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

[_MCB]

See the "lowest 2.28%" range.

This board has 1000 members. The "lowest 2.28%" is 23 of us.

The population of this board is not representative of the general population. There is a bias by way of self-selection that skews it far to the top-side. That is why the lowest quartile (25%) is so ridiculous in the perception of the rest. They are cognitively impaired by reason of Mormonism. Except for Consig and his friends, who defy explanation.

[_Albion]

I am a little puzzled as to the debate here. Corinthians 1 and 2 were both written by Paul some years after his conversion on the road to Damascus. Chapter 12 continues his account of some events that have transpired in his life up to this point and Paul admits that even if his words are seen as boasting, his view, he will continue with the story about himself. He then goes on to relate some details of his Damascus road experience, years earlier, talking of his experience as if it belongs to someone else. Verse 7 makes it clear that he is talking about himself.

I don't think the "third heaven" he references has anything to do with supposed secret Hebrew belief systems and certainly nothing to do with Mormon claims of three heavens or kingdoms after death. There is no support for three heavens in scripture including misinterpretations from Corinthians 15 which is talking of resurrection and the differences between resurrected bodies and earthly bodies.

"Whether in the body...out of the body, the apostle was in a trance or ecstatic state in which consciousness of the outer world was for the time suspended: sight, hearing, feeling were gone, and he was lost in the contemplation of the divine......

The third heaven, the highest state of bliss. Paradise is used as a synonym for the third heaven of V2. The word is used in the New Testament for the abode of the blessed after death." The One Volume Bible Commentary. Edited by J.R. Dummelow, M.A. Queen's College Cambridge.

The readers of Paul's letter would have known full well what he meant by "third heaven" and it is certainly not a reference to a third kingdom where people are assigned after death. As is clear from creation scriptures in Genesis people at this time viewed what God had created as three kinds of heaven. The first heaven is water on the earth's surface and the earth's atmosphere. The second heaven is the vacuum of outer space. The third heaven is that place beyond, where God sits (figuratively) upon his throne. "And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament heaven." Under, middle, and above.

Again, Mormons are guilty of using the Bible to fit Smith's claims rather than using the Bible to verify Smith's claims.

[_consiglieri]

Except for Consig and his friends, who defy explanation.

That is quite possibly the nicest thing anybody has ever said about me.

[_consiglieri]

I wasn't quoting Paul! I stated that he mentioned the third heaven! He didn't mention any subdivisions of the heavens!

I tend to agree with those who see Paul's reference to the third heaven as "paradise" as being influenced to some degree by First Enoch (which was around in Paul's day), where the third of seven heavens is similarly referred to as "paradise."

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_gdemetz]

Albion, what you "think" has already been shown to be wrong here so many times that it isn't even funny. Paul further writes concerning the three glories of the resurrected body in Corinthians 15, and he compares them to the sun moon and stars, which is similar to D&C 76. How about that! We have already had far too many man made ideas and opinions already. That was one big reason for the "restitution of all things."

[_Albion]

Gdemetz, I think you need to go back and slowly read Corinthians 15 once again determining first exactly what Paul is talking about. He is not talking about heaven, neither one nor three. "All FLESH is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another: and stars differ from star to star in splendor. SO WILL IT BE WITH THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD (we're talking people here, gdemetz). The body (person) that is sown is perishable (the way of all flesh at death) i9s is raised imperishable: it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body." Cor. 15: 39-44.

Clearly Paul is talking about people, specifically believers, and how they will be in the resurrection. To use this to jump to some proof text to show three heavens when the subject is not heaven but clearly a demonstration of how our heavenly bodies will be different from our earthly bodies is demonstrably false to say the least. Again, Mormons twist Biblical scripture to somehow fit Smith's ideas rather than using the Bible to verify whether or not Smith was talking falsely. By even the remotest interpretation Smith is flat out wrong on this. It clearly does not in any way support his heresies. Using the D&C to support the error only compounds the error. There will indeed be a restitution of all things, gdemetz...but not yet and certainly not the sham that is Mormonism.

[_jo1952]

It just seems odd to me a born-again person would talk like that.

Hello Haters,

I think it may seem odd because much of what was originally taught and understood has been changed, or buried, or burned, so that man could promote his own version of the Gospel; thereby convincing believers to follow their commandments of men. Thus, such a comment/teaching would not have been questioned by ancient converts; however, they are a mystery to believers today.

Blessings,

jo

[_Drifting]

Why do LDS dismiss this part of the New Testament?

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 1st Corinthians 14

And remember ladies...ask your husband first before you answer...

[_jo1952]

Clearly Paul is talking about people, specifically believers, and how they will be in the resurrection. To use this to jump to some proof text to show three heavens when the subject is not heaven but clearly a demonstration of how our heavenly bodies will be different from our earthly bodies is demonstrably false to say the least. Again, Mormons twist Biblical scripture to somehow fit Smith's ideas rather than using the Bible to verify whether or not Smith was talking falsely. By even the remotest interpretation Smith is flat out wrong on this. It clearly does not in any way support his heresies. Using the D&C to support the error only compounds the error. There will indeed be a restitution of all things, gdemetz...but not yet and certainly not the sham that is Mormonism.

Albion,

How do you explain that the Kabbalah, since the time of Adam (according to their oral tradition which has since been written down), has taught seven heavens? In fact, can you explain why Christendom hasn't taught at least the three heavens? Why have they not taught Kabbalah? After all, Christendom adopted the Old Testament from the Hebrews. Why not also the Kabbalah which teaches the higher and spiritual beliefs of the Hebrews?

Thanks,

jo

[_Albion]

Jo, I don't think I have to explain extra Biblical philosophies at all....that does appear to be the domain of Mormonism. But the question remains: how do you make the leap to heaven, one two three or however many, from a text which is clearly not talking about heaven but what the resurrected body (flesh) will be like in its resurrected state?