Stand on the Rock of Revelation Part 10

Is it one-to-one for teams is a valuable resource for anyone wanting a simplified view of the Mormon religion from a Christian perspective. Mormonism 101 for teens is available at the Utah lighthouse bookstore in Salt Lake City or MRM.org .1 feminism examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective view .1 Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect. And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism are too many Latter Day Saints slogging through the swamp of secondary questions, talking to this additional viewpoint on Mormonism. I'm your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry and with me today is Eric Johnson.

My colleague at MRM today we wrap up our look at an article in the October 2020 edition of inside magazine titled stand on the rock of revelation. It was originally a talk that was given by Elder Lawrence Secor bridge is an emeritus member of the 70 it was a devotional address, titled stand forever and deliver to BYU on January 22, 2019 is addressing a lot of the doubts that many Latter Day Saints have regarding their faith and Mr. Cora bridge cautions those who are reading this article to only focus on what he calls primary questions and to leave the secondary questions basically alone because if you answer the primary questions the secondary questions will be answered as well.

I think we have to understand that were in an age of secondary questions for the Latter Day Saints because if you go back 30 years ago they were not able to ask the secondary questions very well because the information is very limited on how you would find it. But today we have the Internet and so I think the reason they ever came out with the gospel topics essays from 2013 to 15. The LDS church wanted to deal with some of these things about what I actually did a pretty good job and we've said that before having the ability to look on the Internet and have nobody looking over your shoulder to look at the information, such as MRM.org we have a website full of information that would be very troubling and I suppose would bring a lot of gloom to Latter Day Saints who are unsure about its history and Mr. Corbett says that that gloom is the product of belief bias hearing something that contradicts what you already believe. And that's what causes you the gloomy and disturbing thought, well, he says that some who were afraid that the church may not be true, spend their time and attention slogging through the swamp of secondary questions to make sense of this paragraph, we have to go back and remind ourselves what are the secondary questions that Mr. Cora bridge lists. He does this on page 29 where he says the secondary questions are an ending. They include questions about church history plural marriage, people of African descent in the priesthood, women in the priesthood. The translation of the book of Mormon, the pearl of great price DNA in the book of Mormon gay marriage different accounts of the first vision and on and on and as I mention he goes on to say, if you answer the primary questions. Secondary questions get answered to or they pale in significance to remind you, the primary questions.

Number one is there a God who is our father is Jesus Christ the son of God, the Savior of the world three was Joseph Smith the Prophet for is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the kingdom of God on earth.

We insist you can believe points one and two regarding is there a God our father and is there Jesus Christ the son, you can believe that without having the baggage of Joseph Smith being a prophet or false prophet in this case or the LDS church being Falls Church but when he says they mistakenly try to learn the truth by process of elimination by attempting to eliminate every doubt is that really what most Latter Day Saints are really trying to do to eliminate every doubt mean all of us who have faith in anything are going to probably have some doubts. I don't know everything about Christianity, I can't answer every question about my faith. There are some things I have to wonder about hope that I can find an answer down the road but I think the problem that we find with many Latter Day Saints that when they try to get answers to these secondary questions. It tells them. Wait a minute. If these secondary questions can't show that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God, it most certainly shows that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not a true church and what happens then will in many cases will leave the church either find a Christian church that will bolster their desire to still want to believe in God the father and Jesus Christ.

Even though perhaps they're going to get some different definitions of who they are from the Bible or they may drift often to agnosticism or atheism, which sadly happens far too many times a couple paragraphs later. This is what is written answers to the primary questions do not come by answering the secondary questions there are answers to the secondary questions, but you cannot prove a positive by disproving every negative you cannot prove the church is true by disproving every claim made against it. It is a flawed strategy. Ultimately, there has to be affirmative proof and with the things of God affirmative proof.

Finally, and surely comes by revelation through the spirit and power of the Holy Ghost you see how the Holy Ghost or the Holy Spirit gets blamed for all the errors that every Mormon believes how many times have I had Latter Day Saints tell me they believe what they believe because the Holy Ghost told them it was true when knowing the facts behind what they believe. It's not true at all and it couldn't possibly be the Holy Spirit that led them to that conclusion. Eric when he says answers to the primary questions do not come by answering the secondary questions why would say, in some cases, it most certainly does do that if you can show through church history that Joseph Smith's behavior. For instance, was not really the behavior that you would expect from a true prophet of God, such as the fact that he was marrying wives behind his wife's back, and then telling Emma his first wife that he wasn't doing any such thing. Does that sound like the behavior of a true prophet of God. Would that put a bit of a? As to whether Joseph Smith was really called of God.

