Viewing 1 - 4 out of 4 Blogs.

One of the most perverted forms of Biblical interpretation is that of Galatians 1:8-9. This passage is commonly used by Christian Apologists in their attempt to prove that Mormonism is "another Gospel".

 

Therefore, the purpose of this post is to provide understanding as to what the Apostle Paul is discussing within the context of Galatians 1:6-9.

 

Historically, the epistle was written to Gentile Christians in the Galatian Province. The question here is: was it written to all of Galatia or a particular part of Galatia? This is an interesting question, for, when I had researched into the nature and history of the epistle, there is a dispute as to whether or not the epistle was written to the Northern Province of Galatia or the Southern Province of Galatia. Several sources cite this as a historical background. In one classic commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians by W.M. Ramsey (1851 to 1939) published in 1899, we find this:

The study of this document is encumbered with a great preliminary difficulty. It is not certain who were the persons addressed. While some scholars maintain that the "Churches of Galatia," to whom the Epistle is addressed, were planted in the four cities of Southern Galatia, Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch, others assert that those Churches were situated in North Galatia. These two opposite opinions are conveniently designated as the South Galatian and the North Galatian Theory.

In his work - A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians , published in 1920 -  Ernest De Witt Burton collaborates the nature of the debate as to whether the Epistle was addressed to those Churches in the Northern part of Galatia or the Southern Part of Galatia:

On the basis, therefore, of the Acts narrative, and the evi­dence of the letter that "the churches of Galatia" to which it was addressed constituted one group founded on the same gen­eral occasion, we must exclude any hypothesis that the letter was addressed to churches in both parts of the province, and make our choice between the two hypotheses: (a) that Paul founded churches in northern Galatia on his second missionary journey, and addressed the letter to them and them only, using the term Galatia in its older, ethnographic sense; and (b) that he founded no churches in northern Galatia, and that he ad­dressed his letter to the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and (Pisidian) Antioch, using the term Galatia in the political sense.

The importance in understanding to whom this epistle was written is to understand the actual historical context of how and why the Apostle Paul wrote what he wrote to certain peoples and groups. Thus, we must have a basic foundational understanding as to the historical context of the Epistle before any consideration of the textual context is to be discussed and understood. While, I am not going to delve into the nature as to whom the epistle was written too, suffice it to say that we understand the textual context as being this: ...Unto the Churches of Galatia. (see Gal. 1:2). Whether these churches were in the Northern part or Southern Part is up for debate and is only mentioned here as a background of historical understanding.

 

However, not only is the historical context important to understand, but the importance of the content of the message, nature of the message and purpose of the message must be understood and properly interpreted within this historical context. While there is dispute as to the date of the Epistle itself, the overall historical context of the Epistle is two-fold:

 

1) It is addressing an attack on the Apostleship of Paul and his doctrines he espouse and teach.

 

2) It is addressing the false teaching by those Jewish-Christians who were convincing the Galatian Christians that they must adhere to the Jewish rituals of circumcision and keep the strict observations of the feasts and new moons as perscribed within the Old Covenant and Judaic Law.

 

3) Finally, the evidence of Gal. 1:6 shows forth the historical context of how First Century Christians fell into Apostasy due to false doctrines and teachings that others purport to instill upon others.

 

It is here that when a person truly studies the historical and doctrinal aspects of the Epistle of Galatians, there is the understanding that the modern Christian Apologetic reasoning to use Gal. 1:6-9 as a proof text to refute Mormonism is invalidated on the more evidentiary reasoning as to the actual historical and doctrinal context of the epistle itself. Therefore, let us look at the first aspect of the Epistle.

 

The Apostolic Authority of Paul under Attack

 

As mentioned before, the first aspect of the Epistle is the direct attack upon the apostleship of Paul. Burton, in the same work mentioned above, discusses the nature of the attack upon Paul's Apostleship:

The letter itself furnishes evidence, which is confirmed by 1 and 2 Corinthians, that the apostolic office or function was clearly recognised as one of great importance in the Chris­tian community, and that the question who could legitimately claim it was one on which there was sharp difference of opinion. An apostle was much more than a local elder or itinerant mis­sionary. He was a divinely commissioned founder of Christian churches, indeed, more, of the Christian church œcumenical. With their effort to keep the Christian movement within the Jewish church, including proselytes from other religions, the judaisers naturally associated the contention that the aposto­late was limited to those who were appointed by Jesus or by those whom he appointed. With their denial of the distinct­ive doctrines of Paul they associated a denial of his right to teach them as an apostle. This denial seems to have taken the form of representing Paul as a renegade follower of the Twelve, a man who knew nothing of Christianity except what he had learned from the Twelve, and preached this in a per­verted form. This appears from the nature of Paul's defence of his independent authority as an apostle in the first two chap­ters of the letter, and indicates that with their theory of a lim­ited apostolate the judaisers had associated the claim that the apostolic commission must proceed from the circle of the origi­nal Twelve.

