Best argument for modern prophets

[Queolby]

What is the best argument that modern prophets are needed by only using the Bible and logical opinion. I already know of the usual versus often-quoted like, Ephesians 2:19-20 Ephesians4:11-14 Amos3:7

thanks a lot!

 

[Jane_Doe]

Why would an unchanging God suddenly change and go mute?

[Midwest LDS]

Have we suddenly become so perfect that we have no need of guidance from Heaven? Why did our ancestors receive direct and personal guidance from God while we don't? Does God love us less than them? Just a couple of questions that occur to me when I'm asked about this subject.

My personal favorite biblical scripture arguing in favor of modern prophets and apostles is Acts 1:12-26 where the Apsotles replace Judas. Why would God have them replace Judas as an Apostle if that office was not supposed to continue? Of course, my testimony of modern day prophets comes from the Holy Ghost, but scriptures like this one help.

[Anddenex]

45 minutes ago, Queolby said:

What is the best argument that modern prophets are needed by only using the Bible and logical opinion. I already know of the usual versus often-quoted like, Ephesians 2:19-20 Ephesians4:11-14 Amos3:7

thanks a lot!

 

As to this date, since my mission 23 years ago, this question I have always found to be intriguing by one who professes to believe in Christ. To be frank, I have never understood the rationale behind it, especially when a person is aware of the obvious scriptures in the New Testament that abundantly make it clear. I find this question similar to a Jew during Christ's time, after his death, asking the apostles to prove we need further revelation by only using the Torah. Would it be wise for the apostles to only use the Torah and forget/remove all other things taught during Christ's ministry and after his death by the prophets and apostles? The answer is pretty obvious -- no.

My first argument would be read the "whole" Bible, God's pattern of revealing His word to His sons and daughters is plain and easy to understand.

My second argument would be read "all" of God's revealed word through modern prophets. It would have been unwise for the prophets and apostles to only use the Torah to explain the need for apostles and prophets, or to convince them of the Messiah. It would be wise to use the modern revelation at that time, Christ's life and ministry, and the written word from Paul, Peter, James, John, and the others.

My third argument would be the calling of Peter as the prophet upon Christ's death.

My fourth argument would be what @Midwest LDS already shared

My fifth argument would be what @Jane_Doe shared - God is the same yesterday, today, and forever (the pattern did not change in the Old Testament, and the pattern remained in the New Testament when they weren't in a period of apostasy).

My sixth argument is God has left us a comforter, who reveals truth (John 14:26, John 15:26, Matthew 16)

My seventh argument would be (reverting back to second argument) Jacob 4:6, Doctrine and Covenants 1:37-38, and many others.

[mordorbund]

In response to Hebrews 1:1-2 suggesting there were no more prophets in Paul's day, gramps shares the following:

Quote

A far cry from ending the age of prophets, the Bible mentions them as a sign for true believers. Christians who await the return of the Master also await the coming of prophets who will speak for Him and work miracles in His name (Revelation 11:3-13). The early church was filled with prophets – so much so that Paul felt the need to counsel on how prophets should speak in meetings (1 Corinthians 14:29). Some of the prophets named in scripture are Judas, Silas (Acts 15:32), Agabus (Acts 21:10), and James (James 5:10). Christians who want a church patterned after the early apostolic church will seek for prophets.

 

[wenglund]

In addition to what others have said, John 5:32-40 (particularly verse 39) provides excellent justification for living prophets.

After all, the Jews at the time of Christ's mortal ministry had the scriptures (though no living prophets), and yet they were unable to recognize the source of eternal life that was testified within those scriptures, and this  even when Christ walked and preached and performed miracles among them. This remains the case for Jews today, and even to some extent Christians, at least in terms of recognizing the Church of Jesus Christ, that is until  they accept  living prophets. Living prophets, among other things, are needed as another "witness" of Christ and his gospel and kingdom..

(I will be drilling down deeper into the notion knowing Christ and gaining eternal life in the thread on "Are We Responsible For Our Own Learning)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Guest Scott]

 

6 hours ago, mordorbund said:

In response to Hebrews 1:1-2 suggesting there were no more prophets in Paul's day, gramps shares the following:

 

 

I was also thinking of Revelation 11:1-12 (in your link) since it is about the future and says that there will be two prophets that testify in the last days.  

If the Bible is to believed, it is clear that there will once again be prophets.  

Also, the first two versus say that there will be a separation of those who worship in the temple and those who do not.

Since most other Christian churches don't believe in post biblical temple worship it is interesting as to the explanations they come up with as to what those verses mean.   Here's one:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/guzik_david/studyguide_rev/rev_11.cfm

 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

6 hours ago, wenglund said:

In addition to what others have said, John 5:32-40 (particularly verse 39) provides excellent justification for living prophets.

