#How the LDS Church restores first-century Christianity | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

zionsredemptionradionetwork · 2 years ago

Text

A POLISHED JEWEL, Chapter 21 conclusion of Reincarnation

Pages 192 to 199

Through erring schemes in days that past

The world has gone astray,

Yet saints of God have found at last

The straight and narrow way.

(Times and Seasons 4:335)

Approximately one out of every four Americans believes he will be born again as a baby and not just once but many times. This is also a popular theory in China and India, but it is continually being modified by Christians and Mormons to be a type of modern religious potpourri. They struggle to find bits and pieces of sermons or writings to make it more palatable and appealing. By chopping off something here and adding something there, they have married Christ with Hinduism. Multiple births has become a new religious concoction of doctrine, theory and philosophy.

If being born many times were a true doctrine, it would have been clearly established somewhere in the teachings of the Restoration, for this is the dispensation of the fullness of times. Reincarnation was not some secret doctrine the Saints could not accept, like so many others were, as half the world already believed it. If such a doctrine were true, it seems there should have been at least one complete sermon on the subject.

However, not one discourse can be found in support of the doctrine anywhere in the following records of the Church:

[193] Documentary History of the Church (7 vols.)

Comprehensive History of the Church (6 vols.)

Messages of the First Presidency (6 vols.)

Journal of Discourses (26 vols.)

Millennial Star (150 vols.)

On the contrary, every time that theory came up, it was clearly opposed.

If a person would look carefully at some of the popular views of reincarnation, they would have to admit they are absolutely bizarre. A man might get married to some former animal. A woman could possibly marry a man who once was a woman. A person could come back as a toad or a flower. A dog owner might become a dog for a person who was formerly his dog. The ridiculous scenario goes on and on like some warped plot in a fiction story.

The theory of having multiple lives might give hope for the heathens of Babylon, but it has nothing to offer a true Christian or a Latter-day Saint. This whole plot is nothing but a program for sorrow, suffering and sacrifice in repeated mortalities.

Out of the many visions, manifestations and revelations that were prevalent during the first century of Mormonism, there is not one that clearly supports or advocates the doctrine of multiple mortal births. In recent years an LDS lady by the name of Betty Eadie, had one of these glorious visions and was taken into the spirit world where she saw our pre-mortal life, the beginning of this earth, and even the creation of other worlds. Concerning multiple births into mortality she said:

I also learned that we do not have repeated lives on this earth; when we seem to “remember” a past life, we are actually [194] recalling memories contained in the cells. (Embraced by the Light, Betty J. Eadie, p. 93)

In a personal conversation, the author asked her how she felt about reincarnation after her spiritual experience, and she replied, “It’s a lie! It’s not a correct doctrine.”

It has been stated that Lorin Woolley remarked: “Satan’s imitation of resurrection is reincarnation.” Believing you will have more chances in future rebirths to improve your life will negatively affect your efforts to do your best in this world. It gives a person the false hope that next time he will have a better chance to make the grade. When the prospect of exaltation appears impossible or too far in the distance, a person erroneously relies on “another chance” philosophy, when in reality there is no other chance.

* The first and greatest commandment of God is to love Him with all your might, mind and strength; reincarnation only requires faith in a system.

* The Gospel requires a person to seek forgiveness for sins; the reincarnationist looks upon sin as a mere stepping stone along the path.

* The Gospel teaches obedience to ordinances in order to achieve exaltation; the reincarnationist looks at the repetition of lives as necessary for exaltation.

* The Gospel teaches man to strive for “perfection” in this life; the reincarnationist assumes that many lives are required to attain perfection.

* The Gospel teaches man to learn from every experience, obey every ordinance, and live by every true principle he [195] can because this is his only mortal probation; reincarnation teaches that man will have better luck in the next mortal probation.

One of the dangers of the theory of reincarnation is that it is based on many points of positive and correct evidence, but the result is a wrong conclusion. Just as in a court of law where two criminal lawyers each present many points of evidence to “prove” their case-but one is more wrong and the other is more right. For example, in a Perry Mason program, the defendant’s fingerprints are found at the scene of the crime, he had threatened the deceased person, he was seen in the area, and he had a motive-but he was not the guilty party.

