Church Constitution Sample

"... No more Bible." (Part 2) by Hugh Nibley *

Aggiornamento: Churches losing ground.

Aggiomamento is a favorite word of Pope Paul VI can be interpreted as "renewal." A new conception of the Church, and especially their spiritual gifts, running hand in hand with a new concept of scripture, which in turn opens wide the doors to a whole new approach with regard to Mormonism and the Book of Mormon. What that has enabled such strange circumstances? Has been the discovery of ancient records, forgotten by men for a long time, but coming out to light "from [the miraculous discovery made in the hill] Cumorah" in recent years and especially in our own generation to make the story of Cumorah is considered less and less fantastic and also increasingly likely to Over the years and the accumulation of evidence. The irresistible force of ancient voices speaking again from the dust from the Hill Cumorah, and especially from Qumran, is currently leading the entire Christian world through strange patterns. "Nobody can deny," writes a Methodist scholar with strong Catholic tendencies, "that something extraordinary is happening in the formerly 'immutable' Catholic Church Romana. "Nothing can give more indication that it is neither more nor less than a totally radical renewal of doctrines and ordinances. Food and disclosure, terms neglected for decades, have become the main slogans of a" renewed "Christianity, both Catholic and Protestant.

What could be responsible for such amazing revolution? Two scholars, one Protestant and one Catholic, co-authored a new book on Liturgical Movement, have shown that the initial impetus and continuous pressure behind this movement was the progressive discovery of unsuspected old documents make their way to new and strange perspectives of an early church more completely and radically different than conventional Christianity have imagined.

RP Marshall, Protestant minister, his writing begins by noting that Protestants have been guilty of a systematic rejection of rites and ordinances, in effect, "only in recent years the ministry of worship has begun to be seriously considered by Protestants as the promising field of study. " Moreover, the Catholic writer MJ Taylor said that the rites of the Church have long become quite useless for the people: "Men seem unable to respect the simplicity of his original nature. They want to add what tradition has given, "such additions are" made to offer the feel of a show ... In the liturgy which celebrated bishops and popes, the songs went on to become almost symphonic ... The people, unable to participate in the music stand established for these rites, reluctantly gave up her title role in decline for the choir. " That is, both Catholic and Protestant authorities allowed open and frankly, that their churches today are very far from possessing and officiate the original rites of the Church, the return of which the so-called liturgical movement has self-imposed as a primary goal through "a practical effort .. . to renew the lives of all the faithful here and now through the exercise of a revitalized liturgy. " And this is precisely where the voices that speak from the dust to be felt, since the movement started from these liturgical and patristic studies that revealed the true nature of the liturgy in the earliest documents available.

Dom Gueranger (1805-1875) of the monastery of Solesmes began the movement, but although he "thought it was necessary to return to the past ... did not have the historical documents" needed to take, retrospectively speaking, far enough. Therefore, "returned renewal, chronologically speaking, to the time when the Roman liturgy was not the best in itself."

The most important progress was achieved on the subject in Germany at the monastery of Maria Laach, where they are "made an unquantifiable contribution the liturgical movement in relation to liturgical studies "and" ... produced ample justification for reform .... "In short, the coming forth of old documents or historical studies (doctrinal, liturgical and pastoral) left absolutely clear that our current liturgy was not the most appropriate, "no one would have suspected such documents even on the need to" return to the old ways, ... a return to tradition to compensate for the shortcomings of the present. "One need similar is currently perceived by many Protestants and also for them, "the liturgical movement has sought the help of history and theology in the study of the rites ... Catholic and Protestants, "Marshall concludes that" to retrieve what has been lost and useless waste valuable time throwing accusations insulting the other "

As we all know, the world was extremely offended by the assertion expressed by the Latter-day Saints in the sense that Christians had lost many of the ancient rites and ordinances and was shocked and entertained with your concern about the rites and ordinances considered essential for salvation.