It is the very same attitude of these Jewish-Christians (or Judiazers) that modern Christian Apologists implement in their arguments to deny the Apostleship of the General Authorities of the Latter-day Saint Christian Faith, limiting it to the Original Twelve apostles of Christ. Discredit the authority of the person, one ultimately discredits the nature and purpose of the message being delivered. A very serious charge to make and buy into - one of which a commentator has taken upon themselves to perform:

eternally condemned; The Holy Spirit speaks this through the Apostle Paul, this means that Joseph Smith is accursed and damned to hell for preaching another gospel. And you can only be saved by receiving the True Gospel as The Holy Spirit and faith are only imparted through the preaching of the true Gospel

However, Burton is not the only one to discuss this. Martin Luther, one of the great reformers and quite possibly the father of the Protestant Reformation, provided the following commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians:

In every way they sought to undermine the authority of St. Paul. They said to the Galatians: “You have no right to think highly of Paul. He was the last to turn to Christ. But we have seen Christ. We heard Him preach. Paul came later and is beneath us. It is possible for us to be in error—we who have received the Holy Ghost? Paul stands alone. He has not seen Christ, nor has he had much contact with the other apostles. Indeed, he persecuted the Church of Christ for a long time.”

Who were these people that Luther refers to?

These Jewish-Christian fanatics who pushed themselves into the Galatian churches after Paul’s departure, boasted that they were the descendants of Abraham, true ministers of Christ, having been trained by the apostles themselves, that they were able to perform miracles.

Why I mention this is because of the tone of the Epistle from the outset. Imagine having seen Christ. Being struck down on your way to arrest believers and you are a Jew who perscribed to the Pharisaic traditions. You encounter the Resurrected Christ, spend time with the original twelve, are separated with another into the apostolic calling and go about preaching the Gosple, setting up churches and submitting letters to keep those believers adherent to true doctrines and teachings. Imagine having been informed that your very own testimony, the very calling you hold to as coming from God and you have been separated into by the original twelve is being discredited. How would one respond? The answer is quite clear. Paul is angry and upset. Angry that those defactors are denying his apostolic calling. Using their reasoning and argumentation of their perverted belief that because they are descendents of Abraham, that they are the only sole heirs of Salvation and that in order to be saved, one has to not only be cirucmcised but have to be adopted into the Judiac religion.

 

This is where the argument of the Christian Apologist falls apart when using Galatians 1:6-9 as a proof text to prove that Mormonism is "another Gospel" that is false and preaching a different Jesus. In fact, there are two main points where this argument falls apart, when properly examined in historical and textual context: 1) Claiming to be the "Chosen" people of God based upon Ancestrial decent from Abraham as those Jews of the First Century rise of Christianity; And, 2) Teaching that in order to be saved, one has to adhere to the circumcision and be adopted into the lineage of Abraham in order to be considered part of the Chosen people of God.

 

Mormon's do not claim any judiac traditions to Abraham. Meaning, members of the faith, nor the leaders go about saying that we are "Abraham's Seed" and therefore are the sole persons of the True Gospel Message. In fact, if anything, we definitely understand what Christ and Paul truly taught regarding who were of the Seed of Abraham:

They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. (John 8:39).

When we look at the context of John 8:39, we find that there is a discussion between the Jews and Christ. In fact, verse 33 says this: They answered him, We be Abraham's seed...and Christ responding with acknowledgement to their response in verse 37: I know that ye are Abraham's seed. Yet, sandwiched between 33 and 37, we find that Christ says a very interesting thing: Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. Thus, the context of what Christ says in verse 39 is understood within the context of verses 33-39. What were the works of Abraham? And why is that important to understand in light of Galatians 1?

 

John Calvin, in his work Commentary on John - Volume 1, discusses the nature of verse 39 and the context of verses 33-39.

39. Abraham is our father. This altercation shows plainly enough how haughtily and fiercely they despised all Christ’s reproofs. What they continually claim and vaunt of is, that they are Abraham’s children; by which they do not simply mean that they are the lineal descendants of Abraham, but that they are a holy race, the heritage of God, and the children of God. And yet they rely on nothing but the confidence of the flesh. But carnal descent, without faith, is nothing more than a false pretense. We now understand what it was that so greatly blinded them, so that they treated Christ with disdain, though armed with deadly thunder. Thus the word of God, which might move stones, is ridiculed in the present day by Papists, as if it were a fable, and fiercely persecuted by fire and sword; and for no other reason but that they rely on their false title of “the Church,” and hope that they will be able to deceive both God and man. In short, as soon as hypocrites have procured some plausible covering, they oppose God with hardened obstinacy, as if he could not penetrate into their hearts.

 

If you were the children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham. Christ now distinguishes more plainly between the ######## and degenerate children of Abraham, and the true and lawful children; (“Entre les enfans d’Abraham qui sont bastars et forlignans, et le vrais et legitimes.”) for he refuses to give the very name to all who do not resemble Abraham True, it frequently happens that children do not resemble, in their conduct, the parents from whom they are sprung; but here Christ does not argue about carnal descent, but only affirms that they who do not retain by faith the grace of adoption are not reckoned among the children of Abraham before God. For since God promised to the seed of Abraham that he would be their God, saying, I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, (Genesis 17:7,) all unbelievers, by rejecting this promise, excluded themselves from the family of Abraham.

 

The state of the question therefore is this: Ought they to be accounted Abraham’s children who reject the blessing offered to them in the word, so that, notwithstanding of this, they shall be a holy nation, the heritage of God, and a royal priesthood? (Exodus 19:6; Joel 3:2.) Christ denies this, and justly; for they who are the children of the promise must be born again by the Spirit, and all who desire to obtain a place in the kingdom of God ought to be new creatures. Carnal descent from Abraham was not indeed useless, and of no value, provided that the truth were added to it. For election dwells in the seed of Abraham, but it is free, so that all whom God sanctifies by his Spirit are accounted heirs of life.

What I find strikingly similiar (when I had devoted some time to studying the historical aspect of the Epistle to the Galatains) is that the similar arguments proposed by the Judiazers as to their direct lineage of Abraham is that of those Jews who confronted Christ while he served his earthly ministry and stated the same argument and were proven false. Yet, the question had not been answered - what were the works of Abraham and why did Christ mention to these people that if Abraham were truly their father, they would do the work of Abraham? The answer is very simple and quite obvious. Faith. The work of Abraham was that of faith in the redemptive power of Christ and the salvation of man. This is evident in verse 56: Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day.

 

Paul says this in Romans 4:3 - For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. What scripture is Paul referring to?

 

While many interpreters would say that this is evidence of salvation of grace within the Old Testament, a true and more careful reading of the scripture Paul refers to does not talk about works of righteousness, but talks about believing in the promises of God and the covenants God makes with those who choose to enter into a righteous relationship with the Divine:

...the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, "Do not fear, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great." And Abram said, "O Lord God, what wilt Thou give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus? And Abram said, Since Thou hast given no offspring to me, one born in my house is my heir." Then behold, the word of the Lord caem to him, saying, "This man will not be your heir; but one who shall come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir." And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your decsendants be." Then he blieved in the Lord; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness" (Genesis 15:1-6, NASB)

Regarding how Genesis 15:1-6 is referring to Faith as a Work, we look only to James 2: 21 - Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

 

We understand that the nature of God calling up Abram to sacrifice his only begotten son was to test his "faith" in God. Because of Abram's faith, he believed that there was a purpose and reason for such a command. This is where the argument of the Salvation by Grace alone and Salvation of Grace and Sanctification come into conflict. It is this very reason that some Christian Apologists rely so heavily upon the idea and understanding that because Galatians 1:6-9 talk about a Gospel of Works as being another gospel and therefore cursed by God is reason to condemn Mormonism.

 

However, the reality and truth is, that when we look at the nature of the Gospel of Grace, we see that we are not only called into repentance and embrace the reality of Christ, but that we are to no longer live as we had lived prior to our conversion. Our faith is not just a belief but a life long change to conform our will to following Christ. Thus, when we look at Abraham, we see that God made a promise to Abraham in providing an heir and that Abraham would be the father of an innumerable amount of people. Christ, declared to the false Jewish belief that because they were of the lineage of Abraham, they were therefore Chosen of God as a holy and distinct people, stated that if these Jews were truly the Seed of Abraham, then they would believe in Christ just as Abraham believed in him - Christ being the Lord in the Old Testament. It is the reason Paul, the Apostle, stated in Romans that because Abram believed on the word of God, that he was declared righteous.

 

What all this means is that when we look at all of the Apostle Paul's teaching, he taught two fundamental things:

 

1) Salvation does not come from lineage and ancestrial descent.

 

2) Salvation is not produced from performance of any type of "Works of Righteousness" as a means to gain Christ's acceptance. On the contrary, because of Christ's redemption and saving grace bestowed upon us, we manifest our appreciation and devotion in following after him and because of our faith in Christ, the evidence is the very works produced as a result of that faith and devotion - Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. is the opposite of if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. The Apostle Paul stated it simply, by their fruits, ye shall know them. Christ declared that a good tree does not bring forth evil fruit and a bad tree does not bring forth good fruit. Works are the fruit of our faith.

 

Hence, it is this very reason that those Jewish-Christians who claimed that because they were descendants of Abraham, they were the "promised and chosen" seed of Abraham. Thereby, perverting the Gospel of Christ and teaching the Galatian believers that in order for them to be saved, they had to not do the works of righteousness, but had to embrace the traditions and rituals of the Judiac rights of circumcision and be adopted into the "family lineage" of Abraham in order to be considered the chosen of God.  Something that the Mormon Faith, Joseph Smith,  the Book of Mormon, and the Prophets and apostles of the Church have never; nor, will ever teach and embrace.