Let’s consider for a minute all of the correct evidence upon which reincarnationists base their beliefs:

1. Man had a pre-mortal existence before he came here.

2. Man and women come into this life with a variety of gifts, talents and abilities which were brought with them from a prior existence.

3. Individuals were created unequal at the time of their mortal birth, viz., mental and physical abilities, poverty, riches, environment, race, etc.

4. God is just and will judge all men fairly, regardless of the time they spend in mortality.

5. Mankind have an eternal spirit within them that lives forever.

6. This spirit will again take up a physical body.

7. Mortals will have a chance to correct their weaknesses and repent of wrongdoings after they have passed through this life.

8. There are different probationary states that give mankind a chance to prove themselves and repent.

[196] 9. The righteous will continue to grow in knowledge and experience and finally reach a “perfection”, which is a condition similar to the one that God has achieved.

10. After men become Gods, they return into mortality and take upon themselves the pain and corruptions of a physical body; but they return to their blissful realm of exaltation when their mission is completed.

These are basic tenets of both reincarnationists and early Mormon leaders. The major difference is that the latter believe it is not necessary for man to continually rotate into mortality over and over again in order for him to reach exaltation.

As a result of coming into this dark and wicked world, we have to struggle against unseeming odds, learn difficult lessons and meet opposition at nearly every turn. But all this experience is to help us and teach us enough so we won’t have to go through it again. Although we each come into this world with very different characteristics, we gain and profit by experience on our individual levels. We are like different kinds of rough stones going through whatever is necessary in mortality in order to become polished jewels. In fact, in a revelation to Joseph Smith, the Lord compared us to stones, or jewels:

I, the Lord, have suffered the affliction to come upon them, wherewith they have been afflicted, in consequence of their transgressions;

Yet I will own them, and they shall be mine in that day when I shall come to make up my jewels. (D & C 101:2-3)

For I, the Lord, rule in the heavens above, and among the armies of the earth; and in the day when I shall make up my jewels, all men shall know what it is that bespeaketh the power of God. (D & C 60:4)

[197] As jewels, the Savior, the prophets, and many good saints can be likened to diamonds. Others might be compared to rubies, emeralds and sapphires, while there are many who compare to those of lesser value, such as agates, garnets, or even sandstone.

If we come to earth as an agate, a lot of polishing will make us beautiful, but it will never make us a diamond. A short, long, or multiple mortality will not change the inherent composition of what we became in the pre-existence. One-third of those hosts of heaven had such poor quality they can never hold together nor take a polish.

The Prophet Joseph Smith also used the analogy of a stone being smoothed and polished as it rolls down the mountain:

I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priest-craft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women-all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. (TPJS, p. 304)

The Savior Himself was compared to a stone:

Christ was the head of the Church, the chief corner stone, the spiritual rock upon which the church was built, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (TPJS, p. 318)

And Peter likened members of the church to stones:

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (I Peter 2:5)

[198] As the scriptures say, there were those who were chosen before they were born because their spirits were composed of certain special substances that pre-determined the value of their jewel here in mortality. As mentioned, mortality provides the polishing, but coming back a hundred times would not change the composition.

A serious mistake of those believing they will continually be born again, is the lack of continuity of their family and friends. They believe they will pass through the veil of death only to be born again somewhere else. They will have lost all contact with their family members and friends. The Prophet Joseph could not conceive of such a scene:

I have a father, brothers, children, and friends who have gone to a world of spirits. They are only absent for a moment. They are in the spirit, and we shall soon meet again. (TPJS, p. 359)

Those following the path of multiple births must expect a much different destiny from those who believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When they die, they expect to be shifted off to some other place on the earth to be born again-or even to some other earth. Their friends and family are of no consequence, and perhaps they will never see them again. If they do, they won’t be recognized in some other body.

To a Mormon, the Gospel brings greater and closer filial ties. It provides the connection of one great family, and the joys and rejoicing will be far beyond our expectations, as Brigham Young described on the following two occasions:

When I get through my work here, my body will have the privilege to rest; and I understand where my spirit will go, and who will be my associates in the spirit world.