the Christian world now admits heavy losses and aims to fill the gap we look back to the writings for so long forgotten, of which the most ancient and important has literally emerged from the dust in our own time. This amazing things can turn shined with the declarations, so characteristically frank and profound, of Pope Paul VI. "Now everything is new, surprising, changed," he writes in relation to the liturgy, "even the ringing of bells in Sanctus has been shelved." All new and changed! It is indeed surprising; but there is a reason for that: "We are concerned," the pope wrote in his first encyclical, "by restoring to the Church that ideal of perfection and beauty to match your original image ... [and we] desire to renew the structure of the Church altogether. "

When Mormons have spoken about a restoration of the gospel, Christian sectarianism immediately took the offensive and challenged the act in a threatening tone "restoration? What ever lost something? " But we now need is neither more nor less than the Pope of Rome, who stated that must be a restoration involving "the structure of the entire Church!" Paul VI speaks of "the great spiritual renewal that the Second Vatican Council hopes to promote" and emphatically and vigorously defend "the heroic struggle waged and impatiently towards renewal. The battle for a correct those errors made by its members." The Church today ... is self-examination and reformulating the things that Christ, its founder, established and bequeathed to us about it ... The Church must now define its nature ... In this sense, the Church completed doctrinal work that projected the First Vatican Council enunciated. "

For anyone familiar with Catholic controversy years ago about the strong emphasis placed on large, monolithic, unchanging, universal and victorious Church, all this seems, indeed, new , surprise and changed. Is not it a bit late to try to determine what really belongs to the Church? There must be some good reason for such drastic and abrupt change of viewpoint and the reason for this not to be found far away, "new discoveries of ancient documents are confronting the world with an image of the early Church which is totally different from all previously planned but an image that the Christian world this must somehow be adjusted to fit. That's not the whole story, but as far as the liturgical movement in general is concerned, it is undoubtedly the first impulse.

Qumran's voice seems to echo in the terms that both the current pope (1967) as the Ecumenical Council, have chosen to designate the Church: "The People of God," "The New Israel" evoke the image of Israel in the desert, the small group of faithful saints who "often looked like a small flock. "" The Church has turned the corner, "writes the editor of the weekly Catholic World," currently belong to a church that has defined itself as the People of God ... We live in a time of renewed attention to charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit conferred on any person baptized with the 'right and duty' to use those gifts to build up the body of Christ. "

Eduard Meyer said not long ago that one of the unique aspects of Mormonism, and completely absent from all other religions, was the idea of \u200b\u200ba sequel of the charismatic gifts as a common heritage of all members. The "right and duty" in our quote refers to a new policy established Catholic which calls for "every member is a missionary:" We are pleased to announce that the analysis [of the draft council] constantly demand that the whole Church is missionary and also that every faithful member, as far as possible, become a missionary in spirit and in deeds. "

currently much talk, both in Catholic publications as Protestant, of revelation and inspiration - Do we need to remind the reader that at first believed that continuing revelation was the most harmful and dangerous of Mormonism? Latourelle father mentioned that the Second Vatican Council is the first time in history, a Church council that methodically considered the basics of revelation, tradition and inspiration. And now we are told that "when the Roman Pontiff or the body of Archbishop together define a proposition, they do so in communion with the revelation," so that "everything is related and complies with this principle of revelation." Inevitably, we are told, is co-extensive with the deposit of divine revelation, "ie, the words of the Bible "exposed with the help of the Holy Spirit." The cornerstone of ecclesiastical authority is now the revelation and the Holy Spirit. But it was not always so. What will be the fate of the scholastic philosophy, the largest and most remarkable achievement of the Catholic Church, which until now had been officially designated as the proper key for disclosure, ie, for correct exposure of the scriptures? The revelation itself is now considered something more than the word of God recorded in the Bible, official statements must now somehow be considered as "related to the disclosure." Currently the scholarship is outdated and indirectly the revelation is taking place cautiously. Even the pope said his predecessor Pius XII, open, but carefully, like a prophet, one who spoke "in a solemn tone as a prophet of God and father of the World."