 

Another thing to note, regarding this, and how it all correlates with the nature of disputing the authority of Paul, is that when these Judiazers taught the Galatians, they were effectively disproving Paul's teaching and denied Paul as an Apostle of Jesus Christ. They had convinced the Galatian Christians not to accept Paul's teaching on the basis that Paul's doctrine was "another gospel". Something which we will discuss next.

 

False Teaching of the Jewish-Christians

 

Previously, I discussed the nature of what these Jewish-Christians were teaching the Galatian Christians as to what they believed to be a "true gospel" as opposed to what Paul, the Apostle taught. And, the more I think about this, the more I am starting to realize the similiarities between these Jewish-Christians and some of the Evangelical Christians that I dialogue with in regards to Mormonism and the doctrines of the LDS Faith.

 

The first thing we noticed, and one of the later things I had discussed in the prior section, is that the "works" these Jewish-Christians were teaching were the circumcision and adoption into the Abrahamic line. To these people, the belief in the Abrahamic covenant still had a hold upon their mindset and belief system. While embracing this, they assimiliated the ideals of the the Older covenant with that of the newer Covenant of Grace. To this, we look to the original twelve that Christ had called into discipleship and later became known as the Apostles.

 

All twelve men were Jews. There were no Gentile Apostles that Christ had called to follow after. In fact, the gospel of Grace was first preached in contrast to the long held traditions of the various schools of religious thought within Jerusalem. The Pharisees, Sadduccees and the Zealots.

 

These twelve men were from the surrounding area of Judea and Jerusalem. Thus, from this Jewish idealism, the Jewish-Christians believed that the Gospel were preached unto them and them alone because of their ideal understanding that the Nation of Israel is God's Chosen People, and, likewise, because Abraham was promised to have numerous children surpassing the stars in heaven. Therefore, it would be natural that these people would intigrate their Jewish idealisms within the New found gospel of Christ. And, as a result, preached "a different gospel" of Jesus Christ.

 

Burton expounds upon this thought of how and what doctrine these Judiaziers would use to influence the Gentile Christians, the difference between Peter and Paul and how the original 12 Apostles accepted Paul's missionary efforts and preaching to the Gentiles:

On the one hand, there were added to the Christian community in Judæa certain men of strongly conservative tendencies who were convinced that Christianity ought to be built strictly on the basis of the Abrahamic covenant, and that the Christian sect ought to differ from other Jewish sects, in particular from the Pharisaic sect, only by the addition of the doctrine of the Messiahship of Jesus, and in no case by any subtraction from the doctrines or requirements of the Old Testament religion as currently inter­preted. On the other hand, as the effects of the evangelistic activity of Paul became more manifest and better known to the church at Jerusalem, the real extent and serious nature of his departure from the views and practices now becoming cur­rent in the mother church doubtless became more evident. As a result of these two influences the question of the obligation of the Gentile Christians to be circumcised came to an issue in the incident narrated by Paul in Gal. 21-10. The debate which took place on that occasion was apparently limited to this one ques­tion of the circumcision of Gentile Christians. The Jerusalem apostles at first urging Paul to conform, at least in the case of Titus, to the views of the ultraconservative element, were at length persuaded to throw their influence on the side of Paul's view, to give their approval to his way of winning the Gentiles to faith in Christ, and not to insist upon circumcision.

Not only does Burton accept the notion that these Jewish Christians integrated their understanding of the Jewish customs and doctrines, but that they admittedly required and retained the idea of salvation through circumcision. Thus, this brings about the truer understanding of what the Apostle Paul states in Romans 2:24 - 3:1 -

For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written, For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

We know that the understanding of what Paul was relating here is within the context of Romans 2:2-10 where the Apostle Paul discusses those who do the works of Righteousness and how they are blessed because of this and how those who do the works of unrighteousness are in anguish, tribulation, and that these two faucets of human experience are not just among the Jews, but also of the Gentiles. It is here, that teh Apostle Paul says that man will be judged by their works - not their faith. This is not to diminish the Gospel of Grace and the salvation that Christ had brought about, but it is to realize that one can't say that they confess Christ as their Lord and Savior in word alone, but must confess that Christ is their Lord and Savior in word and deed. Christ saves us from death - both physical and spiritual, however we are held accountable to the things we do in our life that result in either having a blessed life or a cursed life.