[199] We have more friends behind the vail than on this side, and they will hail us more joyfully than you were ever welcomed by your parents and friends in this world; and you will rejoice more when you meet them than you ever rejoiced to see a friend in this life; and then we shall go on from step to step, from rejoicing to rejoicing, and from one intelligence and power to another, our happiness becoming more and more exquisite and sensible as we proceed in the words and power of life. (JD 6:349)

We talk about our trials and troubles here in this life: but suppose that you could see yourselves thousands and millions of years after you have proved faithful to your religion during the few short years in this time, and have obtained eternal salvation and a crown of glory in the presence of God; then look back upon your lives here, and see the losses, crosses, and disappointments, the sorrow arising from disobedient children-from wicked parents who have opposed their children who wished to embrace the truth, the persecutions from city to city, from state to state, being hunted and driven, you would be constrained to exclaim, “But what of all that? Those things were but for a moment, and we are now here. We have been faithful during a few moments in our mortality, and now we enjoy eternal life and glory, with power to progress in all the boundless knowledge and through the countless stages of progression, enjoying the smiles and approbation of our Father and God, and of Jesus Christ, our elder brother.” (JD 7:275)

God, in His mercy and through the atonement of Jesus Christ, has promised these rewards without the necessity of continually being reborn. His plan of salvation is more beautiful and merciful than all the philosophy and wisdom of man.

#LDS #Mormon #Mormonism

0 notes

nerdygaymormon · 5 years ago

Text

Gospel Topic Essays

In 2013 & 2014, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released a series of essays that address a number of question and criticisms. These essays have been approved by the First Presidency and Quorum of 12 Apostles. The stated reason for the essays is gathering accurate information and making it available.

I added a few thoughts in italics

Are Mormons Christian - Members of the Church believe in and teach of Christ, but they don’t believe in the post-New Testament Creeds, and have scriptures in addition to the Bible. The LDS Church also is not a direct descendant of an existing Christian church.

What Mormons mean by the word “Christian” is different than the rest of Christianity. Mormons are Christian in that they believe Jesus was the Messiah and redeemer of the world.

Becoming Like God - Since people are the spirit children of God, we have the potential to develop and grow to become like God. The essay includes some Bible verses to support this teaching, but most of the world interprets them differently.

The essay leaves out Bible verses that would seem to contradict this teaching. The Bible, at best, is mixed. There aren’t any verses from the Book of Mormon included because this concept is absent from that book.

God was once like humans are now. And people can become gods. We teach God is married, so there are godly roles for both men & women. Does this make us polytheists? Yes, in that there are many gods, but really no because we only worship our Heavenly Father and will continue doing so even when we become gods ourselves.

How does someone become like God? It’s the covenant path we hear so much about. Baptism, Melchizedek Priesthood (if you’re male), temple endowment, sealed to a spouse, obey temple covenants.

Sounds pretty good, except...

What about if your spouse or children are unworthy? If you’re gay? If you get divorced? A widowed husband gets married & sealed to a 2nd wife, what if the 1st wife isn’t into polygamy?

Book of Mormon and DNA Studies - The purpose of the Book of Mormon is spiritual, not historical. There’s no DNA evidence to confirm that Middle Eastern people came to the Americas prior to Christopher Columbus. This essay goes through many possible excuses for why no DNA of the Jaredites, Nephites or Lamanites has yet been found in the Americas.

The introduction page to the Book of Mormon used to say that the Jaredites & Nephites were destroyed, leaving the Lamanites who are "the principal ancestors of the American Indians.” DNA evidence forced a change, it now says, Lamanites are “among” the ancestors of the American Indians.

Book of Mormon Translation - Joseph placed either the interpreters (Urim & Thummim) or his seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out light, and read aloud the English words that appeared. He dictated the words, not punctuation, to the scribes. The scribes wrote their own punctuation and that is what was printed. Most changes in the Book of Mormon have involved punctuation and creating verses & chapters.

It’s not a “translation” in the usual sense of that word. An examination of the characters on the plate wasn’t typically involved (despite much of the artwork that suggests otherwise), in fact, the plates often weren’t visible. There’s no way to test the accuracy of the translation.

Also, some other changes beyond punctuation and creating chapters/verses has taken place, like having some of the more racist language toned down.