The synergistic role played by new discoveries documentary that tip the scales in favor of change is evident so strange considering a number of papal statements: "The Pope acknowledged that exploration, methodologies , excavations, documents, inscriptions, papyri, manuscripts and all sorts of evidence of nature recently, have completely changed the problems of biblical exegesis in the last fifty years "and struggle for a comprehensive search of the original texts as well as the development of a new scientific method of Catholic exegesis. Noting that" even as lustres Bible commentators like St. Jerome often had relatively little success in explaining the doctrinal issues more difficult "writing, the Pope proposes some" general guidelines for the exegete , "requiring" appropriate use of new techniques exegetical particularly those who are inclined to consider the historical method as a whole ... counting on the help of textual criticism, literary criticism and linguistic knowledge, "as if this were not enough, the pope emphasized the importance of" providing ears to the product of recent research findings "and allow" the Catholic exegete can and should be free to exercise their own insight and intelligence. Only in this way each person ... contribute substantially to the continued progress of sacred doctrine. "

Although this apparent freedom of investigation is currently under the strict supervision of the "living magisterium of the Church and" subject to the authority and jurisdiction of the Ordinary, "are the scholars and their" excavations, texts, inscriptions, "and so on., who provide the information necessary to decide which teachings and rites of the Church should be considered authentic.

Amazingly analyze how many of the changes taking place in the doctrines and ordinances Catholic and Protestant point in the direction of the same things that always accumulated in the past persecution and mockery on the head of every Latter Days. This can be illustrated clearly by looking at the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church issued by the Second Vatican Council on November 25, 1965. The first section is entitled "The plan of the Father" and speaks of the Gospel in terms of a plan seremonta the pre-existence. The second chapter is entitled "The People of God" and in the section entitled "A Chosen People" confronts us with this new image of the Church, so strikingly different from what had been diligently cultivated since the time of the Fathers the fourth century AD as we show "the new Israel traveling through the world, ... to move forward through trials and temptations."

The next section is entitled "A People of Priests," and teaches that "the common priesthood of the faithful" is "in a particular and distinctive way participation in the one priesthood of Christ. " The next announced that through the sacraments (ordinances) all must be "reborn as children of God." Next we read that "the Holy People of God and shares the prophetic mission in Christ to engage as living witnesses to Him "This leads (in the next section) to the gifts of the spirit, which should be widely enjoyed in the Church. The section calls attention to the effect that all should be missionaries.

Chapter VII holds a title that would have shocked any historian of the Church some years ago, when the Church and eschatology were diametrically opposed elements: "the eschatological character of the Church Traveling and Meeting with the Church in heaven. "were the type of questions that Augustine and his contemporaries definitively put a stop, for he and his scholastic successors (who hardly receive any notice of the new order of things), the Church on earth was the same church, eschatological and heavenly. But now is a different story as we rushed to Qumran to watch a small group of "saints," despised and rejected by the world, living in the expectation of the coming of the Lord at the end of time: "The final day of the world has come between us, "this chapter begins by informing that" even the appearance of a sky and new earth where justice will reign, the Church roaming ... will wear the ephemeral appearance characteristic of this world. "

So the universal Church, strong and successful, established once and for all to stay (according to the Vatican statement above) "firm and unshakable until the end of the world," acquired "the fleeting appearance characteristic of this world!" Moreover, as support for each and every one of his dramatic claims, "the Catholicism of the Church always hopelessly inadequate."

The Christian world can not be completely ignorant of who is moving in the direction of things to be mocked and ridiculed when the voices spoke for the first time since Cumorah. Full indication of this is the observation made by one of the main and most important Catholic authorities on the subject of Dead Sea Scrolls one of the earliest and best books I have never written on the subject, in the sense that the correct title granted to the community of Qumran should be Latter-Day Saints, but that the title could not used because, unfortunately, had been preceded by "Christian sect."

While some Catholics currently support the changes to be made and done in the past in rituals, customs and administration of the Church, some others have tried for pointing to this writer that the really important part of the estate, ie the doctrine of the Church, has remained unchanged, preserved in the unchanging formulas of creeds. But this is a misunderstanding. The great councils of the Church, including all previous ecumenical councils, were called mostly to discuss and decide on matters of doctrine, but the words of the creeds have remained unchanged, the interpretation of those words has been the subject of an eternal controversy still continues. Understandably, the Catholic clergy in areas where it can be done, assume the position of Bousset in the sense that the Church has never changed its basic doctrines, but as Owen Chadwick has shown, the largest and most far-reaching changes in the Church, both ancient and modern times have been doctrinal in nature.

* of work "The Book of Mormon in the Modern World "

Maybelline Dream Matt Mouse Colour Chart

"... No more Bible." (Part 1) by Hugh Nibley *

Impossible Holding on : The Classic Objections Against the Book of Mormon.

The first line of defense against Book of Mormon, a barricade ready even before I left the press, was the charge that since the Bible is absolute, infallible, perfect and definitive Word of God, qualify any other text as Holy Scripture could not be to rise to the height of blasphemy. However it was easy, both for Orson Pratt as for some others, "clearly show this popular, even fatal error, invented by the priesthood in the early days of apostasy and inherited by subsequent generations. We need not repeat here the published evidence by commentators of the Holy Word have always thought the appearance of the word of God to men as a matter of indefinite duration in which God is free to speak whenever it so decides, no matter how reluctantly the men are willing to grant the privilege, since the proposition is readily accepted by Christian scholars today.

second offense mortal Book of Mormon was the admission in the introduction to this record, translated "by the gift of God," could possibly contain errors. Errors? In a book revealed by God's power? Another concept blasphemous. Even today, Bible scholars accept this assertion as easily as made with the first and work tirelessly day and night to appear on the hands with a Bible text more correct than any hitherto available. The idea that a book could contain many things that are God's true and while many things are wrong and men was one that Catholics and Protestants alike found perfectly unthinkable in the days of Joseph Smith, although Most biblical scholars accept it today. And if the possibility of human error is given why the idea of \u200b\u200brevised edition of the Book of Mormon should be offensive? Revised and improved editions of the Bible constantly emerging from the press and on the other hand, Mormons have never believed in a book or something infallible infallible in what the man has placed his hand. Fallible God allows humans to be partners with him en route to a distant, distant perfection, but is aware that many errors will be committed during the journey.

Why, then, critics have been shocked and delighted to discover that the second revised edition of the Book of Mormon had more errors than the first? For years this writer used the first edition only in their classes and remains by far the best of them. It is full of mistakes, but are obvious errors. According to Gilbert JH printing, Joseph Smith asked that the grammar intact, as "the Old Testament is not of grammar." As we shall see later, recent studies on the Old Testament prophets often show mixed persons, numbers and tenses

In an impassioned speech, just as it does in the pages Abinadi 182 and 183 of the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Moreover, the prophet Gilbert gave complete freedom in terms of punctuation and spelling: "The Manuscript" The printer says, "was a paragraph run from beginning to end without punctuation." Imagine that six hundred pages! How can this be explained otherwise than by the assumption that the text was in fact dictated word for word from one man to another? It was a trick or joke, because no one except the printer was mentioned and who was authorized to correct the manuscript in the parts where deemed necessary. The manuscript used by the printer is now available to us, showing that Mr. Gilbert took some liberties with the text. Are we willing to believe that Joseph Smith is responsible when we read on page 69 of the first edition five lines down, "because my soul delights in the records" while only two lines before reads "Behold, my soul will delight in the scriptures? Since the printer himself admits that he was authorized to correct spelling is not guilty for putting five lines before the end of page 180: "I Lamoni Diji" and the bottom line "Now when Lamoni had said it."? (H 20: 11, 13) Is Or who we responsible for the word "gemte" present on page 127, since the word was spelled properly hundreds of times? If the printer was working on the spell check work by Oliver Cowdery had to correct these errors, otherwise the same Oliver Cowdery had obviously made a slip and any editor would have full freedom to edit such nonsense and not only that, it would have to. Whether you choose the printer to add or remove a dash or a comma, the issue of proper use of punctuation is a responsibility that concerns solely to him. "There was a printing error," wrote Joseph Smith and yet many people, in a dramatic gesture, still twitching and wringing her hands in horror, as if there were errors of this nature can be found in almost any edition of the Bible.

