Thinking of You

bvf5

STAYING AWAY FROM THE CHURCH IS ALSO VERY POPULAR THESE LAST DAYS TOO., MANY A  PERSONS LAST WEEK TRY TO JUSTIFY THEIR STAYING AWAY FROM THE CHURCH BUT IN THE END THEY HURT ONLY THEMSELVES.

Once bitten twice shy, but if you fall off the horse and if you do not get back on you generally next never will

50 percent of the Christians I know eventually fall away from God for wrong personal reasons too

Almost nothing in life can match a good marriage, and almost nothing in life is as bad as a marriage that has gone bad too.. same is true of a good church

of course we know that the devil will keep you away from the church firstly.

To me a good church is like a good restaurant, I am happy and well fed.. of course I hate bad restaurants too but I do not stop going to a restaurant cause there are bad restaurants now too.. I do not throw out the baby with the wash water … sadly most churches I went to now were really boring, bad.. but there are good churches even if sometime very hard to find.. Keep the faith.. find a good church.. forsaking not the fellowshipping of one with another

One thing that has really helped me is that when I go to a church I generally refuse to listen to the preacher or to talk to him, I go instead to listen only to God there… and I am not disappointed.

The full Gospel is not good news,. it is the good and bad news..

I used to go to church 5 days a week, evenings from 6 pm to 12 pm, because their churches services were holy spirit filled, holy spirit inspired.. and you can spot such services, churches, cause you cannot predict what will happen from one minute to the next unless those too often bad, predicable churches, services.. legalistic, dead churches.. God churches have good prayer warriors firstly, and people who apply the Bible, teaching of Jesus.

SOME PEOPLE REALLY HATE TO HEAR, READ THE TRUTH FOR IT RIGHTFULLY MAKES THEM FEEL SHAMED, DISGUSTED WITH THEMSELVES, BAD PASTORS, BAD COPS, BAD PEOPLE ESPECIALLY.. OSTRICH DENIAL..

see also http://mccainvrsobama.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/the-silent-seduction/

Church Revivals do often happen, and can happen in any church as well.. it is conditional on weekly, regularly praying for it, and seeking God with a whole heart as well.. but unfortunately when I have seen revivals, I love them too, I have seen many of them but often I have also seen the wheat and the tares coexisting at these revivals.. some of people continually attending the revival who refused to be changed themselves, even some of the leaders now too.. I had a particular acquaintance of mind attend church for hours 5 days a week even during a revival with no change is his life.. when I prayed about it God said he allowed the person to see the kingdom of heaven from afar but he will still not enter into it next… I have often encountered such typical interested only persons.. sad.
Personal revival is what God wants first.. that begins in our daily, home, life with him too.

(Eph 5:27 KJV) That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

(1 Pet 1:19 KJV) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Remember in the book of Act first revival, Pentecost, the next some people died, were judged by God..

I made a study of historical past revivals and wars , cause had noted revivals often had came first and serious large scale wars came next.. and many were killed in the wars who had refused to be spiritually revived before the war.. frightening ..

God is not mocked what a person sows he reaps.. some people have approached the Lord’s table unworthily and next suffer for it..

To me a sad clue for a still unspiritual person is reflected by the amount of time he or she actually goes to a prayer meeting.. I have known of many a persons who have been professing Christians for decades and yet never went to a Wednesday night prayer meeting.

One thing that really, really bothers me when so many Churches cancel some of their services for the summer holidays, or to allow people to be with they families.. no wonder many of these churches are dead next still..

http://comeholyspirit.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/the-last-days-outpouring-of-the-holy-spirit/

(2 Cor 13:11 KJV) Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you.

Many people are falsely led these days to believe they can have, attain anything they want, which is not so.. Jesus Christ predetermines what is good, needful, essential personally for you.

The same Jesus Christ who has said (John 15:5 KJV) I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. 6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

WHEN I WAS A YOUNG MAN I WAS IN A CHURCH SERVICE WHERE A LONG WINDED UNSPIRITUAL PREACHER WAS PREACHING.. he next asked the congregation for more time to finish his wasteful sermon. THE HEAD ELDER NEXT ADDRESSED HIM AND TOLD HIM TO SIT DOWN HE HAD WASTED ENOUGH OF THEIR TIME. That did more good overall also than one merely patiently sitting there wafting for the service to be over.

(Prov 27:5 KJV) Open rebuke is better than secret love. 6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.(1 Tim 5:20 KJV) Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. 21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. 22 Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure. (Rev 3:19 KJV) As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.(Rev 3:21 KJV) To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. (Rev 3:22 KJV) He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (Gal 3:28 KJV) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

VISIT ALSO http://banpreachergreed.tripod.com/

God bless you
God was, IS always there with me, still looking after me too, all the time

http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/as-to-why-some-have-left-their-church/

Advertisements

the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God

flrs82 (14)

  

A very common concern in life is what to do about a bad husband who is clearly going to Hell.
 
(1 Cor 6:9 KJV)  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11  And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
12  All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
13  Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.
14  And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
15  Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
16  What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
17  But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
18  Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
19  What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
20  For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
7:1  Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2  Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3  Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
4  The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5  Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
6  But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.
7  For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8  I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
9  But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
10  And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11  But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12  But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13  And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14  For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15  But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16  For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
17  But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
 
The  Bible clearly says that a good Christian wife can influence, change her husband for the good by her own good behavior.. and why hasn’t she yet? 

1 Peter 3: 1 In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, 2 as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. 3 And let not your adornment be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; 4 but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.

5 For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. 6 Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.

” Peter surely forbids a wife to nag her husband with the gospel. This can be blatant or subtle, but it is nevertheless something the husband is keenly aware of and strongly resists. Proverbs indicates that this tendency to nag is one which tempts us all, but especially the wife.
A foolish son is destruction to his father, And the contentions of a wife are a constant dripping (Proverbs 19:13).

Second, Peter forbids debate. While nagging may be one method one might use to persuade another, arguing is another. Nagging, by my definition, is simply trying to wear another down by repeating the same things over and over (some folks even try this on God in their prayer life, see Matthew 6:7). Debate is the effort to change another’s mind by continually approaching the discussion from a different point of view, by trying any and every line of argument.