 

Thus, what we discover is the specific doctrine that Paul is contending against, and that of being circumcised in order to receive salvation and redemption. Yet, Burton is not alone in this understanding of what it was Paul was calling the Galatian believers to turn away from. An understanding of the doctrine that was literally causing the Galatian Christians to apostasize from the gospel Paul preached. The Jaimeson, Fausset and Brown Critical Commentary discusses it in this way:

Judaizing teachers had persuaded the Galatians that Paul had taught them the new religion imperfectly, and at second hand; that the founder of their church himself possessed only a deputed commission, the seal of truth and authority being in the apostles at Jerusalem: moreover, that whatever he might profess among them, he had himself at other times, and in other places, given way to the doctrine of circumcision. To refute this, he appeals to the history of his conversion, and to the manner of his conferring with the apostles when he met them at Jerusalem; that so far was his doctrine from being derived from them, or they from exercising any superiority over him, that they had simply assented to what he had already preached among the Gentiles, which preaching was communicated, not by them to him, but by himself to them {Paley}.

Turning to Martin Luther's Commentary, we further read his comments as follows:

Their objection to Paul’s Gospel is identical to that recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Book of Acts to the effect that it was not enough for the Galatians to believe in Christ, or to be baptized, but that it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses, for “except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” As though Christ were a workman who had begun a building and left it for Moses to finish.

The more one studies this epistle, one begins to understand that the context (both historically and contextually) is not about the denial of accountability and being obedient to the Gospel of Christ, but it is about the denial of promoting and preaching the nature and custom of Circumcision as being the ordinance to secure one's salvation. In other words, it is specifically against the doctrine of circumcision that the Apostle Paul refers to as being "another Gospel". In this light, the accusation that Mormonism is "Another Gospel" according to Galatians 1:6-9 is a fallacious argument having no foundational support on this. It further exposes the error of the critic who uses Galatians 1:6-9 as a proof text against Mormonism and against the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. In short, Galatians 1:6-9 actually supports the Latter-day Saint position more so than the modern Evangelical Christian would presume it to support their own position. The observation on this latter statement is self-evident.

 

1) Judiazer claims that in order to secure one's salvation in Christ is to become adopted into the Abrahamic Covenant and be Circumcised according to the manner in which Moses was commanded to be circumcised.

 

Christian believers today say something to the effect: In order to be saved, one only need to make a confessionary statement through prayer and accept Christ in their heart and life. Anything added to this; baptism, laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, obedience to Christ and the commandments of Christ - are but another gospel. On the contrary, even Satan and the demons believe in Christ, does this mean they are saved? Some athiests are adherents to good works of human service and devotion, does this mean they are saved? The reality is that Salvation is first and foremost by and through Jesus Christ. Man can't in anyway redeem himself from the fall. Yet, once redeemed from his sins, man has an obligation to turn from his natural tendencies, former beliefs and subjugate them to follow after Christ and live in a manner where the power of redemption is manifested through them. Christ, Paul and the scriptures are consistently clear that men will be judged, not on their faith, but upon their deeds in this life. Something Christians (when it comes to the differences between Mormonism and modern Evangelical Christian teaching and dogmatics) scoff at, yet turn and teach as evidence of one's faith and reason for the hope of Salvation that lies within the follower of Christ.

 

Evidence of Apostasy:

 

The Epistle to the Galatians is strong evidence for doctrinal apostasy. Something that Christian Apologists disagree with when it comes to the Latter-day Saint statement and belief that Early Christianity had gone into a state of apostasy, the power of the Priesthood having become corrupt and ultimately removed from the earth.

 

Not only was Paul contending for his reason and calling as an Apostle of Jesus Christ, combating the false doctrine of Circumcision, but that he recognized the reality and severity of the false doctrine having come into the belief of the Galatian Christians and caused them to turn from the Gospel of Christ.

 

While some would agree that this is specific to the reference of those Churches in Galatia, the reality is that we do not have any reference or source as to whether or not the Christians in Galatia turned back to the true Gospel of Christ or if they had completely abandoned the gospel of Christ for the more Judiac perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. No matter, the fact is, Paul recognized that these believers were falling away from the pure gospel of Christ.

 

This apostasy was due to three factors: First, the doubt as to Paul's authority as an Apostle (Which we discussed first); Second, declaring the Gospel that Paul preached as being contradictory to that which the Jewish-Christians believed and accepted as the true Gospel, declaring that their doctrines come from the original Twelve whom were Jews as well and Paul, only being an emmissary of the Original Twelve; and Thirdly, influence of the Galatian's own cultural, ethnic and previous paganistic belief system.

 

A serious inquiry of the Epistle to the Churches of Galatia shows forth that the reality of doctrinal apostasy was very real. Why would Paul contend for his authority of Apostleship, defend his teaching and declaring that it is the same gospel as that of the original Twelve in Jerusalem and call the Christian believers in Galatia to repentence and back into the true gospel of Christ?

