Comments about ‘Evangelical preaches at Salt Lake Tabernacle’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Nov. 15 2004 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
To wow and others

I'm a member of the church. I served a mission. My family has been in the church since the 1830s. I have # children, all active in the church.

Please don't quote Orson Hyde, Orson Pratt, Hugh Nibley, or anyone else to tell me what I believe. They were all as human as I and also prone to error and speculation.

Let me fill you in on a little secret. Most members of the church don't even know who Hugh Nibley is. They also don't know who the two Orsons are and it doesn't matter, since they are not Jesus and do not need to believe in any of these three individuals in order to be saved.


It's nice to be nice.


Can someone tell me where in the Bible it tells of baptizing babies and what passages tell about Jesus laying down his resurrected body to become a spirit being again? We read prophecies of His coming, His Birth, His life, His death, His resurection, His ascension, and His second coming. But where is His body buried and when did hHe give die again. Wouldn't that (made up) event be important enough to include in the Bible?

2 cents and more

I read this when it happened a few years ago. I enjoyed reading it then, and am now enjoying forwarding it to every huckalemming who is voting for Huckabee only because he's a Southern Baptist preacher, and thinks LDS are evil cult members. If anyone knows folks in Iowa, forward this to them, and ask them to keep forwarding it on.

wow how we have changed

to wow and others. You write off these men OP, OH, and Nibley as if they have done nothing for the Church. O. Hyde traveled 18 month Israel at the request of Joseph Smith to dedicate the land of Israel for the return of the Jews. He did it without purse or scrip. He was pennyless when he started and pennyless when he came back but the Lord provided for him. Orson Pratt spent his whole life defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hugh Nibley has also spent his life defending the prophet Josep Smith. Yet you pass them off as nothing in your mind. I can not wait until you get to have a talk with each of them and compare what you have done for the Gospel compared to them. good luck with that. what offends me so much with people of your opinion, is you do not realize what these men had to do to get the Church in the position where it now is. what have you done? I reveir these men. I am grateful that they were there when they were needed. they left on missions when ever God called.


The comment about baptizing babies comes from the Catholic Doctrine of "Original Sin" and I was baptized as a baby at birth Lutheran. However the scriptures does talk about an age of accountability, which the LDS Church and the Church of Christ both believe in, having knowledge to know what the covenant of baptism is and being accountable for one's own sins and not Adams's sins. The Age of accountability is not made up by Joseph Smith; it's talked about in the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament.


About Jesus having three wives: Jesus being over the age of 30, may have had one wife, but not three wives. The New Testament writers of the events during Christs days, do not state or indicate his marriage, however some speculate he was married. It was Jewish Custom for men over 30 to be married, I suppose he did practice that custom after all he was born a Jew from the House of David.


During Moses' time, or Abraham's, or all of the old prophets who have lived, not everything they said became record. Only actual revelation would be recorded since it was hard and time consuming to make their records. Fast forward to modern times where it is not hard to record what people say. Almost everything that has come out of our leaders' mouths since the 1800s has been recorded, whether it was just their "personal opinions" or true LDS doctrine. Everything has been recorded and you can find it all in the abundance of books floating out there. There are many ideas that are "speculated" about, but the church will never put out a doctrine that is pure "speculation".

Objective free thought

20 'some odd' years ago, I became inactive in the church. Coming from a strong LDS family, my family was disappointed, but always supportive of my decision. As I have gotten older, I have been focused on finding truth in my life...why am I here? Where did I come from?...and Where am I going? While I have great respect for all faiths, the LDS church is the only way, in my opinion that you can find these answers (with all due respect). I am not blogging here with an agenda, because I am still inactive, but I pray and seek spiritual guidance everyday, by the way all of us have that option available to us. As a fairly educated man I recently started to write a book, with all of the internet access and information available, it is still quite a challenge for me...and I am drawn to a simple fact...how did a fairly uneducated young man write (if as the naysayers say he did)quite possibly the most complicated book of history of all time. The answer read the B of M seek out the truth and pray!

Billy Bob

Thanks " nice" I agree...It IS nice to be nice


I would agree that we can't take every word spoken by LDS leadership as doctrine. It's sometimes very difficult to keep in mind that these are men just like me with biases and products of their generation. Although they will receive revelation/doctrine, they mostly speak of their own accord taking advantage of their free agency. Sure it would be incredible if these men were infallible and only acted as a mouth piece for God, but that would be too easy and would require no faith.

Thank You

Re: To Thomas
You are right in saying that Jesus was not ever married. Or at least it would be very very unlikely.
Men married later in the middle east during and before the life of Christ. About 40 years old is the typical age for marriage of a male. There are several sources for this from literature of the era. (Bible, On Man in The Universe, and others less known.) There can be exceptions to this'rule', for which Jesus doesn't seem to qualify.
Also, people married relatives, in those days. There is no defined family relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
If some of you have been taught to believe Jesus Christ was married by well meaning Institute or Seminary teachers, you have been mistaught.(sorry)
It is difficult to go into depth about a subject like this in so short a space, but Jesus being a single man during his life time is indeed very very logical.
So can you tell me how to get started on studying the ministry of Thomas in India, or anything more about this please (if you are still out there!)

Errors don't help

To Laguna:
You are not the only one to keep repeating the mistaken idea that Galileo was imprisoned, threatened, etc because he said the earth wasn't the center of the universe. Neither did anyone believe the earth was flat when Columbus crossed the ocean. Hermetic /Platonic philosophy was freely taught in Italian universities previous to these men and no one went to prison!
The argument between the Catholic Church and Galileo was not a science vs religion argument, bur a religion vs religion argument.
Would anyone like to know what really happened?
I don't know if this will get printed because it is a little off topic, but the other ones did, so I am giving it a try.


To Errors,
If you are of the OPINION that the Catholic church didnt punish scholars and scientists who correctly argued against the churchs errroneous doctrines, then you have attempted to rewrite history.

Steve - Re: Thank You 1/3 @11:26

You do realize that today or at anytime in history, just because many or the majority tend to do something doesn't mean everyone does it too. So I'm sorry... unless you are secretly hiding a time machine you used to go back and see how it really was, you can't state as fact that Jesus was NOT married. He might have been or He might not, nobody today knows for certain.


final ...

, and Elder Orson Pratt himself sanctioned the repudiation. (B. H. Roberts, Defense of the Faith and the Saints, Vol.2, p.294)

The official 1865 repudiation is found here: Messages of the First Presidency, Vol.2, p.238 - p.239

I find it interesting that the Church repudiated this source in 1865, then again in 1907 (Roberts) and now I need to again in 2008 after another century.

Another argument that should not be ignored is that Psalms 45:9 may have been referring to Christ only symbolically. These wives may refer to churches while the Queen refers to The Church. This is the position that most modern scholars will take if they are embarrassed by the thought that God might be a polygamist like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments