Why Do LDS Dismiss the Greater Part of the New Testament?

[_madeleine]

In addition, we teach all generally accepted (nonCatholic) New Testament books and there is nothing in the New Testament that is in conflict with LDS doctrine.

What is a nonCatholic New Testament book?

[_gdemetz]

BC is absolutely correct in stating that there was eternal marriage taught in the New Testament! That is why the keys of the binding or sealing power where given to Peter, James, and John. That whatsoever they bound on earth, including marriage, would be bound in heaven!

[_Drifting]

There was no first century belief in eternal marriage.

Sure there was. 1 Cor 11:11, 1 Peter 3:7, etc. etc.

bcspace, how do you know that these scriptures aren't amongst the parts of the New Testament that have been incorrectly translated?

[_Albion]

One single verse from anyone that actually supports the idea of "eternal marriage", please....and while you're at it, one supporting verse that it was or should be done in the temple.

[_gdemetz]

Albion, you must not be reading the posts. BC has quoted you two already. I will give you another; Matthew 16:19. However, these may be a problem for you since apparently you have not had the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands.

[_Albion]

No, gdemetz, what I don't have is your ability to make jumps from a scripture that is there to conclusions that are not there, Again, one scripture please that talks about eternal marriage.

[_Yoda]

That is correct. By the time of the resurrection, it is too late to marry. The Sadducee's incomplete use of this story form Tobit also is a good indication of their knowledge of ancient teaching of marriage in the afterlife.

You are missing something here. The woman was already married. The question was, since she was married to all of the brothers, which one would she be married to in the hereafter? Christ's answer was none because at the resurrection, no one is married or given in marriage. There was no preface of a "til death do you part" clause, so we are not talking here about proper authority. The question was taking into account that she was married under proper authority. If that was the case, shouldn't the correct answer have been the first brother? Christ's answer was that everyone is as angels in heaven and there is no marriage. If he is speaking to no one being able to be married in the next life, and having to be married while on earth first, then how is it that women who leave this life single are supposed to be allowed to enter into the highest degree of Celestial glory, if they cannot be sealed to a man in the afterlife?

[_Franktalk]

I do not believe there is any eternal marriage for anyone given in marriage. There may be an eternal marriage for two who both choose to marry.

A sealed marriage just means that a promise is made to the two people. I for one will not bind the hands of God to seal who He wishes.

[_Yoda]

That is correct. By the time of the resurrection, it is too late to marry. The Sadducee's incomplete use of this story form Tobit also is a good indication of their knowledge of ancient teaching of marriage in the afterlife.

You are missing something here. The woman was already married. The question was, since she was married to all of the brothers, which one would she be married to in the hereafter? Christ's answer was none because at the resurrection, no one is married or given in marriage. There was no preface of a "til death do you part" clause, so we are not talking here about proper authority. The question was taking into account that she was married under proper authority. If that was the case, shouldn't the correct answer have been the first brother? Christ's answer was that everyone is as angels in heaven and there is no marriage. If he is speaking to no one being able to be married in the next life, and having to be married while on earth first, then how is it that women who leave this life single are supposed to be allowed to enter into the highest degree of Celestial glory, if they cannot be sealed to a man in the afterlife?

Bumping for BC.

[_gdemetz]

Here we go Albion, I have to go back to primary again! Read 1 Peter 3:7, it states that the husband and wife become "heirs together" of the grace of life, and as BC also mentioned; "neither is the man without the woman, or the woman without the man in the Lord!" I'm confident that you will have some dumb evangelical twist to this as you always do, but please spare me!

For the rest of you: It should be noted here that the Sadducees did not believe in angels or the resurrection. So, why did they ask the question in the first place? They had no reason to except that they knew that Christ's disciples not only believed in it, but they actually were performing eternal bindings, sealings, or eternal marriges! That is what prompted their question in the first place! Unfortunately and obviously, Christ's answer is not complete, but there are different fragments of his statements to them in at least two of the gospels. From those, we can see that He said that they erred, not knowing the scriptures or the power of God. The reason for their error was the fact that they were comparing an eternal marriage by the power of God, which the Sadducees, like many here, did not understand, to a Jewish civil marriage custom! He further chides them by stating that "THE CHILDREN OF THIS WORLD" (SOMETHING HE NEVER CALLED HIS DISCIPLES) and they that "INHERIT THAT WORLD" (A LOWER HEAVEN) neither married nor were given in marriage!