First Vision Accounts - Joseph had a vision (not necessarily an actual visitation) in which 2 heavenly beings appeared to him.

Joseph published 2 accounts of this vision during his lifetime. Two additional accounts (from his autobiography and from a journal) have been found and published in the 1960′s. There are also 5 descriptions of Joseph Smith’s vision recorded by others who heard Joseph speak about the vision.

That makes 9 different accounts, and there are some differences between them. The essay explains that different accounts emphasize different details. Memories fade over time and things get remembered differently.

There is a generally consistent theme across the different versions, but the first written account comes many years after the vision is supposed to have occurred, which makes me wonder how accurate or reliable it is.

Joseph Smith’s Teachings about Priesthood, Temple and Women - During the 19th century, women frequently blessed the sick by a prayer of faith, and many women received priesthood blessings promising that they would have the gift of healing. In reference to these healing blessings, Relief Society general president Eliza R. Snow explained in 1883, "Women can administer in the name of JESUS, but not by virtue of the Priesthood."

That’s because the priesthood was new & fresh, but understanding changed as Joseph Smith received more revelations.

I think they stuck to Joseph Smith’s teachings so they wouldn’t have to go into the misogynistic teachings of Brigham Young or Spencer Kimball. At the time of Joseph’s death, women were still doing healings & had control of the Relief Society.

Priesthood power is given to women in the temple as part of the endowment ceremony. When a couple is sealed in the temple, together they enter into an order of the priesthood. Women can officiate in the priesthood in ordinances for other women. Women can officiate when only women are getting the ordinance, when it is for men & women then the men are in charge.

Women and the Priesthood today - well, they still can do stuff in the temple.

Mother in Heaven - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that all human beings, male and female, are beloved spirit children of heavenly parents, a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother. This understanding is rooted in scriptural and prophetic teachings about the nature of God, and the godly potential of men and women. The doctrine of a Heavenly Mother is a cherished and distinctive belief among Latter-day Saints.

According to things taught through most of church history, this essay could have been titled Mothers in Heaven. We each have a mother & father in heaven, we each have the same father but there could be many different mothers in heaven. Good old polygamy, interwoven into our theology.

6 paragraphs, that’s all? Shouldn’t we know more? What is heaven like for women?

Peace in Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints - The Latter-day Saints were persecuted, often violently, for their beliefs. Several incidents are discussed.

Well, to be accurate, it was more for their actions than their beliefs. We weren’t exactly great neighbors to non-members of the church.

And, tragically, some Church members participated in deplorable violence against people they perceived to be their enemies. Joseph Smith had the Danites, and a stake president ordered the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Brigham Young taught that some sins were serious enough that the person should be killed as part of forgiveness process (blood atonement).

The early Mormons had many threats and violence done against them, and they also did the same to others. It was a rough time.

Imagine all the things said & done against the LGBTQ+ community by the Church--denying they exist, electro-shock therapy, advocating for laws to limit & take away their rights. In a real sense the church isn’t a good neighbor to this group. In an earlier time, this might get settled via guns and violence.

Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo - God commanded people in ancient Israel to have polygamous marriages. As part of the restoration of all things, God commanded Joseph Smith to introduce polygamy.

The verses cited just indicate that polygamy was practiced in Old Testament times, not that God commanded anyone to have such marriages.

Joseph really didn’t want to do it (or worried about how his wife Emma would react), so God had to send an angel 3 times between 1834 and 1842 to command him to proceed with plural marriage. During the final appearance, the angel came with a drawn sword, threatening Joseph with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment fully.

The concept of polygamy was part of the revelation on eternal marriage and is how to be exalted with God.

The essay says there wasn’t much instruction on how to do polygamy, I think this is meant to suggest that mistakes happened because people didn’t know better. D&C 132 does have a number of instructions, some of which were ignored. Such as the 1st wife had to give permission for any additional wife, and the additional wives each have to be virgins.

Joseph kept most of his marriages secret from Emma, and he married other men’s wives who most assuredly weren’t virgins.

Joseph had 30-40 wives. His oldest wife was 56 and the youngest was 14.

