Monday, February 25, 2008

"Angel" Always Equals "Another Gospel?"

Many of our critics have often quoted Galatians 1:6-8 as a proof text that the teachings of the LDS Church equals another gospel. In my experience, often this passage is quoted and the interpretation is generally as follows:

1) Paul warned about the possibility of "another" gospel being preached by an "angel."
2) Mormons believe that the angel Moroni (among others) came and "restored" the gospel.

Therefore,

3) Mormonism is "another" gospel.


There is, of course, a logical fallacy here (high five to the first person who points it out by name!). Besides the logical fallacy, what do our critics do with Revelation 14:6?


6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,



Clearly there is a difference between "another" gospel and the "everlasting" gospel. So, can an angel (theoretically and biblically) come to preach the gospel to people on earth? I'd say not only can it happen, but it was predicted that it would happen.

I submit that Paul's warning in Galatians only shows that the apostasy was well underway then and he knew it. Thus the need in the last days for an angel to come and reverse the work of the devil ("And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations" [Revelation 13:7].) by restoring the everlasting gospel to "every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people."

13 comments:

LifeOnaPlate said...

I've asked this question as well. Also, does the warning against false prophets indicate there will be no more true prophets? If so, the Bible could have said so. But it didn't.

JayFlow22 said...

The Anti-Mormon's seem to enjoy using this verbal fallacy. It is where a conclusion is obtained by the improper use of words that may have more than one meaning.

Critics also like to use verbosity. Or in other words, they try to persuade by overwhelming those reading/listening to them w/ such a volume of arguments that their point sounds plausible, appears to be well-researched, and it is so laborious to untangle and check supporting facts that the argument might be allowed to pass as truth.

They seem to feel like if they can come up with a million poor reasons why the Church is false, then people will just give up...thinking to themselves "Well if only a tenth of that was true, this Church is not what it claims to be".

Andrew Miller said...

thanks guys. Great points!

Peter said...

It's not circular reasoning, is it?

Good job with your blog, continue the fight :)

I can use all of this good material when I leave on my mission later this year (haven't yet put my papers in but very soon)

Andrew Miller said...

Circular reasoning/begging the question. Bingo!

Peter, you'll love and hate the mission. It'll be a great experience for you.

Peter said...

wooo, I get the high five!! :D

I have tracted with the missionaries before and it wasn't too bad. I have seen some footage on YouTube and some of it is pretty harsh. I can't believe the way some people act...

Andrew Miller said...

The hardest part about the mission isn't the work. Much of it is the struggle between missionaries, leaders, etc. You'll get to know about it on your own. Don't get me wrong, it's overall a positive experience and not a negative one.

NM said...

Andrew, I think the whole point of Paul's letter to the Galatians is to warn the church NOT to go back to legalistic-duty-driven religion. =)

Paul's argument (like the letter to the Hebrews) is to steer people away from going back to 'religion'. "Why would you want to go back to stoic principles, when Jesus has done all the work?!"...

...the very fact that Paul (merely) mentions an idea of an angel at the beginning of his letter - to Muslims and LDS is merely coincidental... =/

I don't what the people at Galatia were most interested in, but certainly concerning the Hebrews: the were very much interested in subjects like the law, Moses, Joshua, demons, angels, David etc. and the Cretians (with whom the letter to Titus was given to), Paul warned him NOT to get into any 'silly conversations' about geneologies... =)

BTW, this is a FANTASTIC blog!!! =D I love all your posts...

Andrew Miller said...

nm,

Thanks for your post. LDS, of course, reject the Law of Moses and believe it was fulfilled in Christ. As far as "endless genealogies," most modern scholars agree this has reference to the eons in gnosticism, not to genealogy as we now use the term. As a matter of fact, genealogy was an important part of Biblical religion even in the New Testament. Just see the opening chapters of Matthew, Luke, and Mark.

Great commentary! Thanks for your insights.

Peter said...

I thought that the Law of Moses was the decalogue?! What am I missing?

NM said...

Absolutely!! =)

Andrew, I agree with you whole-heartedly. The 'silly' conversations Paul warned Titus about with regard to geneologies was a mere mask for the Cretians to talk gnostic-ally with =)

Is what you said about 'LDS rejecting the Law of Moses because they have been fulfilled in Jesus' official?

Andrew Miller said...

Yes. It is in our scriptures. 3 Nephi 10 and also 12 come to mind.

Andrew Miller said...

Peter,

The Law of Moses included a lot more than the Decalogue. Just read the book of Leviticus!