Comments on: Review of The Lectures on Faith in Historical Perspective http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/ A Mormon Blog Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:52:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: a random John http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19075 Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:35:01 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19075 The Book of Mormon Reference Companion entry on Spirit of the Lord quotes Talmage as saying that the Holy Ghost is speaking with Nephi in 1 Nephi 11. Of course since Talmage is the father of our current theology one might think that he is interested in simplifying things and supporting his own viewpoint. In any case, I haven’t found anything that deals with the incongruity of 1 Nephi 10 and 1 Nephi 11 on the subject.

]]> By: MBD http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19074 Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:53:41 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19074 Myself, I feel 1 Nephi 11 is rather ambiguous on that point, but the typical explanation or commentary I’ve always heard is that it is the Holy Ghost. At least that’s probably the easiest reading, not necessarily the correct one. But if the Spirit is an angel of the Lord, why make the distinction between this “Spirit”, as it’s called, and the “angel” that takes up the vision beginning in verse 14? And if this is Christ appearing, he doesn’t identify Himself as such, and refers to himself in third-person (though given these are OT times, I suppose that approach wouldn’t be atypical of Him). So I think one can make a case for this being the HG. But if so, it is an unusual instance.

]]> By: a random John http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19073 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 18:58:40 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19073 A few points…

First, my 2000 printing of the RLDS D&C contains no mention of the Lectures. This is even more interesting given that the table of contents is actually a pretty complex table of all previous RLDS editions of the book, including 1835, and even lists sections that have been removed. The preface follows and is two pages long and also makes no mention of the Lectures but does talk about several other changes.

MDB, as far as the 1 Nephi 11 thing goes, I have to say that I don’t understand how we reach that conclusion so easily. I’ve never seen anybody consider the question in conjunction with the fact that the end of 1 Nephi 10 mentions the Holy Ghost as the Holy Ghost, making it very strange that the next sentence in the book (note that the chapters are artificial) would keep talking about the same entity but use a completely different name without making any explicit linkage.

I’m convinced that the authors of the Book of Mormon did not have the Talmage Godhead in mind when they sat down to write. Their understanding was different from ours, and I think both are somewhat limited and simplistic.

]]> By: Steve Evans http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19072 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 06:44:04 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19072 Rob, you’re preaching false doctrine. Please give it a rest.

]]> By: Rob Osborn http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19071 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 06:32:22 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19071 Second teaser- The above verse can be broken down further with this definition of the JST and a further verse-

b JST Heb. 1:6–7 … And let all the angels of God worship him, who maketh his ministers as a flame of fire. And of the angels he saith, Angels are ministering spirits.

(New Testament:Hebrews 1:6)

31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

(New Testament | Matthew 25:31)

The intersting point I draw your attention to in these two verses is that the angels Christ brings with him when he returns as is stated in Mathew are called “holy angels”. This from the previous JST of Hebrews shows us that “Holy angels” can be interpreted to mean “Holy spirts” or as a “flame of fire”. These are all plural forms that we call the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit.

]]> By: Rob Osborn http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19070 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 06:22:54 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19070 Just a little teaser for the brain- “the baptism of fire” is the baptism of the Holy Ghost and this is given to us by ministering spirts (plural)

7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

(New Testament | Hebrews 1:7)

Are not these sprits spoken of as having the purifying and sanctifying power which is the power of being a holy ghost or the power therof?

]]> By: Rob Osborn http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19069 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 05:50:19 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19069 But do you not find it strange that this “Holy Ghost” as a distinctive member of the Godhead manifests himself as such. We have many many testimonies of visions where prophets see the Father or Son, sometimes even together as is told in the first vision account, but we have no actual record of a single distinctive entity called the “Holy Ghost” going from place to place doing work.

Sure, we have many manifestations of the holy ghost dwelling with each of us at different places at the same time, but why is it hard to believe that this “Holy Ghost” is a single and separate entity when all the clues point to him being many beings (ministering spirits) but all with the same purpose! Is not a spirit messenger sent from God a “holy ghost”? And surely, if there is the gift of the holy ghost which enables the holy ghost to dwell with each one of us at different places but the same time tell us that there is more than one holy ghost?

This may be one of those peculiar mysteries of Mormonism that is just not settled yet. Also when speaking of the Holy ghost ministering to the Telestial world we are told that they receive the holy ghost and that this holy ghost is/are ministering spirits assigned to them as they are heirs of salvation. This essentially states that the holy ghost (ministering angels/ spirits) ministers to those on this earth right now that have not forfeited their right to salvation meaning that the ministering spirits (the holy ghost) do not minister to those on the Telestial world who are or will be sons of perdition.

]]> By: smb http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19068 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 02:17:54 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19068 JSJ writes a fair bit about the necessary corporeal nature of the Holy Ghost, and his hierarchical governance over the telestial kingdom implies a distinct existence. I agree that #15 is factually inaccurate.

]]> By: Steve Evans http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19067 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 00:59:53 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19067 Rob, you’re mistaken. The D&C (130:22 in particular) makes it clear that the Holy Ghost is an actual, distinct personage of spirit. Peter, James and John are decidedly not the Holy Ghost, but messengers from God who speak with the power of the Holy Ghost.

]]> By: MBD http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/04/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19066 Mon, 06 Nov 2006 00:51:25 +0000 http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2006/11/review-of-the-lectures-on-faith-in-historical-perspective/#comment-19066 Rob, I believe the first several verses of 1 Nephi 11 (particularly verse 11) are typically held to be a case of someone recording seeing just the Holy Ghost as a separate and distinct individual, as you put it. Though I suppose it could be argued either way that it might refer to a vision of the pre-mortal Christ, or it might be the Holy Ghost, since the messenger is described only as “the Spirit of the Lord”.

]]>