 

Final Thoughts and Testimony

 

The overall historical and textual context of the Epistle to the Galatians shows that the reference to "Another Gospel" is not a reference to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but it is a reference to the false doctrinal teaching that in order for a Gentile Christian to be saved, they had to accept the custom of circumcision and be adopted into the false ideal of the "Chosen" lineage of the Abrahamic Covenant. There is no evidence, in light of this investigatory study, supporting the modern Christian interpretation of Galatians 1:6-9 as to Paul referring to Mormonism, Joseph Smith and the coming forth of the Restoration of the Gospel. It is actually on the contrary that Galatians 1:6-9 is in support of the Latter-day Saint position of how and why there needed to be a restored gospel of Christ. The epistle is a call to repentence of following after false doctrines and traditions and embracing the true gospel of Jesus Christ. What is the true gospel of Jesus Christ?

• We believe that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression.
• We believe that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
• We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Whether you want to agree with me or disagree with me is up to you. I am only responsible to share what I believe to be true, how it is true and the substantial evidence for that truth.

 

I, personally, testify to you that Jesus Christ truly is the sole source for our redemption. That by and through Christ, we are saved and have our hope and purpose. That becasue of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, men can truly come to understand the reality of God's divine plan: A plan to bring about the purpose and reason for our existence. I testify that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not about confessing Christ as our Lord and Savior, but it is about putting to death the old things and walking in a newness of life. That it is about how we live our life as much as it is about our belief in Christ, Jesus.

 

I truly have come to a knowledge as to the reality and truthfulness of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That it is truly the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ in these last days. That Joseph Smith was truly called of God, and those who declare otherwise, denying him his divine appointment as a Prophet in these last days are much like those Judiazers who denied Paul's divine Apostleship.

 

I do testify that the Book of Mormon, and the Church is not "Another Gospel" but The Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the Book of Mormon truly another testimony as to the reality and purpose to Christ's mission, redemption and the call to repentence.

 

I say this because it is true, I say it, not because I have a false hope, or have been misled by the General Authorities, I say this because I have tasted the reality of Christ's atonement, I have tasted the reality of being Born Again. I have tasted the bitterness of giving into false doctrines and presenting them as true doctrines. I have tasted the bitterness of attacking the doctrines of Christ in light of these false teachings that bind men to philosophical meanderings and improper interpretations of sacred scriptures.

 

I testify that there is a real living Prophet that leads the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and that men are truly held accountable in either rejecting or accepting a True Prophet of God.

 

I say this with authority and truth and I say it in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Tags: Mormonism Apostle Apostleship Apostolic Paul Mormonism LDS Doctrines

My apologies for not having posted much of anything in the past couple weeks or so. The economic Crisis and the Recession they have finally admitted that we are in has hit home. Top priority here is for me to find work until the company I was laid off from picks up production and goes back to two shifts. Please keep this in your prayers while I am finding employment to help out with finances until then.

 

Now, in the midst of looking for work and browsing the net, I have stumbled across some of the same old arguments that most of the critics are discussing in various message forums, articles that are written against the Latter-day Saint Christian faith. Thus, being a person who has a penchent for religious discussions, writing and research, I figured it is high time to put my talent to good use and present some good thought provoking articles. This is not to say that the previous articles that I have posted are not thought provoking - they are - but these forthcoming articles that you will see are going to be more indepth, more doctrinal and more comparative in their renderings. These articles are why I have decided to start this blog - a precise, logical defense of the Latter-day Saint Faith. What more could open up such an intense study, thought and understanding than that of the doctrine of Grace and Human Accountability.

 

Why this study is of importance

 

Why I have chosen this subject to study, research and post several articles on is due to the increase information that is available about the Latter-day Saint Christian faith (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) from those who are considered Anti-Mormon's, critics and those who have left the LDS Faith and became known as Ex-Mormons - or Apostates. Either way, majority of the discussions seem to center around Salvation and how one is saved and by what means one is saved. Majority of the Christians today have this presumption that the doctrine of Grace is based upon the doctrine of Original Sin and man's depravity because of the fall. While the heart of this doctrine is within the confines of the Calvinistic Christian thinking, modern Christians have adapted and adopted some or most of the Calvinistic thoughts, doctrines and assumptions to be scripturally authoritative.

 

What these articles are going to do is expose the truth behind the nature and doctrine of Original Sin as an illogical doctrine, unbiblical doctrine and a product of St. Augustine's time. In fact, one cannot in anyway separate the definition of the doctrine from St. Augustine because Agustine actually conceptualized the term "Original Sin" in response to Pelagius and his ideas and doctrines.

 

What this means is that the term "Original Sin" is nowhere in the Biblical text, but a product of a Fifth Century dogma that evolved and became an adoptive teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, then passed on and embraced by the Protestant Reformation and the development of the Calvinistic doctrines and teachings:

Many Christians who profess to believe in the doctrine of original sin do not know what it teaches. Even more Christians are ignorant of its history and origin: that it had its roots in a heathen philosophy, that it has evolved, and that it was made a dogma of the Roman Catholic Church in the fifth century A.D., primarily by the influence of Augustine. {Are Men Born Sinners - The Myth of Original Sin; Chapter 3: The Origin and History of the Doctrine, Original Sin, Tom Overstreet - 1995; found at http://www.gospeltruth.net/, accessed December 1, 2008}

 

 

Today's proponents of the doctrine rely on several Old and New Testament, but the two prominent passages of scripture are those of the Apostle Paul: 1) Romans 5:12, 14, 18 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned...Nevertheless death reigned from Adam unot Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. ... Therefore, as by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification for life.And,  1 Corinthians 15:21-22, For since by one man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

 

A leisurely reading of the King James version translation will show the true believer of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the error and misinterpretations of these texts.