An occasional printing error in the Bible does not disturb anybody, so it is feasible to its existence and the ease of correction. Changes in the words used to clarify the language also cause offense. "A-going" and "a-journey" (these terms on page 249 of the first edition of the Book of Mormon) were quite common use for the time and place where Joseph Smith lived, but now have fallen into obsolete: therefore have been replaced in subsequent editions to avoid confusing the younger generation, although in the opinion of this writer "A-going" and a "journey" have a nice tone, musicality and my grandmother always spoke well. The Bible in English many words are written in italics (italics); are words that were not present in the original text and vary year after year: They have been placed there by the translators in an attempt to communicate as clearly as possible what they believe and assume that ideas were the original writers had in mind. So now in the same second verse of Genesis in the King James Version of the Bible contains the word "was" written in cursive or italic -Because in the Hebrew text the word "was" simply did not exist, but more appropriately rounded idea has been placed there. If men can take such liberties with the Bible and at the same time regarded as an infallible book Why should we not allow the same freedoms to the Book of Mormon, which has not been argued to be infallible?

Looking at the long list of changes made in several editions of the Book of Mormon will find that in any case not the least of them at all alter the meaning of a passage . True, we admit that in two Joseph Smith sometimes added a few words in the second issue: should be written in italics to indicate that its presence in the text reflects just how necessary help to explain more clearly, not to change. In the first edition, referred to Mary as "Mother of God in the flesh" (1 Ne. 11:18), the posterior insertion of the phrase "the Son of God" simply aims to make clear that Regarding the second member of the Trinity, as during the theological controversies made in the Middle Ages, the term "Mother of God" had a special connotation connotation that is still valid for many Christians.

three verses later (1 Ne. 11:21), we find the statement of the angels, "Behold the Lamb of God, yea, the Eternal Father!" has been increased in later editions to "the Son of the Eternal Father" to avoid confusion: In this verse the Eternal Father is possibly connected not to the word "lamb," but the term "God" "He is the lamb of God the Eternal Father . However, since this would not be obvious to many readers, so as to avoid confusion and preserve the original meaning of the text, the phrase "the lamb of God" is made equivalent to the phrase "the son of the Eternal Father." Both ideas are absolutely correct and there is no conflict between them. Likewise, in the second edition adds the phrase "waters of baptism o. .." the statement "waters of Judah" in the first edition (1 Ne. 20:1) by way of clarification, never change-it that the writer had in mind.

Sometimes reviewers later editions of the Book of Mormon have made some "corrections" that would have been better not have touched. It is then that a dedicated editor, in an attempt to visualize and streamline a practical ventilation system for ships Jaredites, miss a good number of words displayed significant nature in the first edition, which, if carefully analyzed, it appears to offer a much better explanation for the "air conditioning" of ships that can be gleaned from the information presented in Ether 2:17 -20 of our contemporary issues. On the other hand, was indispensably necessary to change the name of Benjamin (first edition) by Mosiah in subsequent editions of Ether 4:1? Probably not, because although it is true that Mosiah was the custodian of the records in question, it is nonetheless true that his father, Benjamin, had not had at least something to do with conservation. It was Benjamin who showed zeal and total devotion for the study and preservation of the records, after ceding the throne of the kingdom to his son Mosiah, it could have continued to live long enough to spend many days immersed in the sea of \u200b\u200bknowledge provided for their loved anal. And certainly among this impressive collection of records and registers were Jaredites, who were taken to Zarahemla in the early reign of Mosiah; time when his father insisted, could still have been alive (Mosiah 8:9 -15).

The first edition of the Book of Mormon, despite being the more intelligible, it is established as the current standard. This is because it presents difficulties in management due to its consistent format and lacking in long chapters of the structure divided into numbered verses and grammatical syntax that can often seem disturbing. Disturbing, maybe, but never misleading, that's the point. Much of the material of the New Testament is written in Greek rustic ancient pagans often mocked at the illiteracy and bad grammar of the disciples, but in our Bible grammar is meticulous, scrupulously neat and correct. "That fact poses serious and despicable evidence of tampering? No, at least not more than the low ability in the handling of the grammar of the ancient Apostles was brandished as proof that men were short of divine inspiration. Anyway, the poor grammar of Joseph Smith is useful to demonstrate, as in the case of the Apostles, inspired words of the prophets have never been a product of the academic or invention secretive and exclusive property of men working and resourceful.

