Something on the apostasy

While reading through this thread, http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=35899&st=60 I found some interesting links to Clementine criticism and a good article by the church on the apostacy.

http://www.hermann-detering.de/clem_engl.htm

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Clementine_literature

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=401605481ae6b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

Happy reading.

Exploring Mormon Thought: The problems of Theism and the Love of God.

Rating:	★★★★
Category:	Books
Genre:	Religion & Spirituality
Author:	Blake Ostler

Exploring Mormon Thought: The Problems of Theism and the Love of God.

I wish I could have the patience to write all my feelings and thoughts about the book. Aside from the fact that much of this book went over my head, I think the series contains some of the most important essays and studies of mormon ideologies I have ever encountered. That isn’t to say that I necessarily agree with the author in all respects either.

The first book in the series took on the nature of God and showed how logically, the theology of “orthodox Christianity” is not supportable by scripture nor logic. This book takes on such things as the nature of sin, soteriology and grace. This book has some pretty strong chapter headings: “The Implausibility of Original Sin”, “Self-Deception and Justification by Faith” and “The Problem of Grace”. While I don’t pretend to understand all his arguments, it certainly has made me look at things differently.

My favorite chapters deal with original sin (“Guilt cannot be imputed.”) and the atonement (“Guilt cannot be imputed.”). I will only focus on a few of his arguments on the atonement and the simple refutation of traditional explanations.

Ransom Theory
This is based on being slaves to sin and in captivity to the Devil. Jesus paid the price to get us out of this situation. (1Cor 6:20 and Mark 10:45). “..it fell out of favor because it assumed that God had to resort to trickery to free sinners. Worse, it assumed that God could not simply overpower Satan any time he wanted to.” Pg 261

Satisfaction Theory
This is along the lines that God’s honor has been wronged and needs to be repaired.
“The demand to repair God’s honor seems to be a snobbish self-centeredness that reflects God’s concern for himself and total disregard for our interests and well-being…It assumes that one can amass superogatory moral merit so that one has more moral ‘cash’ than one needs for one’s self. However, moral virtue is not like a bank account that can be saved up and spent. And finally, the notion that God makes a demand to satisfy his honor by punishing the only person who fully honored him is contrary even to the feudal code of honor because it is dishonorable to punish an innocent person to obtain satisfaction.” Pg 263.

Moral Influence Theory
This is based on an error in satisfaction theory, that God can’t commune because of his wounded honor, when it is really our sin that is causing the problem. It is correct in as far as it goes but does not explain how Christ bears our sins nor why Christ’s suffering makes forgiveness possible. Pg 264.

Governmental Theory
LDS might know this as the laws of Justice and Mercy. This is more like a precursor to that theory. Laws are violated and Jesus satisfied the Law while showing mercy.

Penal Substitution Theory.
Developed primarily by John Calvin. God set up laws and he can’t forgive us because his laws must be obeyed. Ostler set up 5 main arguments against this position

1) The penal theory posits a conflict between Father and Son. A loving forgiving Son must persuade the Father to turn away his wrath.
2) The penal theory erroneously assumes that guilt, or righteousness, can be transferred. Innocents being punished for the guilty is not acceptable in any legal system.
3) The penal theory is unjust. This view assumes that the humans who deserve to be punished escape it while the only person in the history of the world who does not deserve punishment is punished in our place.
4) The penal theory limits God’s power to forgive. It fails to explain why we can forgive each other but somehow God is incapable of doing it himself.
5) The penal theory entails a legal fiction as the basis for our reconciliation. It entails that God in fact overlooks our sinfulness and instead regards us as righteous because Christ is—even though it is not true that we are in fact righteous.

He calls his theory of atonement as the Compassion Theory of Atonement. That sin is real in that it separates us from God, from developing a loving relationship with him. Christ’s atonement is His pain in forgiving us. His need or desire to reestablish that relationship and the pain he feels in doing that.

