Why You Shouldn’t Ask God if the Book of Mormon Is True

Stand to Reason:

Would you be willing to pray and sincerely ask God if the Book of Mormon[1] is true?” I responded by saying, “No, I don’t think anyone should pray that prayer.” The reason I refused to pray it, and the reason I say everyone else should refuse, is that basing a belief on something so subjective is dangerous. In what follows, I will explain the inherent problems and dangers with this type of epistemology and demonstrate a biblical basis for testing religious truth claims.

Read more: https://www.str.org/blog/why-you-shouldnt-ask-god-if-book-mormon-true

Advertisements

Rutherford on Self-Examination

Samuel Rutherford (The Covenant of Life Opened, p. 65):

Self-searching is a reflect act upon the state (and such acts are more spirituall, then direct acts) and therefore it should be the work of all, to try, under what reign they are, whether of the first or second Adam. And whereas Angels cover their faces and their feet with wings, Isa. 6. before God and are full of eyes, as without, so also within Revel. 4:8. We may hence learn, such come nearest to the nature of these pure and heavenly Spirits, who have eyes within to see what they are, and their blacknesse of face and feet, when they compare themselves either with the Holy God, or his Holy Law. 2. The Carnall man is a beast, Psal 49:20. and beasts have no reflect acts upon their own beastly state. 3. The more of a spirituall life is in any the more stirring in communing with their own heart, the Law makes, the more of life that is in the worme when tramped on, the more stirring it makes: deadnesse and stupiditie in not being versed and well read and skilled in our selves and our own heart, argues little of the Spirit, and estrangement to a spirituall Covenant, nor can any lay hold on the Covenant of Grace in a night dream.​

If We are to be Instruments of True Revival

Robert Murray M’Cheyne, letter to William Chalmers Burns, September 1840:

I am deepened in my conviction, that if we are to be instruments in a true revival we must be purified from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit.

Oh, cry for personal holiness, constant nearness to God by the blood of the Lamb!

Bask in His beams, lie back in the arms of love, be filled with the Spirit, or all success in the ministry will only be to your own everlasting confusion.

Source: http://soundofanalarm.blogspot.com/2018/07/quotable-quote.html

A Biblical Refutation of Dispensationalism

HT: https://thegospelvideoblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/a-biblical-refutation-of-dispensationalism/

How Doth This Heighten and Elevate Humility

Hugh Binning (Treatise of Christian Love), Works, p. 549:

If he did humble himself out of charity, who was so high, how should we humble ourselves, both out of charity and necessity, who are so low! If we knew ourselves, it were no strange thing that we were humble; the evidence of truth would extort it from us. But here is the wonder, that he who knew himself to be equal to God, should notwithstanding become lower than men; that the Lord of all should become the servant of all, and the King of glory make himself of no reputation! That he pleased to come down lowest, who knew himself to be the highest of all, no necessity could persuade it, but charity and love hath done it. Now, then, how monstrous and ugly a thing must pride be after this! That the dust should raise itself, and a worm swell; that wretched, miserable man should be proud, when it pleased the glorious God to be humble; that absolute necessity shall not constrain to this, that simple love persuaded him to! How doth this heighten and elevate humility, that such an one gives out himself, not only as the teacher, but as the pattern of it. “Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls.”

Source: https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/how-doth-this-heighten-and-elevate-humility.90278/

Affirming Original Sin While Denying It

An interesting admission by Jordan Peterson from his speech to the Trilateral Commission Meeting in 2018:

And the, the case for suffering, I think, is quite obvious, because one of the things that I point out to my listeners is that life has a tragic element and we all are perfectly aware of that, and then we’re subject to that as fragile and finite creatures, and that, that tragic element is amplified by the human proclivity for malevolence, psychological level and at a social level and that’s the reality that we find ourselves confronted with…

Source: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/03/jordan-peterson-at-trilateral-commission.html

It’s interesting that on the one hand the world denies that there is such thing as original sin while on the other hand the world affirms that human beings are “bent” as C.S. Lewis would say. We have an innate “proclivity for malevolence” that cannot be overcome by more money or education or better living standards. That innate proclivity is in part what is meant by the doctrine of “original sin.” And since Christianity is the only religion that recognizes humanity’s innate “bent-ness,” Christianity is the only religion that can possibly be true.  The sooner the world recognizes that, the sooner things can be put right again. May it be sooner rather than later for all of our sakes.