Third, Peter forbids those subtle forms of persuasion which may produce natural responses but fail to produce supernatural conversion. Jesus warned about carefully prepared presentations of the gospel rather than a reliance upon the Holy Spirit (Luke 21:12-15). The apostle Paul is especially sensitive to human forms of persuasion, which he sees as contrary to the way the Spirit works to convince and convert the lost (1 Corinthians 2:1-5; 2 Corinthians 2:17; 4:1-2; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12).

In 2 Timothy, 2 Peter, and Jude, we are warned about false teachers who appeal to fleshly lusts rather than the impulses of the Spirit. I believe a woman may have an even greater danger in this area than men. Women may seek to use flattery to persuade and may even employ seductive wiles on her husband.

To deliver you from the strange woman, From the adulteress who flatters with her words (Proverbs 2:16).To keep you from the evil woman, From the smooth tongue of the adulteress (Proverbs 6:24).

Delilah’s seduction was the downfall of Samson. One does not seduce another into the kingdom of God, though some most certainly seduce others into error (see Revelation 2:20-22). Using this kind of speech may not be offensive to her husband, but it is certainly inconsistent with the gospel.

Peter’s instruction is not merely negative, forbidding Christian wives to verbally pressure their husbands to come to faith in Christ. Rather, in place of her words, wives are to witness to their husbands through their works. Husbands should be able to observe that their wives are different than they were before they came to faith. They should especially be characterized by a behavior which is chaste and respectful. The remaining four verses spell out the meaning of these words, but let us at least come to a preliminary definition of them.

The word “respectful” is literally “fear” as the marginal note in the New American Standard Bible indicates. The “fear” called for here seems to be the wife’s “fear” or respect for her husband rather than her fear of God, though both are certainly required of her (see 1 Peter 1:17; 2:17; Ephesians 5:33).

The word “chaste” is employed a number of times in the New Testament, often with a meaning broader than just sexual purity.89 However, here I believe sexual purity is a prominent part of Peter’s meaning.90 A wife may influence her husband in many ways to control or at least manipulate him. Making your husband jealous is one way which is often considered not only clever but acceptable. Chastity is pressed beyond its limits when this form of manipulation is practiced. In some cases, the wife may not wish to control her husband as much as to gain the attention and admiration or another man. This is also clearly out of bounds. The wife’s feminine charms are for the glory and enjoyment of her husband and no other. Peter calls the wife to live by the highest moral standards, not merely by those of the culture in which she lives.

The Ultimate Beauty (3:3-4)
3 And let not your adornment be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses;91 4 but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.

The problem of looking on outward appearances is not restricted only to women:

But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for God [sees] not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7).

And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God” (Luke 16:15; see also Matthew 6:1ff.).

In both the Old and New Testaments, however, outward adornment became an obsession and therefore a matter for rebuke and instruction:

16 Moreover, the LORD said, “Because the daughters of Zion are proud, and walk with heads held high and seductive eyes, and go along with mincing steps, and tinkle the bangles on their feet, 17 therefore the Lord will afflict the scalp of the daughters of Zion with scabs, and the LORD will make their foreheads bare.” 18 In that day the Lord will take away the beauty of [their] anklets, headbands, crescent ornaments, 19 dangling earrings, bracelets, veils, 20 headdresses, ankle chains, sashes, perfume boxes, amulets, 21 finger rings, nose rings, 22 festal robes, outer tunics, cloaks, money purses, 23 hand mirrors, undergarments, turbans, and veils. 24 Now it will come about that instead of sweet perfume there will be putrefaction; instead of a belt, a rope; instead of well-set hair, a plucked-out scalp; instead of fine clothes, a donning of sackcloth; and branding instead of beauty. 25 Your men will fall by the sword, and your mighty ones in battle (Isaiah 3:16-25).

9 Likewise, [I want] women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments; 10 but rather by means of good works, as befits women making a claim to godliness (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

In the days in which Peter lived, those with the means to do so went to great extremes in dress, cosmetics, and hair styling to look good to others:

Ornate hairstyles were prevalent in the high society of the Roman world:

‘Curl climbs on top of curl and over the forehead there arose something which at its best looked like the chef d’oeuvre of a master pastry cook and, at its worst, like a dry sponge. At the back the hair was plaited, and the braids arranged in a coil which looks like basketwork.’92

While outward appearances affect every believer, male or female (see Matthew 6; and 23:5-6), Peter particularly instructs married women about their priorities concerning true beauty. There is nothing wrong with dressing in a way that pleases one’s mate. It is no sin to be well-dressed (see Proverbs 31:22). But it is wrong to be preoccupied with outward appearances at the expense of inward beauty. A beautiful woman who lacks inner beauty and character is, according to Proverbs, like a pig with a gold ring in its nose.

[As] a ring of gold in a swine’s snout, [So is] a beautiful woman who lacks discretion (Proverbs 11:22).

Not only is it wrong for a woman (or a man) to place too high a value on external appearances, it is likewise evil to seek man’s approval rather than to strive to please God. That which pleases God is a “gentle and quiet spirit.” This is hardly the contemporary estimate of the ideal woman. Our culture teaches women to practice assertiveness and aggressiveness and outer beauty, rather than to acquire a gentle and quiet spirit.

Why is modest apparel and a “gentle and quiet spirit” pleasing to God? What does this have to do with submission, the major topic of our text? Biblical submission is more than most Christians think. Many Christians are resistant to the biblical teaching of the submission of the wife to her husband. And even those who accept this teaching may think of submission primarily in terms of obeying their husband, of following his leadership.

The submission of the wife to her husband certainly includes honoring him and obeying him, whether this is popular thought or not. But the submission of the wife to her husband is much more than this. Creation requires the submission of the wife to her husband (1 Corinthians 11:7-12), as does the fall (Genesis 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:12-15). It is necessitated by the picture marriage is to portray about the relationship between Christ and His church (Ephesians 5:22-33). It is to demonstrate the headship of Christ over the church (1 Corinthians 11:2-16).

The headship of Christ involves more than His authority and rule over the church. It includes the fact that He is the source of the church, that the church was brought forth through Him. It also involves the supremacy and preeminence of Christ. The glory is to be His, not ours. We are here for His glory. The glory of God must be one of our guiding goals and principles (1 Corinthians 10:31).

When the woman ceases to act with a “quiet and gentle spirit,” she begins to promote herself and bring attention to herself. Rather than being the glory of her husband, she steals the glory from him. The same is true of her attire. She may never utter a word publicly, but she may dress in a way which causes every eye to be fixed on her. To do so is to cast aside the headship of her husband and the submission required of her. No wonder Peter and Paul speak of a woman’s dress and demeanor.

But a woman can attract just as much attention to herself by looking sloppy and unkempt as she can by being “dressed to kill.” Whenever a woman attracts attention to herself rather than to her husband, she has failed to grasp and obey the biblical teaching on submission.

23 Her husband is known in the gates, When he sits among the elders of the land. 24 She makes linen garments and sells [them,] And supplies belts to the tradesmen. 25 Strength and dignity are her clothing, And she smiles at the future. 26 She opens her mouth in wisdom, And the teaching of kindness is on her tongue. 27 She looks well to the ways of her household, And does not eat the bread of idleness. 28 Her children rise up and bless her; Her husband [also,] and he praises her, [saying:] 29 “Many daughters have done nobly, But you excel them all.” 30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain, [But] a woman who fears the LORD, she shall be praised. 31 Give her the product of her hands, And let her works praise her in the gates (Proverbs 31:23-31).

The Example of Holy Women of Old
(3:5-6)
5 For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. 6 Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.93

A “gentle and quiet spirit” is totally the opposite of the spirit of the contentious wife of Proverbs (see Proverbs 21:9, 19). The spirit or disposition which underlies submission is of crucial importance. Peter turns our attention to the “holy women of old,” not to remind us of how they dressed but to point to their submissive spirit, their source of true beauty. Notice these women were submissive to their “own” husbands, not because their trust was in their husbands but because their hope was in God. They trusted God to work through their husbands and to work in spite of them. Their hope, like every Old Testament saint (see Hebrews 11), was not in this life but in the kingdom of God to come. Their hope was in God alone who would bring it to pass.

Sarah is the one woman Peter identifies by name. Quite frankly, I would never have picked Sarah for she always seemed to be a kind of feminine counterpart to Lot. As I read Genesis 16 and 21, I find Sarah a little hard to like. She, like Lot and every other saint, was not a perfect saint. But she did exemplify the submissive spirit of which Peter speaks.

Peter refers to Sarah calling Abraham “lord,” as recorded the one time in Genesis:

9 Then they said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “Behold, in the tent.” 10 And he said, “I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing. 12 And Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?” 13 And the LORD said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear [a child,] when I am [so] old?’ 14 “Is anything too difficult for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.” 15 Sarah denied [it] however, saying, “I did not laugh”; for she was afraid. And He said, “No, but you did laugh” (Genesis 18:9-15).

Sarah may have called Abraham lord at other times, but this instance is especially noteworthy. Peter has been contrasting inner beauty with outer adornment and the beauty of a “gentle and quiet spirit.” This passage in Genesis illustrates Sarah’s spirit.

The angels have come to Abraham’s camp and been invited to stay for a meal. They then announce to Abraham that at this time next year Sarah will have a son. Sarah seems to have been eavesdropping, for when she heard the prophecy of a son, she laughed to herself. The words recorded in Genesis 18:12 are the words Sarah thought to herself. She did not speak them aloud, although the Lord was aware that she laughed inwardly.

Most of us speak respectfully to someone’s face, even if hypocritically. But Sarah spoke to herself calling Abraham “lord,” indicating the way she really thought of him. In her mind, Abraham was not “the old man,” but her master, her lord. And she, as it were, was his servant. In her heart, she was submissive to her husband, which made her a beautiful woman and an example for all to follow.

Abraham is sometimes referred to as the “father” of those who believe in Jesus Christ, whether Jew or Gentile by birth (see Romans 4:11-12; Galatians 3:7, 16, 29; Hebrews 2:16). Here, Sarah is called the “mother” of all those women who walk in her footsteps and who respect and obey their husbands: “and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.”

If I understand the passage correctly, “without being frightened by any fear” parallels the earlier expression of a “gentle and quiet spirit.” Some Christian psychiatrists speak of the “typical hysterical female,” a characterization I am not certain I like. Peter talks about the godly Christian wife as being exactly the opposite. She is not hysterical or panic-stricken about the future,94 for her hope is fixed on God. She calmly and quietly submits to her husband,95 knowing God’s purposes will be achieved because of or in spite of her husband.

Can you imagine leaving your homeland, your family, and all of your friends to go to a place God has not even yet revealed (see Genesis 12:1-3)? How many times did Abraham come to his wife to tell her God had instructed him to do what appeared to be foolish? As far as I can tell, Sarah was never present when God gave Abraham his instructions (except this one time in Genesis 18). It could have been a most terrifying thing to have been married to Abraham and follow him without being frightened by any fear. But Sarah did submit to Abraham, first in her spirit, and then on a day-by-day basis.96 For this, she became an example of godly submission to all of us.

Conclusion
A few years ago, I would hardly have felt the necessity of stressing a point which seems all too apparent, but in today’s culture I must stress it: God requires wives to submit to their husbands. The submission of the wife to her husband was established at the time of the creation of man and then at the fall. It is not merely an Old Testament requirement but a New Testament imperative. Paul taught it, and so did Peter. It is clear from our Lord’s practice that He agreed. The cross does not overrule or override the need for submission. In 1 Peter, the cross is not only an example of submission, it serves as the basis, the means and the motivation. Peter’s teaching on the submission of the wife to her husband follows immediately upon his teaching of the submission of servants to their masters, and especially of Christ to the will of the Father, which led to His death on the cross as the great “Suffering Servant.” As Peter addresses Christian wives, he begins with the words, “in like manner.” One cannot avoid the fact that in this age, as in all others of the past, the wife is to be in submission to her husband.

Does our culture bristle at this thought? This is just one more way the Christian will stand apart from others and one more reason why our “doing good” will be evil spoken of by unbelievers. Submission to one’s husband is one of the many ways in which the Christian may suffer for the sake of Christ and to the glory of God. Such submission is required under favorable conditions, and even in adverse circumstances such as when the husband is an unbeliever and refuses to obey the gospel by submitting to Jesus Christ for salvation. The submissiveness of the wife to her husband may bring about his salvation which most certainly pleases God. Does submission appear to limit one’s happiness and fulfillment in this life? It may, but the Christian wife has her hope in God, and she willingly accepts suffering in this life assured of the glory to come.

While this may not sound all that good in theory, I assure you it is even more difficult to practice. More often than I wish to admit, I find Christians turning their backs on Peter’s teaching. They believe a wife should not have to put up with an abusive husband. When they do so, they are thinking according to the mold of our culture rather than the mind of Christ.

Suppose one of your very good friend confides that her husband is cruel and “abusive” to her. She is a Christian; he is not. She wonders what she should do and asks for your advice. Do you turn to the Bible, or do you give “your opinion?” And if you turn to the Bible, is this text one of the first you show her? It should be. It calls on the Christian to suffer unjustly, to the glory of God and for the salvation of those who are lost. Is a “dysfunctional marriage” pleasant? No. Is it an excuse to bail out? Peter gives us the answer, although it is not one we want to hear. Who of us wants to suffer?

Peter’s words about submission and suffering should give us a different perspective on suffering. We are a generation of so-called “victims.” The very excellent book entitled, No God, But God, contains a chapter by Os Guinness entitled, “More Victimized Than Thou.”97 We have become a generation of victims, not victors. Peter will have none of this “victim” mentality. I used to say our culture sought to replace HOPE with HYPE. That is no longer the case. Now, our secular culture seeks to redefine HOPE so that it becomes nothing more than COPE. We are not called to be “copers;” we are called to suffer for Christ’s sake so that we will be overcomers. Let us shed the victim mindset as something which comes from the pit.

This passage cuts to the heart of a growing crisis in America—the disproportionate emphasis on appearance. Peter does not sanction a blatant disregard for good health and caring for one’s body, and neither does Paul (see 1 Timothy 4:7-8). Physical appearance has become the dominant driving force in the lives of many women. I cannot help but think the epidemic of eating disorders is rooted in a failure to understand and apply the principles Peter lays down in this text. Skinny women “feel” fat, and so they refuse the nourishment their bodies need. They are never skinny enough to fit the image of the perfect body, and yet often little attention is given to the inner beauty of which Peter speaks. Let us see Peter’s words as very relevant to our thinking and conduct, for they are.

Peter certainly challenges us to think more carefully and precisely about evangelism. We think of evangelism as being virtually synonymous with our speech. We must proclaim the gospel, for men and women are saved only as they hear and respond to the good news of salvation in Christ. And yet Peter makes it clear that there is a time to be still. We do not convert people by wearing down their resistance. We do not convert people by our persuasive powers. Our lives are to be consistent with the gospel we preach. After the lost have heard of Christ, they must see Him in us. That is the connection which Peter makes between the “Suffering Servant” in 1 Peter 2:21-25 and the suffering of His servants in this entire section. It may very well be our suffering rather than our success in speaking which God uses to draw the lost to Himself. If this is so, it is consistent with the experience of others such as the apostle Paul (see 1 Thessalonians 1 and 2).

Our lesson has primarily been addressed to those who have already trusted in Jesus Christ. Peter has been speaking to Christian wives. He has made it clear that those who have come to Christ must live like Christ. Just as He suffered for us, we are now called to suffer, as He did, to God’s glory and for the salvation of others. But just as it is true that coming to Christ often results in suffering, it is also true that suffering may bring us to Christ. Listen to these words spoken by our Lord at the outset of His ministry:

1 And when He saw the multitudes, He went up on the mountain; and after He sat down, His disciples came to Him. 2 And opening His mouth He [began] to teach them, saying, 3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. 5 “Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth. 6 “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied” (Matthew 5:1-6).

Has suffering brought you to the end of yourself? Has it caused you to look to the Lord Jesus for salvation? Jesus came to minister to those in need. If that is your plight, then there is hope—in Him. He suffered and died so that your sins could be forgiven and so that you might have eternal life. May God open your heart to trust in Him, who turns suffering to joy unspeakable and full of glory (1 Peter 1:6-8).”
http://bible.org/seriespage/word-wives-1-peter-31-6

Unacceptable Flaws In the Pearl of Great Price.

By Jerald & Sandra Tanner 

      In our new book, Flaws in the Pearl of Great Price, we have compiled some very important information concerning (Joseph Smith’s book of Doctrine called) the Pearl of Great Price, a book accepted by members of the Mormon Church (The LDS, and the FLDS but not the RLDS) as inspired scripture. It is, in fact, one of the four standard works of the church. Since most of the material contained in the Pearl of Great Price was supposed to have been given to the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith by divine revelation, it is considered more accurate than the Bible.

      The “Book of Moses,” contained in the first part of the Pearl of Great Price, purports to give an account of the Creation which God originally gave to Moses and later revealed to Joseph Smith. In the 1965 printing of Commentary on the Pearl of Great Price, by George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl, page xi, we read: “we need go no further in our research than to compare the story of the Creation of the earth and Man, and the history thereof down to the time of the Flood as it appears in the Book of Genesis (Old Testament) with these same writings, unimpaired or unmarred by the incidents of time, contained in the Pearl of Great Price, the Writings of Moses. At first they both were the same; the one (Genesis) effaced by the wisdom and carelessness of men, the other as it was revealed by God through the Prophet Joseph Smith.”

      The second part of the Pearl of Great Price contains The “Book of Abraham.” It was supposed to have been written on papyrus by Abraham himself about 4,000 years ago! According to Mormon officials, this same papyrus fell into Joseph Smith’s hands and he began translating it in 1835.


The Pearl of Great Price also contains Joseph Smith’s “inspired translation of a portion of the book of Matthew, his own story concerning how God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ appeared to him, and how an angel from God revealed that it some gold plates were buried near his home. Smith “translated” these plates and published the contents under the title, the Book of Mormon.

The Pearl of Great Price concludes with Joseph Smith’s “Articles of Faith.” The Pearl of Great Price was first published in book form in 1851 by Apostle Franklin D. Richards. Prior to Richard’s compilation, portions of the text he used had been published in early Mormon publications. In 1880, the Pearl of Great Price was canonized and at that time became one of the four standard works of the church.

“DRASTICALLY CHANGED”

      One of the problems (The writer is soft peddling the nature of these heretical writings.) relating to the Pearl of Great Price is the serious changes (See if the tripe written by Joseph Smith were “Inspired” the Mormon leaders would have been terrified to alter a single word but by the fact that they have time and again alters major portions of this “Revelation” shows that they themselves do not believe for one minute these words are inspired , rather they believe that this book is their organizations charter that can be and needs to be amended from time t time)  that have appeared in the text since it was published in 1851. Like Paul Dunn’s stories, new elements have been added to the text which ARE NOT in the original handwritten manuscript when it was first dictated. The portion of the Pearl of Great Price which has had the most drastic alterations made in it is the “Book of Moses.” The Book of Moses is actually only a part of a far larger work known as the “Inspired Version” of the Bible. Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie stressed that the Inspired Version was given to Joseph Smith by revelation:

     

“In consequence, at the command of the Lord and while acting under the spirit of revelation, the Prophet (Joseph Smith) corrected, revised, altered, added to, and deleted from the King James Version of the Bible to form what is now commonly referred to as the Inspired Version of the Bible (This is not the book of Mormon this is a separate Bible Translation written by a man who in court was proven to have no knowledge of Greek Hebrew much less  Egyptian)…. The first 151 verses of the Old Testament, down to Genesis 6:13, are published as the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price. But (Not what is in the bible – this text is purported to have been) restored by the Prophet (Joseph Smith) the true (Smith inspired) rendition contains about 400 verses and a wealth of new doctrinal knowledge and historical data…. the marvelous flood of light and knowledge revealed through the Inspired Version of the Bible is one of the great evidences of the divine mission of Joseph Smith.” (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, pp. 383-84)

 

Actually, the Inspired Version of the Bible has been the (a continual) source of much embarrassment for the Mormon Church leaders. It was never published during Joseph Smith’s lifetime. In fact, his wife, Emma, retained the manuscript and would not give it to Willard Richards, who had been sent by Brigham Young to obtain it (She with many of the early leaders stayed in Mo. And formed the RLDS – rejecting Brigham Young and the LDS as Heretics)(see History of the Church, vol. 7, p. 260). Mormon Church leaders were never able to obtain the original manuscripts of the Inspired Version from Joseph Smith’s widow. She, in fact, turned them over to the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS)--an offshoot of the Mormon Church. This was a great blow to the Mormon leaders because they considered the Reorganized Church to be an “apostate” organization.
To the chagrin of the Mormon leaders, in 1867 the Reorganized Church published Joseph Smith’s Inspired Version of the Bible. Brigham Young was very opposed to the idea of members of his church receiving the Revelation from an “apostate” organization. Apostle Orson Pratt, on the other hand, wanted to accept it, and this caused some conflict with President Young.


     
After the Inspired Version was published by the Reorganized Church, it became obvious that there were serious discrepancies between it and the chapters the Mormon Church (The LDS version) had published in 1851 in the Pearl of Great Price. According to James R. Harris, of the Mormon Church’s Brigham Young University, Brigham Young felt that the Reorganized Church’s publication was fraudulent (Despite them having the original notes which threatened the LDS’s legitimacy): “The minutes of the School of the Prophets indicate that President Brigham Young regarded the Revision ‘spurious’ and that he brought Elder (Orsen) Pratt to some level of agreement with his position.” (Brigham Young University Studies, Summer 1968, p. 374, n. 23) President Young, on the other hand, had “high regard” for the first edition of the Pearl of Great Price (see The Story of the Pearl of Great Price, by James R. Clark, p. 205). After President Young passed away, the church leaders completely repudiated his (Brigham Young’s) ideas concerning the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of these books, for they (The LDS) changed the text of the Pearl of Great Price (Their made up version) to agree with the Reorganized Church’s (RLDS version or the Pearl and the Joseph Smith’s bible translation) printing of the Inspired Version. In his M. A. thesis written at Brigham Young University in 1958, James R. Harris acknowledged that “every major change in the American edition [i.e., the 1878 edition of the Pearl of Great Price] appears in identical form in the Inspired Revision.” (“A Study of the Changes in the Contents of the Book of Moses From the Earliest Available Sources to the Current Edition” typed copy, page 225)
The fact that the Mormon Church leaders changed the text of the Pearl of Great Price to agree with the Inspired Version indicates that
they felt the “apostate” Reorganized Church had a more accurate version of the scriptures than they did! They, therefore, put more trust in the publication by the Reorganized Church than they did in the word of President Brigham Young, the 2nd Prophet, Seer and Revelator of the church. It is rather interesting to note that Brigham Young died in 1877, and before a year had passed the new altered edition of the Pearl of Great Price was published. It is also significant that Orson Pratt, the apostle who disagreed with President Young over the accuracy of the Inspired Revision, was the editor of the 1878 edition.


     In any case, in his M. A. thesis, James R. Harris freely admitted that the text of the Pearl of Great Price was “drastically” altered in 1878:

 

      “Orson Pratt was the Editor of the first American edition of the Pearl of Great Price… The American edition was more drastically changed than any previous publication by a member of the Church.” (“A Study of the Changes in the Contents of the Book of Moses typed copy, p. 226)

     

      “From the standpoint of omissions and additions of words, the American Edition is the most spectacular rendition…. Some of tire words added to the American edition had impressive doctrinal implications.” (Ibid., pp. 224-25)

     

      Although James R. Harris admits that serious changes were made in the Pearl of Great Price, he feels that Joseph Smith himself made the changes in manuscripts he worked on before his death. In other words, he believes that when the Mormon leaders changed the text of the Pearl of Great Price in 1878, they were bringing it into conformity with changes Joseph Smith made in the manuscripts during his lifetime. Richard P. Howard, Church Historian for the Reorganized Church, has released information which gives support to Dr. Harris’ idea. Howard, who has had access to the original manuscripts, shows that there were a number of different manuscripts involved in the production of the Inspired Version of the Bible and that Joseph Smith often revised his own revisions and left the manuscripts in a very confused state: “Many texts reveal that the process was not some kind of automatic verbal or visual revelatory experience on the part of Joseph Smith. He often caused a text to be written in one form and later reworded his initial revision. The manuscripts in some cases show a considerable time lapse between such reconsiderations…

     
“A considerable number of places in NT #2 [as Mr. Howard now numbers the manuscripts] show that initially Joseph Smith considered certain texts in the King James Version to be either correct or in need of slight revision, but that on later consideration he decided to amend them further. Since the manuscript pages were already written and filled to the extent that the later corrections could not be included, the problem was solved by writing the text out on a scrap of paper and pinning or sewing it to the appropriate manuscript page.” (Restoration Scriptures: A Study of Their Textual Development, 1969, pp. 93, 96)

      “Therefore OT #13 represents a third draft manuscript of… Genesis 1-7, a second draft manuscript of Genesis 8-24:42a, and a first draft manuscript of the remainder of the Old Testament, although revised considerably by interpolations written in later years between the lines and on separate scraps of paper pinned to the manuscript pages.” (Ibid., p. 106) “…the manuscripts indicate rather clearly that Joseph Smith, Jr., by his continued practice of revising his earlier texts  as many as three times, demonstrats that he (Joseph Smith) did not believe that at any of those points of rerevision he had dictated a perfectly inerrant text by the power or voice of God…. It is thus unnecessary and could be misleading to appear to claim ‘direct’ revelation in the determination of the entire text of the Inspired Version as the preface written for the 1867 edition apparently implied.” (page 151)

     

      Richard P. Howard’s admission that Joseph Smith rerevised his earlier text “as many as three times” is certainly a serious indictment against Joseph Smith’s work and plainly shows that his “Inspired Version” is anything but inspired. The fact that he could not make up his mind shows that he was tampering with the Scriptures according to his own imagination rather than receiving revelation from God. Mormon writer Truman G. Madsen also admitted that Joseph Smith “often revised a passage, later added to or amended it, and then, in a third attempt, clarified it further.” (Improvement Era, March 1970, p. 70)

     
The many changes that had to be made in the “inspired” renderings found in the Pearl of Great Price tend to undermine confidence in Joseph Smith’s work. As we indicated earlier, the most drastic revision of the Pearl of Great Price was made in 1878. In our new book, Flaws in the Pearl of Great Price, we have photographically reproduced the original 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price and carefully compared it with the church’s official 1989 printing. All of the changes that have been made have been noted in handwriting. The reader, therefore, can plainly see all of the words that were added, deleted or changed.

MOSES OR JOSEPH?

      As one reads the first section of the Pearl of Great Price (the “Book of Moses”) the question arises as to whether the words were actually spoken to Moses by God over 3,000 years ago or if they came from the fertile imagination of someone who lived in the 19th century. To those familiar with the Bible, the phraseology of the document has the ring of ancient scripture. Unfortunately, however, it sounds just too much like the King James Version, which was first published in 1611. Many of the verses, in fact, have been plagiarized from the book of Genesis. We have used the Mormon Church’s own computer program, The Computerized Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to help us locate the verses which have been borrowed from the Bible. In Flaws in The Pearl of Great Price, Appendix 2, we show a large number of verses that have obviously been taken from Genesis. The most serious problem, however, is that material has also been taken from the New Testament. In our book, Covering Up the Black Hole in the Book Of Mormon, we have dealt with the presence of New Testament quotations in Joseph Smith’s Book of Mormon, and since the situation is analogous to that found in the Book of Moses, we quote the following from our book:

     

            “It is very clear from the contents of the Book of Mormon that while the author was not a trained Bible scholar, he was rather familiar with the contents of the King James Version of the Bible. Although Mormon apologists are reluctant to face the facts, the evidence shows that Joseph Smith had the ability and the Biblical knowledge required to write the Book of Mormon. According to Smith’s earliest account of his life, written in 1832, he claimed he began studying the Bible when he was only about 12 years old….9 (This is utterly incorrect Smith did not write the Book of Mormon Smith originally was hired on as a circus hand to work his sleight of hand for a scheme created by Judge Solomon Spaulding who also was a Lawyer, and Oliver Cowdery a prolific writer and newspaper editor of a half-dozen upstate New York  Newspapers.  The presence of these two men alone who become Joseph Smiths “two witnesses” and his chief “two prophets” alone should raise ones eyebrows. Judge Spaulding a lawyer appears to be the mastermind of the entire scam, and it appears that the man  had spent quite some time combing federal and state law of the day to see how for he could go with a religious con without he or his prophet Smith being able to be arrested.  And Cowdery was not only the scribe that was needed to pen the book of Mormon but this man was a publicist. he was the scheme’s Madison Avenue machine of his day to see to it that 1) their prophet got all the good press he could get with his connections. 2) he was also the man that dreamed up many of Smiths early photo-ops.)

     
“From letters and comments we have received, it is obvious that many believers in the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon do not have a correct understanding of
the plagiarism issue with regard to that book. They often point out that some portions of the Bible are similar or even identical to other portions and feel that this demonstrates there is no problem with the Book of Mormon using parts of the Bible. It is true, of course, that such similarities do occur. For instance, many of the words of Jesus are taken from the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 8:3 the following words of Moses are given: ‘…man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth he live.’ In Matthew 4:4 these words are attributed to Jesus: ‘But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.’ Since we have evidence that the book of Deuteronomy was in existence before the time of Christ from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint translation of the Bible made in [the] third century B. C., it is obvious that Jesus could have quoted from it. There are, in fact, many quotations from it in the New Testament, and this is the very thing we should expect to find…. in the examples we have cited from the Bible, all of the cases of copying can be explained by simply stating the obvious fact that the authors used some known and available work. The problem with regard to the Book of Mormon, however, is that it (Purports to contain the words of) ancient Nephites making extensive quotations from works (Old Testament and New Testament books) that were not even in existence at that time (that these supposed Nephites of the book of mormon lived)   . In fact, in the 1st and 2nd books of Nephi, the writings of the New Testament are cited 600 years before they were written!…
“To those who really consider the matter, it should be obvious that the presence of many portions of the New Testament in the Book of Mormon is more
(than a little) out of place —These (New Testament Passages) words alone would be enough to prove the speech (The entire book or Mormon) a forgery.  

 

Further in the Book of Mormon we have also have Lehi quoting from the New Testament book of Revelation almost seven centuries before it was written! (The first quotation appears on the second page of the Book of Mormon and is dated ‘About 600 B. C.’ The book of Revelation is believed to have been written about A.D. 90.)
“It is clear that the author
(Spaulding Cowdery and Smith) of the Book of Mormon was holding a King James Version of the Bible in his hand when he (They) produced it. (The problem with these three men is try as they might they were not men of Scripture – so when they first got out of the box they needed some bible preachers to mark their teachings and they hit the jackpot with Parley Pratt, Simon Rigdon and Orsen who wrote their restorative gospel – it is interesting to note that their early bible preachers did not quote the book of mormon in their sermons or writings they stuck to the bible – they only spoke or the Prophet the golden bible and the restoration of tongues prophecy and gifts in their meetings)  

 

 He (The modern author fancying himself to be Lehi), therefore, could not have lived in 600 B.C.. When all the evidence is examined, it is evident that he actually lived in 1830 (the writer is referring to Smith)–some 2,430 years after Lehi was supposed to have fled from Jerusalem.” (Covering Up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon, pages 75, 79-81)

 

      As we have already pointed out, Joseph Smith’s Book of Moses is also filled with material that has been plagiarized from the New Testament. Moses 6:52, for example, has quotations from a number of New Testament passages. Below we have set this verse in regular type and added similar material found in New Testament verses in bold type inside brackets:

       

      “52 And he also said unto him [Adam]: If thou wilt turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, and believe, and repent of all thy transgressions, and be baptized [and be baptized–Acts 2:38], even in water, in the name of mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth [only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth-John 1:14], which is Jesus Christ [which is Jesus Christ–I Corinthians 3:11], the only name which shall be given under heaven, whereby salvation shall come [there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved–Acts 4:12] unto the children of men, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost [ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost–Acts 2:38], asking all things in his name, and whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be given you [Whatsoever ye shall ask… he will give it you–John 16:23].” (Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses 6:52)

     

      In Flaws in the Pearl of Great Price, Appendix 1, the reader will find over 150 parallels (quotes and references) between the New Testament (And even far more damning is the quotes in the book or Mormon are not from the ancient Greek texts but from the modern King James Bible translation.)  and the Book of Moses. There are undoubtedly other parallels that could be pointed out, but this should be sufficient to convince the reader of the modern origin of “Book of Moses.” All of the evidence points to the inescapable conclusion that the Mormon prophet was not working with an ancient text dating back to the time of Moses; instead he was borrowing from the King James Version of the Bible. Joseph Smith’s “Book of Moses” clearly bears all the earmarks of a spurious document and reminds us of the works of Paul Dunn. Like Dunn, Smith combined elements from more than one source to create his story of the early history of the world. He appropriated a large number of verses from the Old Testament, modified them to serve his own purposes and then added elements from a number of books in the New Testament.

     
In Mormonism–Shadow or Reality? we have a chart showing that there is a great deal of manuscript evidence for the Bible. Some of it, in fact, dates back even before the time of Christ! Joseph Smith’s Book of Moses, on the other hand, is without documentary support. The only handwritten manuscripts for the Book of Moses are those dictated by Joseph Smith in the early 1830’s.

      As we have noted earlier, the Reorganized LDS Church has the original manuscripts of the Inspired Revision. Richard Howard, RLDS Church Historian, spent a great deal of time examining these manuscripts and seems to have concluded that the “Christian” material and the idea of putting the narrative into the first person came from the mind of Joseph Smith:

     

      “Viewing these subjects as he did from the vantage point of his own Christian background, Joseph Smith quite naturally would have tended to read into the symbolic pre-Christian language of the Old Testament certain uniquely Christian meanings. Therefore the content of all three of the documents comprising OT #1… reflects the nineteenth century theological terminology of (Judge Spaulding Oliver Cowdery and)  the prophet Joseph Smith. For example, references to the Holy Ghost and to the Only Begotten–terms arising from the early Christian community–help one to see that even at this early stage of development the text in a sense represents Joseph Smith’s studied theological commentary on the King James Version of the early Genesis chapters of the Bible.

     
“This has been most difficult for students to perceive because of his practice, throughout the first… and the second… documents of OT #1, of phrasing the language in the first person singular, portraying God himself speaking to Moses the very words which, in turn, were apparently being apprehended verbally by Joseph Smith and dictated to his scribe in 1830, nearly three thousand years later. However, Joseph’s heavy reliance on the early seventeenth century Elizabethan English language and style of the King James Version throughout this second document makes this verbal inspiration approach to the language of the early Genesis chapters of his New Translation untenable. This becomes even more apparent when one considers the very complex, centuries-long process culminating in the King James text of 1611.” (Restoration Scriptures, page 77)

BOOK OF ABRAHAM

      As we have indicated earlier, the second part of the Pearl of Great Price contains the “Book of Abraham.” It was supposed to have been written on Egyptian papyrus by Abraham himself about 4,000 years ago! According to Mormon officials, this same papyrus fell into Joseph Smith’s hands and he began translating it in 1835. If the papyrus were really written by Abraham, its discovery was probably one of the most important finds in the history of the world. To say that the papyrus would be worth a million dollars would be greatly underestimating its value, for it would be older than any portion of the Bible.
For many years Joseph Smith’s collection of papyri was lost and there was not way to check the accuracy of his translation.
However on Nov. 27, 1967, the Mormon-owned Deseret News made a startling announcement that the collection had been rediscovered in the (New York) Metropolitan Museum of Art. The article went on to say: “Included in the papyri is a manuscript identified as the original document from which Joseph Smith had copied the drawing which he called ‘Facsimile No. 1’ and published with the Book of Abraham.” The importance of this find cannot be overemphasized; it, in fact, made it possible to put to Joseph Smith’s ability as a translator of ancient Egyptian writing to an absolute test.
Although the Mormon Church tried to slow down the dissemination of material with regard to the Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri, within six months from the time the (New York) Metropolitan Museum gave the papyri to the (LDS) church, the Book of Abraham had been proven (to be) untrue! The fall of the Book of Abraham was brought about by the identification of the actual piece of papyrus from which Joseph Smith claimed to “translate” the book.
The identification of this fragment as the original from which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham has been made possible by a comparison with Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar–handwritten documents by Joseph Smith’s scribes which we photographically reproduced in 1966. Noted Egyptologists Richard A. Parker and Klaus Baer have translated this papyrus fragment and found that it is in reality the Egyptian Book of Breathings. (And Subsequently) other Egyptologists have (also) confirmed that It (Joseph Smith’s Papyri that the prophets claimed to be the book or Abraham) was nothing (of the sort) but the Book of Breathings. Even Mormon apologist Hugh Nibley has admitted this identification. In fact, he has even made his own re-translation of the text (ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics)  (see The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment, p. 18-45).
It is obvious, therefore, that the papyrus Joseph Smith claimed was the “Book of Abraham” is (and at all times was) in reality an Egyptain funerary text (Papyri) known as the “Book of Breathings.” (This Papyrus) is a pagan document, which is filled with magical practices and the names of Egyptian gods and goddesses. It has absolutely nothing to do with,(and never had a single word in it about) either Abraham or his religion.
As in the case of the “Book of Moses,” Joseph Smith (simply) plagiarized extensively from the Old Testament in creating his “Book of Abraham.” He modified many of the verses which he lifted from the King James Version of the Bible.

The RDLS or as they now call themselves the “Community of Christ” reject the writings of Joseph Smith that are embodied in the Pearl of Great Price.  One would believe that that is somehow related to this glaring admission that the “Sacred Scroll that Joseph Smith Had received from an Angel and he only had a sketch of had been in fact hanging decade after decade in the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Apparently Smith and his henchmen had seen a photo of the scroll of sent someone in person down to New York City to make a copy of it.  Then they set to work gleaning bible passages and manufacturing a new book of the bible.  the bible” and palmed it off to his followers for the remainder of his life real books of the bible that were a show piece for his divine laws that were to govern all of the Mormon Church – then how can they still with a straight face say they believe Joseph Smith’s tale of how he obtained and came to translate the “Golden Bible” which he later hailed as the Book of Mormon?

The question comes if the RDLS can see that Joseph Smith lied in his reception of this text, if the RLDS can see that Joseph Smith and his cronies manufactured an entire book of 

 

The answer is that the leadership is damned if they do and damned if they don’t. If they admit that the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith was an utter fraud they stand to lose the entire ranch. And if they don’t confess the truth before God and Men they have accepted eternal damnation for the fake hollow church that they seek to shroud themselves with.  In truth these men are seven-fold the merchants and hirelings of the denominations that they falsely railed against for 175 years.  And they are just as evil and corrupt as their father Joseph Smith.

 

If these men and women had any love for God or their fellow-Mormons that are riding this ship down they would confess the whole thing – call for a week of fasting and prayer and say look we have a church we have really faithful and great people let us try to take this ship and do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord they could site Jeroboam the son of Nebat

           

Strange as it may seem, he used quite a number of the same verses he had previously incorporated into his “Book of Moses.” In many cases, however, he altered them in a different way than he had in his earlier work. Some of these changes were made because of his study of the Hebrew language, but a significant number were made because he had changed his views of the Godhead.
Toward the end of his life (June 16, 1844), Joseph Smith gave a speech in which he publicly taught that “the [Hebrew] word Eloheim ought to be in the plural all the was through–Gods.” (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 476). The word Elohim is used many times in Genesis. It is found, for example in Genesis 1:3. It is interesting to compare this verse from the King James Version of the Bible with Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible with Joseph Smith’s “translation” in the books of Moses and Abraham. In the Bible we read: “And God said, Let there be light…” Joseph Smith changed this to read as follows in Moses 2:3: “And I, God, said: Let there be light…” Notice that Joseph has added the word “I,” thus making it even more apparent that the verse is referring to only one God. In the Book of Abraham, however, Joseph Smith completely reversed his position with regard to this matter, for in Abraham 4:3 we read: “And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light…” In our book, Flaws in the Pearl of Great Price, we photographically demonstrate how Joseph Smith continued to cast doubt on his earlier work (the Book of Moses) throughout the 31 verses of Abraham, Chapter 4. In this chapter Joseph Smith consistently translated the word Elohim as “the Gods.” In the same book we also show that Smith added elements from other sources into his Book of Abraham.
A good example is the fact that he put the “anti-black” doctrine, which was commonly held in his day, into the mouth of Abraham! Until 1978 the Mormon leaders banned blacks from the priesthood and would not let them be married in their temples. The Book of Abraham 1:21-27 was often used to support this discriminatory doctrine. The Book of Moses was also cited because it states that blacks were put under a curse.


While the Pearl of Great Price is filled with problems, the other two books of scripture which Joseph Smith produced are also laced with serious errors. Mormon apologists, of course, would like us to believe otherwise. Milton R. Hunter, for example, made this fantastic claim concerning Joseph Smith’s works:

 “The Prophet Joseph Smith produced for the world three new volumes of holy scriptures… and, in addition, he revised the Bible. No prophet who has ever lived has accomplished such a tremendous feat. There are only 177 pages in the old Testament attributed to Moses, while Joseph Smith either translated through the gift and power of God or received as direct revelation from Jehovah 835 [pages].” (Deseret News, Church Section, July 18, 1970, p. 14)
While we must agree that Joseph Smith produced a great deal of material that purports to be scripture, it does not appear that this material bears any evidence of divine inspiration. For those who would like to learn more about problems in Joseph Smith’s “scriptures,” the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, we recommend our books, Covering Up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon and Major Problems of Mormonism. For a very detailed study of the changes, plagiarism and other problems found in the Pearl of Great Price the reader should have our new publication, FLAWS IN THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE….

 

http://www.alaskandreams.net/ekklesia/Flaws%20In%20the%20Pearl%20of%20Great%20Price.htm

 Most Christians do not accept either the Mormons or the Jehowah Witnesses as being Christians, they are cults..