I’m not necessarily sold on this yet, but it is intriguing. I can’t even say that I even have the ability to defend it. I still think it is dangerous that he uses philosophy to defend his views, in that most LDS view that as the prime reason for the departure of early Christianity from the Gospel.

http://www.christiansonline.cc/forum/comparing-notes/3675-atonement.html

A prophesy for the apostasy

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showtopic=29411&st=0

A good interp of Matt 16 and the possible meaning of leaven

Matthew 13:33
(33) Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.


Luke 13:21
(21) It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.



Physically, leaven is a lump of old dough in a high state of fermentation, or a substance that causes dough to rise (yeast). A natural reason for leaven's negative symbolism is the idea that fermentation implies a process of corruption. In the Old Testament, it is generally symbolic of sin and evil. In every instance that leaven appears in the Bible, it represents evil; the only exception, some say, is Jesus' use of leaven in this parable. Knowing its Old Testament significance, however, He would have used the symbol in the same way.

While some commentaries interpret this parable as depicting the spreading influence of the gospel, such explanations go against Jesus' use of this symbol. He uses it to refer to the evil doctrine of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and Herod (Matthew 16:6-12; Mark 8:15), and this could easily apply to later corruptions of doctrine by those who place more importance on the traditions of men than on the Word of God.

Paul uses leavening as a type of sin in its development (I Corinthians 5:6-. His reference to Christ's sinless sacrifice, and his statement that believers, as such, are unleavened shows the typical significance of leaven. In Galatians 5:7-9, its diffusive quality describes the harmful effects of false doctrine. He calls leaven a persuasion, something that exerts a powerful and moving influence, that hinders people from obeying the truth. Such a thing, he declares, is not from Him who calls us.

In the parable, the leaven alone is not what relates to the Kingdom, but the entire concept in the parable, the progress of the church in history. The leaven is hidden in the meal, representing the way Satan subtly strikes against the truth. Leaven is symbolic of things that disintegrate, break up, and corrupt. The leaven of the Pharisees was hypocritical formality. That of the Sadducees was skepticism. Herod's was of shameful self-indulgence in worldly desires. The leaven of those who have distorted doctrine down through the ages has been greed, pride, control, and worldly desires.

Whenever we find the symbol of a woman in the Bible, she represents a system of beliefs and practices that influence other people. Nations or political groups and religions or churches have specific unique beliefs. All human-based belief systems go contrary to God because "the carnal mind is enmity against God" (Romans 8:7). What the woman does and how she acts determines what belief system she is representing.

The woman in the parable takes leaven and hides it in the meal (Matthew 13:33). Hid is translated from the Greek word enkrupto, from which comes the English word "encrypt." The root word, krupto, means "to conceal" or "to keep secret." Hence, this woman is surreptitiously placing the leaven of false doctrine in the church. She is an opponent of Christ and infuses His church with corrupting ideas. Elsewhere she is called "Wickedness" (Zechariah 5:7-, "Jezebel" (Revelation 2:20), and the "great harlot" (Revelation 17:1).

Three measures of meal would be a huge amount even for a large family-perhaps as much as is needed to make about a dozen loaves of bread. More importantly, most of the Jews listening to Jesus would have recognized the three measures of meal (an ephah) as the meal or grain offering (Leviticus 2). This offering was never allowed to contain leaven (Leviticus 2:5). The meal offering represents the offerer's service and loyalty to his fellow man and is typified in how Jesus Christ offered Himself in service to mankind (Matthew 20:25-28). It portrays the second great commandment of Matthew 22:36-39: love of our fellow human beings. Thus, the three measures of meal represent love, service, and loyalty to others, specifically our brethren in the church.

Jesus warns in this parable that false doctrines would be infused by stealth into the church, and these evil beliefs would corrupt, erode, and destroy relationships. If the false doctrines are allowed to grow, affection and loving concern in service to one another are thwarted. The phrase "till all was leavened" is a sobering indication that the church would be plagued by insensitive, uncaring, self-absorbed, self-centered attitudes that would spread through the church just as leaven spreads through bread dough. The apostle Paul tells us "through love serve one another" (Galatians 5:13), an antidote to the woman's devious subterfuge.