The Book of Mormon claims to have been written in "plain language": its meaning is always clear. Near the end of his life, Joseph Smith proclaimed it the most correct book on earth. "The more correct in what sense? The text of Tom Sawyer is much better absorbed than the Bible, but the above should be inferred that Tom Sawyer is a book more "correct"? What is meant by the book "correct"? "One with its banks distributed appropriately, properly bound, with a useful and accurate index page? Of course not, this is just a wealth of simple technical details, as might also the punctuation, spelling and even grammar-those aspects that critics of the Book of Mormon have embraced together. Probably a book Science can only really be correct in the sense of conveying perfectly accurate: here is precisely where we must recall the warning of Karl Popper: "Any claim of a scientific nature must remain provisional forever." So a weighted scientific statement today as not necessarily be correct tomorrow. The most correct book in the world is one in which they arrive to find the least amount of incorrect claims after having compared and reviewed all the books in the world. Of course nobody can know what this book could be, unless you know it by revelation. However, a statement on the Book of Mormon calls made by his translator to do a more thorough review on the subject. Examination they try to contribute.

Trying to shore up the weak argument of the uniqueness of the Bible, opponents of the Book of Mormon have always depended heavily on the creation of strong invective against the character and personality of Joseph Smith . The commonly accepted procedure has always been argued that because Joseph Smith was a scoundrel, the Book of Mormon must necessarily be a fraud, while his rascality test rests squarely on the alleged fact he produced the Book of Mormon.

and now we can not see the matter looked at from the vantage point of both friends and enemies of Joseph Smith, who despite the antagonism in which the situation has settled, coincide to swear to have known personally and intimately. We can, indeed, considering the reputation of the witnesses as they try to do in the work Myth Makers, but everything about the character of Joseph Smith has been reduced to a matter of an academic nature. Moreover, we now have to submit certain advantages to test the Book of Mormon that were denied to previous generations. The whole discussion has moved completely to a radically different scenario, although critics of the Book of Mormon are still desperately determined to keep the old. How things have changed drastically can shined when comparing the position taken by the clergy for a hundred years they have taken on the same subject today. At that time argued that the Book of Mormon could not be true because their existence refuted most of the dogmas of the Christian faith. Currently, these dogmas in particular are being reviewed every time the church began to teach them things that, when the Mormons came, I took offense.

Let's look at a public debate who built a summer crowd present at the ceremony held in Boulogne-sur-Mer in the hot month of July 1850. Ministers from three prominent names were sent to Elder John Taylor and his three companions, who were working on the Missionary Work, "a respectful public challenge to gather around an open public debate," in trying to show that (1 ) Joseph Smith was "a profane and vulgar impostor," (2) that the Book of Mormon was "a meaningless drivel "and (3) that the alleged divine calling themselves elders was a perfect fraud. Another three ministers served as judges. The prosecution based its argument on the writings of the Rev. Henry Caswall, Professor John Turner C. Bennett. This Elder Taylor gave a peculiar advantage, because not only had deep intimacy with Joseph Smith, but had also personally met both Caswall as Bennett, while their opponents never even had seen them.

"With regard to Mr. Caswall," said Elder Taylor, "was present in Nauvoo when he visited. Reached in order to find the bad ... I saw Mr. Caswall in the printing office of Nauvoo. "Here comes interesting to examine the history of Caswall few years ago we had been unable to find an eyewitness to the visit, but here we have one. We even have a report from the famous episode Psalter. "I had an ancient manuscript and stated to be anxious to know what it was. I looked at him and told him I thought he was a Greek manuscript. In his book, Caswall states that it was a manuscript written in Greek psalter, but none of the Mormons present said it was. The above mentioned is a lie, because I told him. "Significantly, in a later version of his story, published some time after this discussion, Caswall changed his story and mentioned to Joseph Smith, who in his first version says that said, "That's not Greek," and now says he said "some of it is Greek." In our study show that indeed there was something highly suspicious in relation to the version of Caswall on "Episode psalter" in which a trap detectábamos more than obvious to lure Joseph Smith, a trap that never worked, although the Rev. Caswall developed cunning and vigorous efforts to prove that this fue.9 And now we have an interesting confirmation of our theory of deception.

was the third night of the great discussion. The ministers, who had bet to win by Caswall testimony, that night they brought a manuscript to test knowledge of Greek by Elder Taylor. That was irrelevant, of course, since the claim of Elder Taylor was not in the sense of having shown that the manuscript was held Caswall of Greek origin or that their identification was correct, but only in the sense that he had said I thought it was Greek. However, the ministers laid before the elder Taylor three statements written in strange characters and asked if he could tell which of the three was written in Greek:

Elder Taylor. "This is, I think (pointing to the first statement).

