defines John's possession of the keys, to bring the souls of men to Christ, to prophesy, to be as a flaming fire and a ministering angel, to be a minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth, to do a greater work than what he had done before, as an Apostle, as one of the co-foundations of the Church.

What am I missing, fig? According to the story, John had the priesthood, the keys, the power, the authority, the same calling, their jurisdiction and the special privilege to not taste death. With all of this in John's possession, what is the basis for the claim that after the deaths of the Apostles, the priesthood keys and authority were taken from the earth?

In the Church, all men who are ordained Apostles and sustained as members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have all priesthood keys conferred upon them. (See D&C 27:13; D&C 110:11–16; D&C 112:30.) But they do not have the right to exercise all those keys individually.

Under ordinary circumstances within the parameters of your priesthood doctrine, I won't argue with you. But, apparently, according to the stories in D&C 7 and 3 Nephi 28, Jesus made special exceptions of John and the three Nephites. This is the undeniable truth of your scriptures. All four had the priesthood, the keys, the power, the authority, the same callings, the same jurisdiction (the world) and the special privilege to not taste death. They brought souls to Christ, and baptized them in water and the Holy Ghost.

So, I again ask, what am I missing? With all four Apostles having those priesthood essentials in their possessions, what is the basis for the claim that after the deaths of the Apostles, the priesthood keys and authority were taken from the earth?

And, what about Mormon and Moroni, as successive prophets up until A.D. 421?

The President of the Church is the only person on earth who has the right to exercise all the keys of the Priesthood in their fulness. (See D&C 132:7.) He receives authority by setting apart by the Twelve Apostles.

Weren't Mormon and Moroni successive Presidents of the 'Church'?

In the early Church, Peter was the one chosen by the Lord to hold these keys:

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matt. 16:19)

The most precious thing lost in the Apostasy was the authority held by the Twelve—the priesthood keys. For the Church to be His Church, there must be a Quorum of the Twelve who hold the keys and confer them on others.

AGAIN, according to the story, Jesus Christ himself conferred the keys and authority on the four, calling and granting them special priesthood privileges, based on the desires of their hearts. And, they allegedly exercised those privileges, throughout the world, even to the present, and until Christ's return.

How does that add up to a complete apostasy, with the priesthood keys and authority being taken from the earth.

It doesn't add up, and it doesn't make sense.

When Peter and the other apostles were killed, the keys were not given to another. They were lost. And though John still held the priesthood, he did not have the right to exercise his priesthood keys, as that right rested with Peter, and the Quorum of the Apostles as a quorum.

That's the opposite of what Jesus allegedly said, in D&C 7. Jesus TOLD Peter, what greater, special work John was going to be allowed to do, right there in verses 3-7.

If you are going to try to criticize our own doctrine of the Priesthood, you should become more familiar with it.

I have NOT tried to criticize your doctrine of the priesthood. I have criticized your doctrine of a complete, universal apostasy following the deaths of the apostles, when allegedly four Apostles were on the earth throughout that alleged apostasy, who possessed the very priesthood essentials for a special calling from Jesus Christ, which priesthood essentials your religion claims were taken from the earth after the deaths of the Apostles.

It's a contradiction. Or, what am I missing?

[BrianH]

Jeff, even a casual review of my participation in this thread thus far would have indicated that I did NOT go off topic at all. I addressed a specific pertinent question to YOU that you have ignored. Fig is the one who responded with the non-answer and all I did in the post to which you are responding is point out that his reply was not an actual answer.

I suggest you get your facts straight BEFORE you run like a scared chicken behind another lame and unsupportable accusation.

-BH

.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by BrianH

Jeff, even a casual review of my participation in this thread thus far would have indicated that I did NOT go off topic at all. I addressed a specific pertinent question to YOU that you have ignored. Fig is the one who responded with the non-answer and all I did in the post to which you are responding is point out that his reply was not an actual answer.
I suggest you get your facts straight BEFORE you run like a scared chicken behind another lame and unsupportable accusation.-BH.

---If you have stayed on topic, then you should be able--even after a mere casual review--to show where you answered my questions. On the other hand, if you never gave a substantial response, you will be unable to show where you did, and you will resort to inflammatory insults as a very poor subs***ute. To reiterate:

The first post in this thread says what I mean, and asks what I want answered. It should be self-explanatory. Read it again and I am hopeful that I won't need to p**** each sentence for you.