Polygamy was illegal. Most people who participated were told to keep it secret. Also important for married women to keep it a secret from their first husband. Rumors spread and so “carefully worded denials” were issued in which they’d switch one word, or change the meaning of a word. Basically it looks like they were lying because it would mean trouble.

Wilford Woodruff issued a manifesto in 1890 which led to the end of polygamy (eventually...it took a second manifesto in 1904 to end it officially).

A form of polygamy still survives. Men who remarry may be sealed to their additional wives. People can do temple work to seal women who were married to more than one man during their lifetimes but not sealed to them. Only men are allowed to be sealed to more than one person whilst alive.

Plural Marriage and Families in early Utah - Church members do not understand the purposes for instituting the practice of plural marriage during the 19th century. The essay heavily suggests that having a lot of children was a primary purpose.

Footnote 6 says “Studies have shown that monogamous women bore more children per wife than did polygamous wives except the first.” In all likelihood, polygamy led to fewer children than probably would have been born in a monogamous society

Accounts left by men and women who practiced plural marriage attest to the challenges and difficulties they experienced, such as financial difficulty, interpersonal strife, and some wives’ longing for the sustained companionship of their husbands. Virtually all of those practicing it in the earliest years had to overcome their own prejudice against plural marriage and adjust to life in polygamous families.

Few would have entered into plural marriages if leaders didn’t emphasize that polygamy was required for a man’s highest exaltation in the life to come, and women who refused plural marriage could find themselves single & a servant in heaven. Polygamous wives were so unhappy that Brigham Young eventually gave an ultimatum, 2 weeks to freely leave the territory or stop whining and fully live their religion.

Plural marriage was an illegal practice and members engaged in civil disobedience against such laws. In direct violation of the 12th Article of Faith

The essay shows Mormon polygamy in a very favorable light.

The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage - Polygamous marriage was illegal in the United States and the LDS Church fled to Mexico but the United States took the territory they were fleeing to. The Church felt that polygamy was protected under the Constitution’s freedom of religion but the Supreme Court disagreed.

Given the importance polygamy to the church’s beliefs about heaven, the members were encouraged to disregard the law and obey God. After 2 decades of increasing troubles, many polygamous families headed to Canada or Mexico to escape US justice (nevermind polygamy was just as illegal in those countries).

When the US Supreme Court upheld the legality of confiscating church property, this could mean that temple ordinances would end when those buildings are seized. Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto to ban polygamy in 1890. This calmed things with the US government and within 3 years Utah was admitted as a state.

Members continued entering into new plural marriages for about 15 more years, but in declining numbers. In 1899 the newly-elected senator from Utah was not allowed to take his seat in Congress because he had 3 wives, including one he married after the manifesto. When an apostle was elected in 1903, he also was not allowed to take his seat as an investigation took place into the church & polygamy, even church president Joseph F. Smith testified before Congress.

President Smith testified that the Manifesto removed God’s commandment on the church to practice polygamy, but didn’t forbid individuals from choosing to continue to be polygamous. He issued a Second Manifest at the April General Conference forbidding members from entering new polygamous marriages.

Race and the Priesthood - The Church was established in 1830, many people of African descent in the United States lived in slavery, and racial prejudice were believed by most white Americans.

From the mid-1800s until 1978—the Church did not ordain men of black African descent to its priesthood or allow black men or women to participate in temple endowment or sealing ordinances.

This is true, but one would hope a church which claims revelation through prophets would be able to overcome cultural norms that aren’t in line with the gospel.

Church leaders taught many things to explain the ban, and today, all of that is rejected by the church and considered error. These weren’t just teachings, they were doctrines. And the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham were used to justify bigotry, such as stating that the curse of Cain was a dark skin.

International expansion of the church, especially in Brazil, forced the church into difficult situations. The Church in the USA was also under heavy pressure for the priesthood restrictions.

Church president Spencer W. Kimball spent many hours praying for revelation to undo the priesthood ban. The essay makes it sound like some big revelation was received, but it wasn’t that way. It was a process, a statement drafted and changes made to it and voted on.

Today, the Church disavows all teachings that teach any race or ethnicity if inferior in any way, or that mixed-race marriages are wrong. Church leaders unequivocally condemn all racism.

No reason for the priesthood ban is put forward in this article other than racism. The past leaders were racists and that blinded them to what God wanted for black people. There’s a big lesson in that.

Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the book of Abraham as scripture.

A traveling salesman sold several Egyptian papyri and mummies to Joseph Smith. He was excited to learn one papyrus was scripture from Abraham and set to translating it.

After the church left Nauvoo, Joseph’s family sold the Egyptian artifacts and they eventually ended up in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. In 1967, the museum transferred these fragments to the Church.

Discovery of the papyri allowed an examination of Joseph Smith’s translation. Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham.

Joseph’s translation was not a literal rendering of the papyri as a conventional translation would be. Rather, the physical artifacts provided an occasion for meditation, reflection, and revelation. They catalyzed a process whereby God gave to Joseph Smith a revelation about the life of Abraham, even if that revelation did not directly correlate to the characters on the papyri.

The essay mostly tries to explain how it is possible for Joseph Smith to have called the process for bringing forth the book of Abraham a "translation" when it is obvious that it was not a translation of the Egyptian papyri in his possession

#before these essays many of these positions would be considered anti-Mormon #tumblrstake

30 notes · View notes

republicstandard · 6 years ago

Text

Bishop George Bell INNOCENT, Archbishop of Canterbury Refuses to Apologize

No “words of knowledge” on Bishop George Bell’s innocence, Archbishop Welby?

When you hear a media fanfare of brass, clashing of cymbals and thumping of tambourines panegyrizing Justin Welby like a Roman princeling in Ben Hur, you know that one of two possibilities have come to pass.

First, there has been a big stink, and Welby’s media flunkeys are masking the pong with a good news story. Second, a skeleton is going to tumble out of Welby’s wardrobe, and dance on a tin roof at Lambeth Palace and Justin’s witch doctors are banging their tom-toms and trying to distract you from the real story.

Now you know why wily Welby timed the “tongue speaking” interview just before the Briden report exonerating Bishop George Bell of molesting a child was released on Thursday.

In a fit of sheer intemperance, the Archbishop of Canterbury had besmirched and tarnished the good name of the former Bishop of Chichester by insisting that Bell, who had been dead for nearly sixty years, was guilty of pedophilia, even after the publication of the independent Lord Carlile Review, which slapped the Church of England for rushing to judge the deceased bishop. Welby said Bell was “accused of great wickedness” and apologized only “for the failures of the process.”

Now, in his 24-page report, Timothy Briden has concluded that the allegations against the saintly bishop are completely “unfounded.” This is Welby’s most humiliating climbdown since he pronounced with blind hubris that “a significant cloud” hung over Bell’s name and refused to retract his calumny even after seven leading historians wrote to him calling his claims “irresponsible and dangerous” and urging him “to repudiate what you have said before more damage is done.”

Welby has been forced to eat humble hummus and has demonstrated a degree of contriteness. “I apologize profoundly and unconditionally for the hurt caused to these people by the failures in parts of the process and take responsibility for this failure,” he said. The people he is referring to are Bell’s relatives, colleagues, supporters, and those who looked up to Bell.

I count myself privileged to be one of the Bishop’s supporters—having written a number of columns defending the good and godly cleric and having the honor of being the speaker at the first Rebuilding Bridges Conference at Church House (the Church of England’s HQ) in defense of Bishop Bell.

Even here the authorities hounded us. On the eve of the conference, the Church of England released a statement claiming that its “National Safeguarding Team has received fresh information concerning Bishop George Bell. Sussex Police have been informed, and we will work collaboratively with them,” albeit insisting that, “As this is a confidential matter we will not be able to say any more about this until inquiries have concluded.”

The conference went ahead thanks to Richard W. Symonds, founder of the Bell Society, who with courage, determination and moral fiber invested his time, money and energies into seeking the restoration of Bishop Bell’s reputation.

So let’s return to Welby’s pre-emptive interview with Premier Radio where he let us into his prayer closet and revealed how he prays in tongues at 5 am every day. The Archbishop also disclosed how he heard God’s voice: “I expect to hear from God through other people with words of knowledge or prophecies—some of which I am unsure about, others I can sense there being something of the Spirit of God.”