 

I say this, because the obvious is this: in both epistles, the Apostle Paul is referring to Adam and Christ. Thus, since Paul is referring to Adam and all humanity thereafter who have descended from Adam and his immediate children, so also is he referring to Christ and the atonement of Jesus Christ.

 

1) Wherefore, by ONE MAN (Adam) Sin entered the world and death by sin, for ALL DIE. Because of the offence of one man came judgment and condemnation passed unto ALL MEN

2) for by ONE MAN (Adam) Death came into the world and death passes unto ALL MEN.

 

3) By the Righteousness of ONE (Christ) came upon all men

4) In Christ, ALL SHALL be made Alive.

 

What we have here is a logical argument where these texts essentially destory the idea and doctrine of Original Sin. The logic is this:

 

If Original Sin is A in the argument, Christ and his Atonement and Salvation of Mankind is Z, thus if A affects B through Y then Z affects Y through B in the same manner.

 

Meaning, if Original Sin is truly in Romans 5:12, 14 and 18 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 (Rom. 5:12-19 contextually), then that would mean the doctrine of Universal Salvation is just as true and Biblical as that of Original Sin. Why that is because both passages reference Adam and the Fall and Christ and his Righteousness. Thus, according to the doctrine of Original Sin, the effects of the Fall of Adam is passed onto the human populace and because of this, Man is born a sinful creature. Because Adam fell, and because he passed on the heredity of physical and spiritual death, sinful disposition unto all of humanity, the antidote to this is Jesus Christ, his crucifixion on the Cross, his death, burial and resurrection on the third day. And, if Christ is the antidote to man's sinful nature, fulfillment of what the Mosiac Law could not do, and ability to do that which Man could not do of his own free will - break the bonds of Sin and Death, therefore, because Man's inherint sinful nature is the product of Adam's Fall, his redemption is the Product of Jesus Christ and therefore, because of Christ's redemption all men stand righteous before God.

 

The proponents of Original Sin, and the Critics, Ex-Mormon's and Modern Christian thinking believers would disagree with the doctrine of Universal Salvation. And why is that? The answer will vary from Christian to Christian, because in the Modern Christian scheme of Salvation, only a few are saved from God's Condemnation, only a few are redeemed from the effects of the fall and are "born again" as a new creation in Jesus Christ. Those who are not are justly condemned in the life to come.

 

But, yet, they rely on passages like Romans 5:12-19 and 1 Corinthians 15.21-22 because they are taught to believe in a fifth centure dogma of the Roman Catholic Church that also taught - because of man's inherint sinful nature, infant baptism become a doctrine and practice of religious thought and practice, even among Calvinistic and Reformed Christian believers.

 

 Human Accountability - A Cursory thought why Original Sin is false:

 

Another reason why I am discovering the false doctrine of Original Sin is the nature of Human Accountability. Upon an in depth study of Original Sin, one will soon discover that there is no human accountability for their own actions. Meaning, because man is inherintly sinful, the blame does not fall upon their own actions but what was done at the beginning of human history.

 

Not only is this idea false - pertaining to Original Sin - but it is illogical within the legal field. Imagine a criminal standing before a Judge and saying: I am not responsible for my crimes because, I am already a criminal anyway.

The sad reality, we already see this happening in our court rooms and legal system. The lack of accountability for one's crimes and actions. "I do not know what happened, I just blacked out and then when I 'came too' my wife/husband/lover/child(ren) were lying lifeless on the floor. It is sad that at taxpayers expenses, young people who do not wish to live by structured rules and boundaries and find a sense of freedom on the streets to be vagrants and vagabonds pick a mental defect and force themselves and begin to exhibit the symptoms of that specific disorder so that they can get tax free money and not have to worry about any true responsibility.

It is sad that man blames another for their actions and reasons behind there behavior.

 

In reality, all the doctrine of Original Sin says is: "The Devil Made me do it because he made Eve do it, Eve made her Husband, Adam do it and therefore because I am human, it is in my nature".

 

Not only does the doctrine of Original Sin diminish the human accountability, it also diminishes moral responsibility in a sense.

 

Conclusion

As one can see, the depth and scope of these articles are pertinent, not just to defend the Latter-day Saint position, but to reveal and expound upon the Biblical truth that Men are and will be held accountable for their own actions and lives and not because of Adam's transgression and sin. Essentially, it is to establish and support the Second Article of Faith: We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's Transgression.