I absolutely I think you're right. And when we understand that one third of just dismiss wives where teenagers as young as 14 and then another third of his wives were married to living husbands, which was never practiced anywhere in the Bible. I think that is the major reason why many women leave because they understand that the character of this man, especially in an age. Today we live in the 21st century and we say it wasn't right for this age, let alone in the 19th century. Let's look at another point that he talks about people of African descent in the priesthood. I would think it would rightly concern a Latter Day Saints when they start looking into why those of African heritage and were members of the LDS church were not allowed to hold the priesthood simply because as leaders taught there was a war in heaven than 1/3 of God spirit children in the preexistence were not loyal to God the father or Jesus and were kicked out and became the demons but then there was another third that were not as valiant as they could've been an Mormon leader said that because of their lack of valiance they were still allowed to take on the human body here on earth, which is certainly important if you're going to be exalted later on, but as a punishment they would be marked with a black skin and therefore would not be allowed to hold this necessary priesthood so vital to your exultation in the next life. When they find out what leaders were saying prior to 1978 and compare it to what leaders are saying now. There is certainly a huge contradiction, because before 1978. That was the X explanation they were giving today.

The leadership goes, we don't know why they were allowed to hold the priesthood. While they certainly seem to know before 1978 now all of a sudden you have this doctoral amnesia and you can't remember why these people were being banned from holding this necessary priesthood for much of the Mormon Church's history and when it comes to the translation of the book of Mormon.

Another point that he lists here how many Latter Day Saints new by the still small voice that Mr. Corbett says is what gives you true information. How many Latter Day Saints new by the still small voice that Joseph Smith really translated the book of Mormon using a rock in a hat. These are problematic. I mean the first vision in the book of Mormon origination and the story of the book of Mormon. We talked about last week.

Those are two cornerstone events in this church and if they're not true. Even their own leaders have said this church is not true. So all of these things that were talking about. I think go directly to the third primary question was Joseph Smith the prophet if he was a prophet, then these things that are secondary issues should be supporting his position as a prophet rather than tearing it down and so you can call it gloom. But if somebody tells you that you have something green in your teeth as you are walking through the hallway you are appreciative of the gloomy news and you can take care of that issue or if a doctor says that you have cancer. At least you have something to go on.

You want him to tell you the truth, rather than having him hide that idea and a year later, you would ask the question why didn't you tell me so I could have at least tried to combat this cancer. What when Mr. Corbett says I am not saying you should put your head in the sand.

I get the impression he sorta is saying you need to put your head in the sand. You don't want to be looking at the secondary issues because it most certainly might cause you to come to a conclusion other than what you might believe right now, so when a Latter Day Saints is all yeah check all this stuff that isn't really what Mr. Corbett is wanting you to do.

I don't get the impression from this article that Mr. Corbett Ridge is encouraging you to really go out and dig and find out these answers. He's basically saying it's not all that important. A couple of other quotes I want to give on page 31. Toward the end of the article he writes the church of Jesus Christ is grounded on the rock of revelation and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Using Jesus's words, you and I are the church.

We must be grounded on the rock of revelation, and although we may not know the answer to every question we must know the answers to the primary questions and then in the last section, he adds this. He says the Church of Jesus Christ of is the kingdom of God on the earth. I know this by my experience all of it. I know this by the evidence and the evidence is overwhelming. I know this by study and most surely I know this by the spirit and power of the Holy Ghost filled. You get the impression that he knows this more by the power of the Holy Spirit, which he claims to have and what about the evidence he doesn't really give us much to go on in the six pages of the article he doesn't. And you know at the beginning of the article he says that when he was going through as an assignment to look at some of the claims against Joseph Smith and his church. He wrote down some of his answers. I'm assuming yet he doesn't give us the answers, but let me just bring this out. He said the church of Jesus Christ is grounded on the rock revelation. The gates of hell will not prevail against it. Wait a minute you mean the church that Jesus found wasn't really the church of Jesus Christ. It wasn't grounded on the rock of revelation either because Mormons believe the gates of hell prevailed against it.

Isn't that odd that the church that Jesus himself founded and set up the apostles to keep that church going, it failed but yet Latter Day Saints assumed that theirs cannot fail, but this is what I also find fascinating. When he says you and I are the church. That's a Protestant position right that's a position that we would hold.

We believe that the church is composed of forgiven individuals. It's not an organization it's not a building. So when he says you and I are the church. How can he really say that and believe that in light of what his church has said since it began in 1830.

Thank you for listening. If you would like more information regarding his research ministry.

We encourage you to visit our website at www.mrm.org you can request a free newsletter Mormonism research.

We hope you'll join us again as we look at another viewpoint is