After all, the Jews at the time of Christ's mortal ministry had the scriptures (though no living prophets), and yet they were unable to recognize the source of eternal life that was testified within those scriptures, and this  even when Christ walked and preached and performed miracles among them. This remains the case for Jews today, and even to some extent Christians, at least in terms of recognizing the Church of Jesus Christ, that is until  they accept  living prophets. Living prophets, among other things, are needed as another "witness" of Christ and his gospel and kingdom..

(I will be drilling down deeper into the notion knowing Christ and gaining eternal life in the thread on "Are We Responsible For Our Own Learning)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It’s funny how often I see this scripture (John 5:39) quoted within the Church as if it were a straightforward injunction that we should search the scriptures; when Jesus’ statement—taken in context—is positively dripping with sarcasm.  

As for the OP:  one reason is something others have hinted at it, but to put it another way: the extant written corpus of scripture is not enough to devine the will of God for our particular situations.  Never was, never will be.  The Torah wasn’t enough for Isaiah, the Old Testament wasn’t enough for Mark, Mark wasn’t enough for Luke, and Peter’s epistles weren’t enough for John.  Even if we could somehow develop a canon with unquestionably timeless value, an army of scripture-lawyers would inevitably pervert it to their own ends until we had a litany of competing schools of interpretation— which is, in fact, what happened to Christianity. 

To make His current will known, God can either speak to us directly; or He can appoint certain trustworthy emissaries.  In the event—He does both, and each lines of communication serves as a check against potentially spurious revelations coming through the other line. 

Edited January 5, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Jesus’ statement—taken in context—is positively dripping with sarcasm.

I....must.....not........feel........justified.......

[wenglund]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It’s funny how often I see this scripture (John 5:39) quoted within the Church as if it were a straightforward injunction that we should search the scriptures; when Jesus’ statement—taken in context—is positively dripping with sarcasm.  

Exactly. As I posted on the other thread:

Even if one believes that eternal life may be found within the scriptures, the Jews at the time of Christ demonstrated that something more is need than just the words of scripture.

In addition to living prophets, the first lesson of "Come Follow Me" gives some indication of what else is needed:

Mental and Spiritual Action

• Ask, seek, and knock. (Lk 11:9-13; Mt. 7:7)
• Ask in faith, nothing wavering (Jm 1:5-6)
• Ask in Christ’s name in faith (D&C 15:18)
• Diligently seek through the Spirit (1 Ne 10:17-19; 1Cor 2:9-11)
• Seek learning by study and faith. .(DC 88:118)
• Search the scriptures daily. (Acts 17:11; Jn 5:39)
• Receive the Word with readiness of mind.(Act 17:11)
• Cultivate good mental soil (parable of the Sower Mt 13:1-23)
• Delight in and ponder the scriptures (2Ne 4:15)
• Think on these things. (Philip 4:8)
• Awake and arouse your facilities, exercise a particle of faith, and desire to believe (Alma 32:27)
• Seek diligently to teach one another words of wisdom.(DC 88:118)

Physical Action

• Fast and pray (Alma 5:45-46)
• Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only (Jm 1:22; Philip 4:8)
• Do works of faith (Jm 2:17)
• Be anxiously engaged in a good cause to bring about righteousness. (D&C 58L26-28)

Both

• Come follow me (Lk 18:22
• Discipleship (i.e. he who receives the law and doeth it—D&C41:5, doeth unto the poor and needy and sick—D&C 52:40; 84:91;  lays down his life—D&C 103:28)
• Keep the commandments (Mt 19:16-22)
• Do God’s will (Jn 7L17)
• Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good (1Thes 5:21)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Fether]

.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Fether

[Traveler]

21 hours ago, Queolby said:

What is the best argument that modern prophets are needed by only using the Bible and logical opinion. I already know of the usual versus often-quoted like, Ephesians 2:19-20 Ephesians4:11-14 Amos3:7

thanks a lot!

 

What are the Biblical arguments that there will be no true prophets in the last days prior to the return of Christ?

 

The Traveler

[JohnsonJones]

15 hours ago, Scott said:

 

 

I was also thinking of Revelation 11:1-12 (in your link) since it is about the future and says that there will be two prophets that testify in the last days.  

If the Bible is to believed, it is clear that there will once again be prophets.  

Also, the first two versus say that there will be a separation of those who worship in the temple and those who do not.

Since most other Christian churches don't believe in post biblical temple worship it is interesting as to the explanations they come up with as to what those verses mean.   Here's one:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/comm/guzik_david/studyguide_rev/rev_11.cfm

 

 

Revelations 11 is perhaps an extremely STRONG argument that there MUST be prophets in the last days.  It states blatantly that they will prophesy.  If one believes in the book of Revelations, that there will be a second coming and that Revelations shows us what will come in the last days leading up to the Millennial reign of our Lord, then chapter 11 shows that there MUST be prophets (at least two of them) that will be around.

Quote

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.

7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

Of course, as per that chapter, it also shows that a majority DO NOT believe them and fight against them.  They will even let their dead bodies unburied and celebrate their deaths. 

This also indicates that a majority of the earth will REJECT prophets and rejoice over these prophets death when they are killed.

[Queolby]

On 1/5/2019 at 8:46 AM, Traveler said:

What are the Biblical arguments that there will be no true prophets in the last days prior to the return of Christ?

 

The Traveler

Hebrews 1:1-2 and Luke 16:16

[CV75]

On 1/4/2019 at 1:11 PM, Queolby said:

What is the best argument that modern prophets are needed by only using the Bible and logical opinion. I already know of the usual versus often-quoted like, Ephesians 2:19-20 Ephesians4:11-14 Amos3:7

thanks a lot!

 

Revelation11;10 speaks of two latter-day prophets. 1 Corinthians 14:29-37 applies today. 1 Corinthians 12:28-29 includes them as part of the church.

[unixknight]

On ‎1‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 1:11 PM, Queolby said:

What is the best argument that modern prophets are needed by only using the Bible and logical opinion. I already know of the usual versus often-quoted like, Ephesians 2:19-20 Ephesians4:11-14 Amos3:7

thanks a lot!

 

The problem with trying to use the Bible alone to provide evidence for any Restored Church doctrine is that the Bible alone is just not sufficient to do that.  If it were, then Protestants would already believe it.  Protestant Christianity is all about sola scriptura (in general) and have spent centuries accounting for every single verse.  What may seem to very obviously support concepts like modern prophets is interpreted in a very different way by our Protestant friends.  You can present your take on those verses, but don't expect to make any armor-piercing arguments with them.

[prisonchaplain]

A Pentecostal favorite is Joel 2:28-29:  And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my spirit upon on flesh; and your sons and daughters shall prophesy, and your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days I will pour out my spirit.

Peter, in his great Acts 2 sermon, counters the accusation that the apostles and believers are drunk, by declaring, "THIS is THAT which was spoken by the prophet Joel." Of course, we experience the gift of prophecy different, but the idea that the gifts of the Holy Spirit, including prophesy, would cease--especially that such would happen as a result of the completion of scripture canon, is largely based on conjecture, in my always humble opinion.

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, Queolby said:

Hebrews 1:1-2 and Luke 16:16

Luke 16

Quote

14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

In the verse you stated in Luke it appears he was talking about the ancient prophets up until John the Baptist.  Under this idea you present, are you saying that there was no need for the Lord to teach?  

As that is what it implies from your assertion in my understanding, even though the chapter itself seems to talk about something entirely different and unrelated to what you state...except for the connection in verse 31 to verse 16 which to me implies more towards the conviction that justifies the LORD and his teachings more then condemnation of that of others having the gift of prophesy or other writings that would come after John the Baptist.

Then we have Hebrews chapter 1

Quote

1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;

12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.

13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

This seems to validate the LORD and his teachings, but in no way invalidates John (the Revelator's) teaching in regards to the two prophets coming in the future (as per Revelations) nor does it seem to counter that which occurred at the day of Pentecost. 

Though I suppose one could say that it means that since it talks about happening in the past, it could in nowise be talking about the Future or about that day in which it discusses that the Son has now come.

It is interesting the commentary on Angels beyond that, and of course depends on what one defines as a prophet (if it is one that testifies of the Lord than apostles could be prophets themselves, and Hebrews 2 disagrees with the idea that Hebrews 1:1 is saying there are no more prophets) and of course there are the angels.

Quote

1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.

2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;

3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.

6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?

7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Overall, Hebrews 1 (and 2) seem to talk less about prophets and MORE on a testimony of the Lord and the great things he has done to redeem us and give us salvation than telling us that the Lord will no longer have those who testify of him or prophesy or give prophecy through the Holy Spirit.

I suppose it depends on how one interprets such a reading on their own and how much they feel is implied.

Do they feel Hebrews with it's one verse taken out of context is supposed to invalidate the prophecy given to others about there being two prophets in the last days...OR...even greater, as such comes from prophets in the Old Testament but more specifically in our time from John's Revelation in the New Testament (thus being a prophecy hence meaning he, as an apostle was also a prophet) that the Book of Revelations as a whole is invalid and non-canon.

The reason?

If prophecy has ceased and there are no more prophets, then John the Revelator could NOT have been a prophet.  This means the prophecy given as Revelations could not be and is not true, as prophets would have ceased and thus John could not have given it as a prophecy of the future.

I would say that John DID prophecy and the book of Revelation is perhaps one of the strongest indications that, yes, Prophets DID continue in our time after the Lord ascended to heaven.  That this indicates that Apostles in some ways were MORE than just the prophets of old, but were the leaders of the Church, personal witnesses who saw the Lord, AND had the power and authority given to them to Prophesy and thus were also Prophets (and hence we also have their writings in the Bible today as Canon).

We have different interpretations of this (I believe that some would say this is from the Holy Spirit and hence any who have the Holy Spirit fall upon them thus are prophets, while some of the Latter-day Saints may say that there is only ONE prophet and others say that we have 15 or others say more), but I think that many may say there are still those that prophesy in the Lord, and hence we have modern day prophets.

It is more to ask then, what differentiates the LDS prophet from any of the other Prophets that may be out there...and in this I would say because we believe him to also be a Seer and a Revelator as WELL as an apostle (being a special witness of the Lord).  This on TOP of simply being a prophet, even if we simply call him that, he is a special witness that we believe talks directly to the Lord as well as a Seer and a Revelator.

 

PS: On the idea of prophets in our time or at least being able to be here and be prophets via the Holy Spirit I think you will find strong evidence of in the New Testament. 

On the otherhand, I think the only evidence you will find of those being called today to be Apostles (as I would say, a special witness of the Lord who talks directly with the Lord), Seers and Revelators in the same office is something that will uniquely be found in the LDS books rather than any real support of such being found in the Bible as far as I can see currently...which is what some really are asking when they are talking about the OP question).

Edited January 8, 2019 by JohnsonJones

[person0]

On 1/5/2019 at 12:05 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

It’s funny how often I see this scripture (John 5:39) quoted within the Church as if it were a straightforward injunction that we should search the scriptures; when Jesus’ statement—taken in context—is positively dripping with sarcasm.

Our Sunday School teacher used this verse yesterday; I commented that this verse actually meant that the scriptures were insufficient, hinting that revelation was needed in addition to the scriptures and that this is clear from Christ's use of the word 'think'.

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, person0 said:

Our Sunday School teacher used this verse yesterday; I commented that this verse actually meant that the scriptures were insufficient, hinting that revelation was needed in addition to the scriptures and that this is clear from Christ's use of the word 'think'.

I’m curious as to whether your insight elected any reaction?  I had a moment yesterday when a totally new paradigm for approaching the parable of the rich young ruler hit me right out of the blue—but when I tried to share it in class, everyone looked at me like I was nuts.  (Which I sort of am.  But, still . . .  )

Also, to the OP:  in Matt 7:15-20 Jesus warns of false prophets and gives us a key to detecting them.  Now, why would He have us take the trouble to evaluate a would-be prophet’s “fruits”, if He could have simply said “There will be many professed prophets; reject all of them immediately regardless of any pretended fruits, for after Me there are no such?”  Jesus’ counsel here implies that there will be both false prophets and true ones; and that we are expected to be able to tell the difference.  

Edited January 8, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[zil]

10 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

 I had a moment yesterday when a totally new paradigm for approaching the parable of the rich young ruler hit me right out of the blue—but when I tried to share it in class, everyone looked at me like I was nuts.

And....?  (Feel free to post your answer in the thread about that lesson if you don't want to jack this thread.)

[Just_A_Guy]

1 minute ago, zil said:

And....?  (Feel free to post your answer in the thread about that lesson if you don't want to jack this thread.)

Will do.

[mikbone]

What was your take on the rich young ruler?

 

This is mine:

The young man was full of $#!+

He had had not kept the commandments from his youth.  He kept the commandments to his own satisfaction...

That is why the Lord had to remind him to keep the commandments and then had to list them...

The Lord knew he would not follow.

 

Clemson is destroying Alabama

 

[Just_A_Guy]

8 minutes ago, mikbone said:

What was your take on the rich young ruler?

 

This is mine:

The young man was full of $#!+

He had had not kept the commandments from his youth.  He kept the commandments to his own satisfaction...

That is why the Lord had to remind him to keep the commandments and then had to list them...

The Lord knew he would not follow.

 

Clemson is destroying Alabama

 

I’ll wrote it up in the thread @zil linked.  It’s kind of a convoluted thought process. 

[person0]

10 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I’m curious as to whether your insight elected any reaction?

No one else commented on it afterward and the teacher essentially acknowledged the response as valid and moved on because she wasn't expecting that type of a statement in relation to that passage.  It wasn't awkward like the occasional 'weird' comment; one could see the wheels churning in at least the teachers mind.