DrewM

This one is good: Strong Reasons

Willow, I think the law of consecration has a lot to do with the heart, being willing to do whatever or give whatever is necessary for building up the kingdom of God. That doesn't always mean that we end up giving all or doing all, but we should be willing. That truly, in my opinion, is the heart of the gospel--giving ourselves to God and his will. It's a beautiful thing. Like you said, however, we all fall short in one way or another at different times.

Willow, The law of consecration has never been taken away. The United Order has. Every endowed LDS member has covenanted to live the law of consecration.

Thanks for your comments, fellows. As always, they are well balanced and insightful

I don't guess I made it clear enough. I think these scripture support the LDS view and NOT the Calvinistic view.

T-U-L-I-P Total Depravity (Original Sin) Sin inherited from parents: Deut. 1:34-39; Ezek. 18:19-20; Isa 7:15-16; Jer 19:2-6; Matt. 18:1-3; 19:13-14 Non-saved incapable choosing or doing good: Deut.11:26-28; 30:15-20; Josh. 24:15; Acts 10:1-4, 22 (cf 11:14); Rom. 2:14-16 Unconditional Election (Predestination of Individuals) Acts 10:34; Rom 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 1:17; Tit 2:11; 1 Ti 2:3-4; 2 Peter 3:9 Limited Atonement (Jesus died only for the elect) Luke 19:10; John 1:29; 3:16; Romans 1:16; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 2:9; 1 John 2:1-2 Irresistible Grace (No choice in one's salvation) Matt. 11:28; Acts 6:10; 7:51-55; Revelation 22:17; John 12:32 (cf. John 6:44 & 2 Nephi. 26:24-28, 33) Perseverance of the Saints (Once saved always saved) Ezek 3:20; 18:24-26; Matt. 7:21-23; Luke 8:13; 9:62; 12:41-48; John 15:1-7; 1 Cor. 8:11; Gal. 5:1-4, 13; Col. 1:21-23; 1 Ti 1:18-20; 4:1; 5:8; Heb. 3:12; 4:1-2,11; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 10:38-39; James 5:19-20; 1 Pet. 5:8-10; 2 Pet. 2:1,15,20-22; 3:17; Rev 2:4-5; 3:5,16-17 I invite you to take a look at these scriptures if you're interested in the topic. It shouldn't take more than about 45 minutes.

I've made a scriptural list before on Biblical References to Deification. I made one today on Calvinism. I think this scriptural list shows the inconsistency of the Calvinist doctrines of total depravity, unlimited election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints. LDS reject all of these concepts. Interestingly, some Calvinists have wanted to exclude Mormons from being Christian because of this issue. Would these same extreme Calvinists exclude Arminians? T-U-L-I-P Total Depravity (Original Sin) Sin inherited from parents: Deut. 1:34-39; Ezek. 18:19-20; Isa 7:15-16; Jer 19:2-6; Matt. 18:1-3; 19:13-14 Non-saved incapable choosing or doing good: Deut.11:26-28; 30:15-20; Josh. 24:15; Acts 10:1-4, 22 (cf 11:14); Rom. 2:14-16 Unconditional Election (Predestination of Individuals) Acts 10:34; Rom 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 1:17; Tit 2:11; 1 Ti 2:3-4; 2 Peter 3:9 Limited Atonement (Jesus died only for the elect) Luke 19:10; John 1:29; 3:16; Romans 1:16; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 2:9; 1 John 2:1-2 Irresistible Grace (No choice in one's salvation) Matt. 11:28; Acts 6:10; 7:51-55; Revelation 22:17; John 12:32 (cf. John 6:44 & 2 Nephi. 26:24-28, 33) Perseverance of the Saints (Once saved always saved) Ezek 3:20; 18:24-26; Matt. 7:21-23; Luke 8:13; 9:62; 12:41-48; John 15:1-7; 1 Cor. 8:11; Gal. 5:1-4, 13; Col. 1:21-23; 1 Ti 1:18-20; 4:1; 5:8; Heb. 3:12; 4:1-2,11; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 10:38-39; James 5:19-20; 1 Pet. 5:8-10; 2 Pet. 2:1,15,20-22; 3:17; Rev 2:4-5; 3:5,16-17 I invite you to take a look at these scriptures if you're interested in the topic. It shouldn't take more than about 45 minutes.

It's a great blog on LDS apologetics et cetera. Strong Reasons

Jesus said that we share on common Father and God (see John 20:17). That makes him, at least in one sense, our brother. He is also fully divine (John 1:1).

Haha, that's great :)

This is one of my resent posts on my blog Strong Reasons. Tell me what you think. --------------------------- Paul tells us in Acts 17:22-29 basic nature of God and our relationship to him. Please read carefully. " Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. " Now, may I ask, Paul, why shouldn't we think of God as gold, silver, or stone, etc? What is the logic in your statement? I think Paul would say "We are God's offspring. We are, therefore, what he is. He is what we are. Therefore, we shouldn't think of him as anything else like gold, silver, or something created by man." That's what this scripture seems to say to me in very plain terms. Now, if we're the offspring of God, he cannot be anything but what we are! His logic is as clear as can be. To interpret any other way is to destroy the meaning of his logic. Further, God is not "unknown" or unknowable like the Athens thought. Many today also teach that he is unknowable, or inconceivable by nature. Does this imply that the mainstream Christian idea of God as being inconceivable or unknowable is derived from the Greek world of thought? Lastly, Paul argues that we are God's offspring (Greek: genos!) and therefore we ought not think he is like silver, or gold. What should we think of him as then? The implication is perfectly clear. If we are his genos (Latin genus, English, "species") then we ought to think that he is basically like us in his nature. We are of the same species. The Geneva Bible translates it "generation." Generation is a word derived from "genus." Genus has to do with origin usually in the sense of a child has his origin in his parent. For fun, here are some other languages: genus ergo cum simus Dei non debemus aestimare auro aut argento aut lapidi sculpturae artis et cogitationis hominis divinum esse simile (Latin) Siendo pues linaje de Dios, no hemos de estimar la Divinidad ser semejante a oro, o a plata, o a piedra, escultura de artificio o de imaginación de hombres. (Reina Valera, Spanish) Sendo nós, pois, geração de Deus, não devemos pensar que a divindade seja semelhante ao ouro, ou à prata, ou à pedra esculpida pela arte e imaginação do homem. (PJFA) Essendo dunque progenie di Dio, non dobbiam credere che la Divinità sia simile ad oro, ad argento, o a pietra scolpiti dall'arte e dall'immaginazione umana. (Italian, IRL) γενος ουν υπαρχοντες του θεου ουκ οφειλομεν νομιζειν χρυσω η αργυρω η λιθω χαραγματι τεχνης και ενθυμησεως ανθρωπου το θειον ειναι ομοιον (Greek) Since this appears to be the plain and obvious meaning of the verse, could we say that Paul believed that men are gods by nature? Do you accept Paul's teaching, or do you prefer the Greek understanding of God as being "unknown" and totally other? I've always been impressed by this scripture and see it as one of the greatest Biblical evidences for the basic tenet of Mormonism, namely the nature of God and man.

This is from my blog Strong Reasons. Please give me your thoughts: --------------------------------- After Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden, God "drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Genesis 3:24). What could this "flaming sword" represent? The Book of Mormon has the key. Lehi saw a vision of the tree of life (See 1 Nephi 8). He related this vision to his family. Nephi was moved by the dream and "was desirous also that I might see, and hear, and know of these things, by the power of the Holy Ghost" (1 Nephi 10:17). "For it came to pass after I had desired to know the things that my father had seen, and believing that the Lord was able to make them known unto me, as I sat pondering in mine heart I was caught away in the Spirit of the Lord, yea, into an exceedingly high mountain, which I never had before seen, and upon which I never had before set my foot. And the Spirit said unto me: Behold, what desirest thou? And I said: I desire to behold the things which my father saw" (1 Nephi 11:1-3). Nephi then sees the tree of life, the birth, life and ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (among many other things). He sees a a great gulf that separates the wicked from the righteous (Compare Luke 16:26). He is then told, "And the large and spacious building, which thy father saw, is vain imaginations and the pride of the children of men. And a great and a terrible gulf divideth them; yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God, and the Messiah who is the Lamb of God, of whom the Holy Ghost beareth record, from the beginning of the world until this time, and from this time henceforth and forever" (1 Nephi 12:18 word is corrected to read sword in accordance with the original manuscript). This gulf that separates the wicked and the righteous is also referred to as "the sword of the justice of the Eternal God, and the Messiah who is the Lamb of God." I believe this has reference to the same terminology in Genesis 3:24. The sword represents God's justice. Since man has sinned, justice prohibits him from returning to God's presence and partaking of the tree of life. This interpretation is further solidified when compared to what Nephi said to his brothers immediately after his vision. "And I said unto them that it was an awful gulf, which separated the wicked from the tree of life, and also from the saints of God....And I said unto them that our father also saw that the justice of God did also divide the wicked from the righteous; and the brightness thereof was like unto the brightness of a flaming fire, which ascendeth up unto God forever and ever, and hath no end" (1 Nephi 15:28, 30). Now that man has been cast out of God's presence and justice separates man from God's presence, what is to be done? How can we cross this "gulf" that separates us from God and the tree of life? The Book of Mormon answers that question authoritatively. Lehi said to his wicked sons: "O that ye would awake; awake from a deep sleep, yea, even from the sleep of hell, and shake off the awful chains by which ye are bound, which are the chains which bind the children of men, that they are carried away captive down to the eternal gulf of misery and woe" (2 Nephi 1:13). The once wicked but now saved Ammon exclaimed: "Behold, we went forth even in wrath, with mighty threatenings to destroy his church. Oh then, why did he not consign us to an awful destruction, yea, why did he not let the sword of his justice fall upon us, and doom us to eternal despair? Oh, my soul, almost as it were, fleeth at the thought. Behold, he did not exercise his justice upon us, but in his great mercy hath brought us over that everlasting gulf of death and misery, even to the salvation of our souls" (Alma 26:18-20). "Thus we may see that the Lord is merciful unto all who will, in the sincerity of their hearts, call upon his holy name. Yea, thus we see that the gate of heaven is open unto all, even to those who will believe on the name of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God. Yea, we see that whosoever will may lay hold upon the word of God, which is quick and powerful, which shall divide asunder all the cunning and the snares and the wiles of the devil, and lead the man of Christ in a strait and narrow course across that everlasting gulf of misery which is prepared to engulf the wicked— And land their souls, yea, their immortal souls, at the right hand of God in the kingdom of heaven, to sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and with Jacob, and with all our holy fathers, to go no more out" (Helaman 3:27-30). "And now, my sons, remember, remember that it is upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is Christ, the Son of God, that ye must build your foundation; that when the devil shall send forth his mighty winds, yea, his shafts in the whirlwind, yea, when all his hail and his mighty storm shall beat upon you, it shall have no power over you to drag you down to the gulf of misery and endless wo, because of the rock upon which ye are built, which is a sure foundation, a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall" (Helaman 5:12). As we can see in each of these verses, mercy is juxtaposed to justice. It is by the mercy of Jesus Christ that those who believe on his name and build on his foundation can cross that "everlasting gulf of misery" and be spared from "the sword of the justice of God." It is only after we "wake up" and realize the seriousness of the justice of God that we can be freed from the oppressive powers of Satan and hell. As a side note, I have been moved while preparing this and studying this topic. The Book of Mormon is truly marvelous. To suggest that is is the product of a 23-24 year old man in the late 1820's is, to my mind, ludicrous. Truly, this book and its teachings are divinely inspired. EDIT: I did some more research and found these scriptures that corroborate the information above. "And he said unto them: Behold, I, Samuel, a Lamanite, do speak the words of the Lord which he doth put into my heart; and behold he hath put it into my heart to say unto this people that the sword of justice hangeth over this people; and four hundred years pass not away save the sword of justice falleth upon this people" (Helaman 13:5). "Behold, I would tell you somewhat concerning the justice of God, and the sword of his almighty wrath, which doth hang over you except ye repent and withdraw your armies into your own lands, or the land of your possessions, which is the land of Nephi" (Alma 54:6). "And it shall come to pass, saith the Father, that the sword of my justice shall hang over them at that day; and except they repent it shall fall upon them, saith the Father, yea, even upon all the nations of the Gentiles" (3 Nephi 20:20). "And when ye shall see these sayings coming forth among you, then ye need not any longer spurn at the doings of the Lord, for the sword of his justice is in his right hand; and behold, at that day, if ye shall spurn at his doings he will cause that it shall soon overtake you" (3 Nephi 29:4). "Behold, the sword of vengeance hangeth over you; and the time soon cometh that he avengeth the blood of the saints upon you, for he will not suffer their cries any longer" (Mormon 8:41). "Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you, which are built up to get power and gain—and the work, yea, even the work of destruction come upon you, yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you, to your overthrow and destruction if ye shall suffer these things to be" (Ether 8:23).

Well said.

For what it's worth, I believe salvation is by grace. I believe it is only through Jesus that we can be saved. (Since you asked). The New Testament and post-New Testament fathers seemed to indicate there were ordinances reserved for the members of the church who were "adults" or "spiritual" instead of "babes" and "carnal." What those ordinances consisted of is not clear at all. One of the things involved, however, was gnosis (secret knowledge). This sounds fairly similar to the LDS concept. That's all my point was. :)

Mahonri, I'd love to see that quote. There is clearly a relationship between ordinances and revelation.

I agree Elgama, thanks.

Latter-day Saints have long been criticized for our rejection of the post-Biblical concepts of the Trinity. One such post-Biblical concept is the idea that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ontologically one Being who is three persons. In contrast, LDS believe that the the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three persons and three distinct beings. While mainstream/traditional Christians maintain that the three persons of the Trinity are in reality only one Being and one God, LDS Christians affirm that there are in fact three Beings who are one in glory, power, might, dominion, mind, will, knowledge, attributes, etc. In LDS thought the three persons of the Trinity are one in every conceivable way except their identity or being. Over the years some of my non-LDS Christian friends have listed a few different New Testament passages in support of their concept of the Trinity. I will here quote them and then comment on why they do not reflect post-Biblical Trinitarian notions and show how they often are more congruous with the LDS concept of the Godhead. John 10:30 "I and my Father are one." This verse does not say that they are "same being." This text does not say how they are one at all. Fortunately for us, John later records Jesus' teaching on how He and his Father are one. "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as (kathos) we are...Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as (kathos) thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as (kathos) we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me" (John 17:11, 20-23). Jesus here makes clear that his disciples can be one even as (kathos) He and his Father are one. The Greek kathos means just as or how (See Strong's). In other words, Jesus prayed that they may be one just as He and his Father are one. If Jesus and his Father are one being manifest in two persons, for Jesus' prayer to be fulfilled his disciples must loose their identity and become absorbed into the Trinity! Assuming that a Billion or more will be saved (just for fun)--what will that make? A "Billinity"? So how are Jesus and his Father one, according to Jesus? The key is in verse 22: "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that(hina) they may be one, even as we are one." The Greek word hina translated "that" literally means in order that (See Strong's). Jesus and his Father share the same glory and are thus one. Jesus prayed that his disciples may receive Their glory in order that they may be one with Them. There is no other passage of scripture in the Bible that defines how Jesus and his Father are one. The later post-Biblical doctrine that define the Trinity as one being in three persons is not derived from the Bible but is added to it. John 14:10-11 "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake." As seen above, Jesus prayed that his disciples "all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee," but one need not go to a different sermon of Jesus to find this. He refers to this very concept in the same sermon. In verse 20 he said, "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you" (John 14:20). If Jesus meant for us to interpret "the Father [...] dwelleth in me" and "I am in the Father, and the Father in me" as "My Father and I are the same Being," did He also intend for us to interpret "I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you" that we, He, and His Father are all one ontological being? This, of course, is absurd. To complicate the issue further, Jesus concludes his sermon by saying "my Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). Such talk is nonsense if He and His Father are the same being. Colossians 2:9 "For in [Christ] dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." Some have interpreted this scripture as meaning that all of the Trinity somehow dwelt in the person of Jesus in an ontological union of being as defined in the post-Biblical creeds. We'll now investigate that. First, one must understand that "Godhead" in 16th century English means "deity" or "godhood." The Greek word is theotes which means "divinity." This passage would better be rendered for our modern readers as "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (ESV). The scripture, therefore, is not stating that all of the members of the Trinity dwelt in Christ, but that Christ was fully and completely divine. Something else the critics overlook is the following verse. "And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power." The word translated as "complete" is the adjective form of the noun translated as "fullness" in the previous verse. For this reason, it is better translated "And you have a fullness in him..." This verse, understood this way, teaches that the fullness of divinity that was in Jesus can also be in us. This fullness was not reserved for Jesus only, but for all. Therefore, this scripture cannot be rightly interpreted to support the idea that God is three persons yet one being. The doctrine of the saints receiving a fullness of God is reflected in another scripture authored by Paul. "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God." (Ephesians 3:14-19). 1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." This one is the most fascinating. Why? Because it is almost universally recognized as being an interpolation (addition) to scripture that wasn't actually written by the original author (See Metzger, Bruce. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 647-649). Even if the text were authentic, which it probably is not, it does not define how the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost are one. For such a definition one must turn to John 17 which clearly shows they are not ontologically one being, but one in glory. Any other proof texts for the Trinity or comments are welcome. Thanks!

Which of your 14 questions or 7 blind assertions would you like me to respond to?

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: What may all of this mean for mainstream Christians today who often teach that all an individual needs to know to be saved is that Jesus is his or her Savior? Where are the gnosis and musterion today?

In the New Testament the word "mystery" often implies a "secret rite" in the Greek (see Thayer's lexicon). In the Latin Vulgate, it is often translated as sacramentum from which the English word "sacrament" is derived. LDS people mean "sacrament" when we say "ordinance." The two words are really synonymous. In LDS terminology, referring to the Lord's Supper as "the Sacrament" isn't technically complete. It is "the sacrament of the Lord's supper" or "the ordinance of the Lord's supper." Baptism, confirmation, priesthood ordination, etc are all "sacraments" or "ordinances." To avoid the confusion of referring to the Lord's Super as "the sacrament," the Church translation of the scriptures into Spanish refer to la santa cena (the Holy Dinner) instead of to el sacramento (the sacrament). In many older texts and often considered the more authentic reading, 1 Cor. 2:1 says that "I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the mystery of God." Later texts changed it to "Testimony." Mystery fits better in the context. Let me show you why. For example, verse 6: Then in chapter 3 he repeats this theme, saying In the next chapter, Paul writes, "Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and the stewards of the mysteries of God" (1 Cor. 4:1). So, It appears that Paul had in his mind two classes of Saints. The teleoi (or mature, the initiated, or "perfect") who had given to them hidden wisdom in a mystery (sacrament, ordinance, secret ritual) who could receive the adult food. The second class was those who hadn't received the hidden wisdom in a mystery because they were not yet ready. The people in Corinthians who had been members of the Church already for years fell into the second class, according to Paul's epistle to them. That's pretty fascinating. I think this topic is also hinted at by the author of Hebrews (whom I believe to be Paul). Another fascinating reference to this is in Ephesians 5. In this context Paul speaks of marriage and the Church: Paul refers to marriage as a "great sacrament" and also speaks of the church as a bride without "wrinkle" or "spot" painting an image of special ceremonial wedding clothing. Anyway, this continues after the New Testament. Here's the info I've gathered so far on the topic. Please read the quotes carefully before you start saying they refer to baptism or the Eucharist (some may, indeed, but not all for reasons that will be apparent to the careful reader). I think there is some real clear indicators that the "mysteries" were often other ordinances now long lost (except to the Latter-day Saints). Ante-Nicene Fathers:

Thank you sir!

Some things your bishop may consider: 1. Was this a repeated offense? 2. Have you had this problem with more than one girl? 3. Did you initiate such activities, did she, or was it mutual? 4. How are you doing in other areas like tithing, church attendance, scripture study, prayer, magnify your callings, etc? 5. How long did you wait to confess this problem? 6. Have you sought forgiveness from those you have offended (when appropriate)? For a transgression of the sort you named (if I understood correctly), you probably will not have a formal church court if you're truly repentant. EDIT: Remember, there is no dishonor in making a mistake, even a serious one, and seeking forgiveness. However, people who sin and cover their sins are cowards.

Like I said, I don't think you'll get kicked out of school. I think you'd be surprised how many students make that kind of mistake. However, you must be willing to face consequences. If not, you're not repentant. If you're not repentant, you might face greater consequences than getting kicked out of school. I suggest you seek the strength to say "Dear Lord, I have made a big mistake. I'm scared of the consequences, but I'm scared more of my sins and their consequences. Give me strength to do what is right. I only want to make Thee happy." I think you'll be surprised how merciful the Lord is with those who repent, and how terrible and just He is with those who fear man more than God.

From my blog: Hebrews 12:22-23 says "But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Hebrews 12:22-23) The Greek word translated "firstborn" here is πρωτοτοκων (prototokon). This is the plural form of πρωτοτοκως. The word is a compound word from πρωτος (proto-first as in prototype) and τοκως (tokos-born). Literally, then the word means "firstborn [ones]." The word "firstborn" in English could either be singular or plural. In this case, it is meant to be plural. So, what is "The Church of the firstborn [ones]?" Let's go to D&C 93 for clarification. "And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn; And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn." (D&C 93:21-22). Christ, in the pre-mortal realm, was the Firstborn Son. As such He is heir to all that the Father has. Those who are reborn, "begotten through [Jesus]," become "partakers of the glory of the [Firstborn]" who is Jesus. They, then, become "the church of the firstborn." The meaning is that those who are begotten through Jesus Christ receive his glory and become heirs with Jesus Christ, they each become "firstborn [ones]" in their inheritance from God. This doctrine is taught in passages such as Romans 8:14-21, Galatians 4:1-7, 1 John 3:1-3, and D&C 76:24. Through Jesus Christ, the saints become heirs of God as though each of us were the Firstborn Son. We all, through Jesus, can inherit all things (See Matt. 24:47, Romans 8:32, D&C 76:58-59). "He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son." (Revelation 21:7). Unfortunately, this meaning is obscured in the English version of Hebrews 12:23. I think most people interpret "firstborn" as being singular and thereby referring only to Jesus. (It should be clear on careful reading though: "church of the firstborn, which are written"). I believe this number confusion (singular versus plural) is also true of D&C 93:22. Here, I believe, "church of the Firstborn" should not be capitalized since it probably is intended to be understood as plural ("church of the firstborn [ones]") and not as a reference to Christ the Firstborn alone. I believe this verse would be understood properly thus: "And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn; And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the [Firstborn], and are [therefore] the church of the firstborn [ones]." (D&C 93:21-22). Also, this nuance is lost in the foreign language translations of the scriptures. Although in Portuguese and in Spanish translations of the Bible, Hebrews 12:23 reads "Church of the firstborn ones (plural)" in the translations of D&C 93:22 it reads "Church of the Firstborn (singular)." I suspect this problem exists in all of the foreign language translations done by the Church. -------- I have some other translation issues. Abraham 1:3 in Spanish now says, in part, "el derecho del primogénito, o sea, del primer hombre, el cual es Adán, nuestro primer padre..." It should say "el cual es Adán, oprimer padre.." 1 Nefi 19:23 "...porque apliqué todas las Escritura a nosotros mismos.." Would be better as "...porque asemajé todas las escituras a nosotros mismos..." There are a few others I have written down somewhere.

Also, who do I contact about an editing issue in the English scriptures? There's a few suggestions I have there too.