 

And, the third article of Faith, We believe that thorugh the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

 

And, the fourth article of faith, We believe that the first principles of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repenteance; third, Baptism by immersion fo rthe remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the figt of the Holy Ghost.

 

 

All three of these articles of faith are true biblical Doctrines that will be further investigated and expounded upon in the coming articles.

 

One other interesting fact is that after I had left the Latter-day Saint Faith, I had become a proponent and believer in the Calvinistic Doctrines and Traditions. While I admit, there are some aspects of the Calvinistic Doctrines and beliefs that seem to be truly Biblical teachings and proper interpretations, one must closely scrutinize and examine to see if they truly are. Thus, these articles are not just meanderings and rambling words to sport a more intellectual observation, but actual research and studies of my own personal reflections as I go back and re-examine and rethink the Calvinistic position as compared to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint faith.

 

Thus, the doctrines, the history and the interpretions of the following are going to be in-depth articles:

 

Original Sin
Predestination
Salvation by Grace Alone
By Faith Alone
T.U.L.I.P - Acronymn for Calvinism, otherwise known as the Five Points of Calvinism: 1) Total Depravity; 2) Unconditional Election; 3) Limited Atonement; Irresistable Grace; Perserverance of the Saints.
There are many more, but these are just a tip of what will be coming forward in the days and weeks to come.

 

And, I definitely look forward to sharing these insightful, intellectual and Biblical truths to one and all.

 

As always, your comments and suggestions are definitely welcomed, especially when the first article is posted. Please feel free to pass on this blog to your friends or those who are wanting a more reasonable defense, or those who have serious doubts/questions about the doctrines of the Mormon Faith.

Tags: Mormonism Sin Sinful Nature Natural Man Original Sin Grace Salvation

Tags: Commandments Obedience Faith Grace Works Perserverance Truth Love H

I grew up within the confines of the Latter-day Saint faith. I knew nothing of apologetics or any other technical religious terms. The only thing I knew was that which I was taught in my youth. Unfortunately, I was what one would call a "weak" member of the faith. Although I had always borne my testimony, there was no true testimony that anchored me. While there was a strong grasp of scriptural understanding, when it came to personaly faith, I was lacking.

Yet, being a person who believes that all things happen for a reason and a purpose in our lives, I would not go back and change anything that had happened in my life. We all make our journey and sometimes have to experience things more than others. Life is the fire test we all have to walk through no matter what. Even when one thinks they are sitting on the sidelines, life is cruel and mean at times; calm and peaceful other times. Life is what we make of it.

What caused me to make the journey I had traversed was my own personal apostasy. One in which (to this date) I am still walking in, and hopefully walking out of. The change and the outlook, the understanding and the knowledge I have gained through this journey took me into the different realms of religious thought. Starting with the Pentecostal and Charismatic movement and going into the Calvinistic Tradition and Reformed Theology. A search to answer the ever pervasive question: Of all the religions of the world, which one is the true Church of God? To the modern Protestant and Evangelical mainstream Christians, it is Christianity as they understand it. No matter what denominational alignment one is, Christianity as a whole is understood in their own confines of interpretations and understanding of what they call Biblical doctrines and truth. To the Mormon's, it is the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ in these last days, in the dispensation of the fulness of times and the restoration of the family, marriage, community and priesthood authority to teach and act on God's behalf.

As I studied to find answers and to give a justifiable defense for the Mormon faith and religion, I started questioning some of the teachings personally. The issue here is that I relied upon my own intellectual reasoning and understanding and allowed the seeds of doubt to sow in my heart. It was when these seeds blossomed that I started finding myself on the other side of the fence, defending what I believed to be the Historical Christian faith against the heretical teachings of the Mormon Church, the doctrines of the foundations and pillars of so many people who have come to embrace Mormonism and the influence it has on their lives. For the most part, I became antagonistic, border-line Anti-Mormon and started studying more. The more I studied, the more my doctrine and theology changed.

It was not until I examined and embraced the doctrines of the Calvinistic persuasion and faith that I started questioning some of the things again. Once more, seeds of doubt fell onto the fertile grounds of my heart and being. It was no sooner than that I found myself abandoning all forms of religious discussions, teachings, doctrines and stopped attending any church. I lost sight of truth and light and became just a being wandering aimlessly through life.

What then happened was my interest in religion, doctrine, teaching, history and archaeology that thrusted me back into religious discussions and debates. The more I started to defend what I believed to be true Christian teachings, the more I began questioning and being drawn back to the LDS Faith to examine the teachings. A fresh pair of eyes and I started seeing bits and pieces starting to fall into place.

The only thing I have to battle and combat is the pride that I have to swallow, become humble enough and repentent to do what needs to be done to make the progressive return back into the LDS Faith.

Tags: Repentence Apostasy Biblical Studies Search For Truth