Christian Euhemerism and Ancient Mythology

Steven Dilday:

Many of the oldest civilizations on earth have a Flood Story; it is not unique to the Bible. This has made its way into public education in the West, with argumentation along these lines: “Many ancient civilizations preserved a story of a Great Deluge among their myths; and, although interesting, no one takes these old stories as anything but mythology. The Hebrew people were participants in this milieu; it is not particularly surprising that they have a version of the Flood Story. But, their version is worthy of no more credit than any of the others.” All of this seems purposely contrived to undermine confidence in the Scriptures, and to weaken the faith of the godly.

However, there is an older view that is worthy of attention and consideration again. Euhemerus, a fourth century BC Macedonian mythographer, argued that the ancient myths have historical roots in real people and actual events, the accounts of which have been corrupted and/or exaggerated over time. As Christianity began to spread through the Greco-Roman world, a school of Christian Euhemerism began developing almost immediately, and continued in some strength into the early modern era. The basic structure of Christian Euhemeristic thought:

1. The narrative of the history of the ancient peoples, as given in Genesis 1-11, being inspired by the God of all Providence, is true and reliable.

2. If the epochal events surrounding the Great Flood, as portrayed in Genesis 6-9, are true (and they are), those events would long be remembered in the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth (Noah’s three sons).

3. If the tongues of the families were confused at Babel, about a hundred years after the flood (and they were), it would not at all be surprising to find the history somewhat confused and corrupted linguistically and substantially.

4. By the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and only by these three families, was the earth overspread and populated; and they took with them confused and corrupted versions of the history of the great events of the Flood.

5. The passage of time would likely lead to further corruption of the narrative.

6. Given the preceding points, the situation stands as one would expect: The oldest civilations (China, Babylonia, Egypt, etc.), all descending from the three Noahic families, have a Flood Story; but the Stories have been corrupted linguistically and substantially by subsequent events (especially Babel) and the passage of time.

This older view disarms the contemporary critic of the Scripture, and the contemplation of the ancient myths, far from shaking the faith of the godly, confirms it, being fully consistent with what one would expect to find. Perhaps Christian Euhemerism was too early set aside.

This introduction is intended to present the marrow of the argument, but much of the interest and persuasive power of this type of study rests in the details. In the excerpt that follows, Poole takes up just one of these myths, the Greek fable of Saturn and his sons, and provides a wide-ranging linguistic and substantial comparison between it and the Biblical narrative of Noah’s Flood. Could it be that the Saturn-myth is a corrupted and skewed version of the history of the Great Flood of Genesis? Let the attentive reader give careful consideration to the details of the argument, and then judge.

This same sort of careful, detailed comparison, other Christian Euhemerists perform with the myths of other ancient peoples. For those interested in this area of study, Theophilus Gale’s The Court of the Gentiles and Pierre Jurieu’s A Critical History of the Doctrines and Worships (both Good and Evil) of the Church are particularly worthy of attention, and a good place to start.

There are two pieces in this link: De Moor’s treatment of the derivation of Jove and Jupiter from Jehovah; and Poole’s treatment of the genesis of the pagan myths from the story of Noah and his sons. Enjoy.

https://www.fromreformationtoreformation.com/blog/de-moor-iv-8-gentile-misuse-of-the-divine-name

Source: https://puritanboard.com/threads/genesis-of-the-ancient-myths.95967/, Comment 1