Mr. Cleeve . "There's not a Greek letter here, is a verse written in Japanese (laughter and confusion)

Elder Taylor. "That certainly looks like Greek.

Mr. Groves [another minister, other than the three that make up the prosecution] "I really think it's much more like the Hebrew ...

A gentleman present. "Let me see. I am a graduate of Oxford and declared that Greek characters and here is that anyone who is unfamiliar with the language can easily be confused with the Greek (screams: "this is a hoax! Is shameful," and further confusion) .. .

A second gentleman. "is written by imitating the Greek and was evidently made expressly with the intent to deceive.

Mr. Cleeve. "There is a single letter in the Greek here.

First Knight. -declare that they do exist, sir, and I can not be contradicted. (Confusion)

In such desperate measures resorted to by men of the clergy in an effort to discredit the Book of Mormon. Here we have a sufficiently clear demonstration of the kind of things that can Caswall. If the discussion did not lead to anything else, at least made clear the positions taken by both sides. The contrasting views were summarized by Elder Taylor:

Do apostles? No. The idea seems ridiculous. Do prophets? No. They tell you that there is no more prophecy. Do pastors, evangelists and teachers, ie men divinely inspired?. They do not believe in the inspiration of the spirit and say that the source of this inspiration has ceased. Do they speak in tongues? No. You have already heard the way it ridicules the fact [for discussion]. Do they have among them prophets prophesy? No. They call this hallucination. If anyone is sick "" Send for the elders of the Church pray for them and anoint with oil in the name of the Lord, "as James says? No.

In their discussions, ministers did nothing but confirm all of these items, even with the judges arbitrarily on their part. But what be their positions on these issues today? Undecided, although they may hold them despite the passage of time.

* of work "Since Cumorah: The Book of Mormon in the Modern World"

Camcorder Hd Under $400

"The Spirit bears witness".

BY ELDER BOYD K. PACKER

The Council of the Twelve.

was exactly a year ago, in a solemn assembly, who had the privilege to raise our hands to sustain the authority of the Church in the same way as we did this morning. It was on that April morning I heard my name being submitted for your support as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Fell upon me an obligation to stay with the other men who had been called as special witnesses of Jesus Christ on earth.

Perhaps you have wondered, as I have done, why should this come to me call me. At times it seemed accidental thing to keep receiving aid worth, but always prevailed in me a constant feeling, quiet, that was guided and prepared.

This morning was our privilege to raise our hands to hold the President of the Church. I regard that as a great privilege and a special obligation because I have a testimony about it.

few weeks before the meeting made in the month of April, I left the office on a Friday afternoon thinking about the assignment was for the conference this weekend. I waited for the elevator go down the fifth floor, the doors slowly opened it, saw that there was President Joseph Fielding Smith. For a moment I was surprised to see him, because his office is one floor below.

Seeing him under the doorway, I was in a powerful testimony that is the Prophet of God. That sweet voice of the Spirit is like the light that has something to do with pure intelligence, I said that this was the Prophet of God.

is not necessary try to define this experience to Latter-day Saints, that kind of testimony is property of this Church. It is not something reserved for those who occupy high positions, is a testament not only available but is vital for each member. And as it is with the President, so it is with his advisers.

North of where we are, in the Wasatch Range, there are three great mountains. The poet would describe as a powerful stone pyramids. The center, the highest of the three, the map identified as Willard Peak, but the pioneers called it "The Presidency." If someday you will come to pass Willard, look eastward and high, very high, is "The Chair."

Thank God for the presidency. As these peaks, only the heavens are above them. They need our vote of support, sometimes there alone in those lofty appeals to address, as they are not to please man but to God. God bless these three great men and good.

Occasionally, during the past year, I asked a question. In general, it seems a curious question, almost vain about the qualities needed to be a witness for Christ. The question they ask is: "Have you seen him?"

This is a question I've never made anyone. I have not made my brethren in the Quorum, thinking it would be so sacred and personal that a person should have some special inspiration, truly some authority, even to do it.

There are some things too sacred to be discussed. We know this with respect to the temples. In these sacred ordinances are performed, it has sacred experiences, and yet, because of the nature of them do not discuss them outside these walls. Not that they are secret, but sacred and must not be discussed, but preserve, protect and regarded with the deepest reverence.

I have come to know what the prophet Alma wanted to say: "... A lot of people is to know the mysteries of God, but they are under a strict command not to teach but according to that portion of his word that he gives the children of men and in accordance with the care and diligence that you quit. "Therefore, he who hardens his heart receives the smallest portion of the word, and not harden their hearts, most of it, until it is given to know the mysteries of God to the degree to understand completely "(Alma 12:9-12).

Some people hear the testimonies of those who occupy high positions in the Church, as well as members in the wards and branches, all using same words: "I know that God lives, I know that Jesus is the Christ," and ask the question, "Why can not be said in plain words? Why do not more explicit and descriptive? Can not the apostles say more? "

the same way that the sacred temple experience, it becomes our personal testimony. It is sacred, and when we got used to put into words, what we say in the same way, all using the same words. The apostles declared in the same phrases that small Primary or youth Sunday School. "I know that God lives, and I know that Jesus is the Christ."

would do well not to disregard the testimony of the prophets or the children, because "he communicates his word to men by angels, yea, not only men but also women. And this not all, many times they are given words to the children that confuse the wise and educated "(Alma 32:23).

Some people expect that the testimony is given in a new, dramatic and different. Express testimony is similar to a declaration of love. Since the beginning of time, the Romantic poets and loving couples have sought ways more impressive to say, sing or write.

have used all the adjectives, superlatives and all forms of poetic expression. And after all is said and done, the most powerful statement is the simple choice of two words.

For anyone seeking honest, the testimony given in these simple sentences is sufficient, since it is the Spirit who bears witness, not words.

There is a power of communication as real and tangible as electricity. Man has invented the means of sending pictures through the air and sounds that are captured by an antenna and thus to play, hear and see. This other type of communication can be compared this, except it is a million times more powerful, and the testimony offered is always the truth.

There is a method which can emanate pure intelligence, by which we can have security without hesitation at all.

I said I had a question that can not be taken lightly and answered without the inspiration of the Spirit. I have not asked that question to others, but I heard the answer, but not when asked. She has been answered under the inspiration of the Spirit, holy occasions when "the Spirit bears witness" (D & C 1:39).

I heard one of my brothers declare: "I know from experience, too sacred to tell them that Jesus is the Christ." I've heard others testify, "I know that God lives, I know that the Lord lives. And more than that, I know the Lord."

was not his words that locked the meaning and power, was the Spirit. "... Because when you talk about the power of the Holy Spirit, the power of the Holy Spirit into the heart of the sons of men" (2 Nephi 33:1).

speak with humility on this subject, with the constant feeling that I am the least in every aspect of those who are called to this sacred place.

I have come to know that the testimony can not be acquired by signs, sold through fasting and prayer, through the activity, testing and obedience is achieved by holding the servants of the Lord and follow them.

Karl G. Maeser (l) leading a group of missionaries across the Alps. Upon reaching the summit, stopped. Pointing to the trail left with sticks stuck in the snow to mark the way through the ice, said: "Brethren, behold the priesthood. They are just common sticks like the rest of us ... but since they have the becomes that they mean to us. If we depart from the path that mark, we are lost. "'

The testimony depends on the support of the servants of the Lord as we have done here by a signal, and as we do with our actions.

now with you I wonder why someone like me has been called the Holy Apostolate. I lack many qualities, so much what I need in my effort to serve. As you ponder this, I have only one simple conclusion, a quality which can be a cause, so I have that testimony.

I declare that I know that Jesus is the Christ, I know who lives, born in the meridian of time, taught the Gospel, was tried and crucified. Rose on the third day was the first fruits of resurrection. Has a body of flesh and bones. Of this I testify. El am a witness. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.