The apostle Paul mentions this spiritual gift in his first letter to the Corinthians. “For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit.” In his dependence on God, the Archbishop uses both categories of intelligible utterance (wisdom, knowledge, prophecy) and inspired ecstatic utterance (tongues, interpretation).

What is this “word of knowledge”? Some scholars suggest that Paul “has in mind a supernatural endowment of knowledge, factual information that could not otherwise have been known without the Spirit’s aid,” writes Gordon Fee, while “others see it as referring to something more akin to inspired teaching, perhaps related to receiving Christian insight into the meaning of Scripture.”

Either interpretation would apply to Welby’s use of “words of knowledge.” No one knew for sure what happened in the mysterious case of “Carol” and Bishop Bell. However, the great and good of the land in one accord inundated Welby with “words of knowledge” telling him George Bell was innocent.

These ranged from columnists like Peter Hitchens (himself an Anglican convert from atheism) to historian Andrew Chandler, author of the recent authoritative biography on Bishop Bell. Seven leading historians sent Welby their “words of knowledge.” George Bell’s 94-year-old niece Barbara Whitley sent him her own “word of knowledge” and asked him to resign for smearing her uncle. Bishop Gavin Ashenden warned Welby that he was in “the grip of what appears to be both a serious sin and a psychological distortion.” I wrote how I believed Welby was one hundred percent sincere but was afflicted by a severe case of cognitive dissonance. The Re-building Bridges conferences sent “words of knowledge” to Welby calling for justice and reconciliation. Welby remained as deaf as an adder.

A number of us alerted the Archbishop to God’s revealed “words of knowledge” in Scripture. The ninth commandment warns us not to bear false witness against our neighbor. “You shall not spread a false report,” says the Torah. “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established,” says the law code of Deuteronomy.

“Do not entertain an accusation against an elder (presbyter) unless it is brought by two or three witnesses,” writes Paul to Timothy. A torrent of biblical “words of knowledge”! Why did Welby not hear God shouting at him through the megaphone of his Word?

There were “words of knowledge” from the wisdom of Western jurisprudence accrued over the centuries with biblical and Roman roots. Emperor Trajan declared in AD 112: “Anonymous accusations must not be admitted in evidence as against any one, as it is introducing a dangerous precedent.” The presumption of innocence is another “word of knowledge” Welby threw to the winds.

In the Acts of the Apostles, Paul is awaiting trial and is brought before King Agrippa II and Porcius Festus, Procurator of Judea. The chief priests and elders ask them to condemn Paul. Festus reports to Agrippa his response to the Jewish leaders:

“I answered them that it was not the custom of the Romans to give up anyone before the accused met the accusers face to face and had opportunity to make his defense concerning the charge laid against him.”

Welby also discounted “words of knowledge” from psychological research, which has an abundance of data on “false memory,” and several thousand case histories have been referred to the British False Memory Society.

Like a hibernating tortoise, Welby ignored every single strand of “knowledge.” Like Tony Blair, he waved his sexed-up dossier and from his plinth of pomposity pontificated that he, and he alone, had this esoteric gnosis that George Bell had perpetrated the unmentionable sin.

Despite this sharp jab to Welby’s archiepiscopal hooter, there is some debate as to whether he has unreservedly apologized. In the very next sentence after he apologizes “unconditionally” Welby inserts a conditional sentence prefixed with “however.”

“However, it is still the case that there is a woman who came forward with a serious allegation relating to an historic case of abuse and this cannot be ignored or swept under the carpet.”

The dictionary notes that this adverb is “used to introduce a statement that contrasts with or seems to contradict something that has been said previously.” In response to Welby’s caveat, Richard Symonds asks Welby:

“So, Archbishop, are you saying your ‘significant cloud’ no longer hangs over Bishop George Bell? If so, would you please apologize for that monstrous remark.”

No, he won’t Richard! Not until he has a “word of knowledge” from God. Or, perhaps, we ought to graciously accept our Justin’s “unconditional” apology as yet another example of his “speaking in tongues”—an ecstatic and unintelligible utterance?

from Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine http://bit.ly/2RPF9mN via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine

0 notes