8 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Wait, you don’t clean the chapel? I’ve heard it said that Melchizedek is Shem, but never heard that he is Jesus. I don’t see how that’s possible. I love the Bible too. I think maybe you’re misreading some of the attitude toward the Bible in the Church. I think there are a lot of people that love it, and certainly the official position of the Church gives it a lot of credit. If some members dismiss it they are misguided. |
If I remember right, the Bible dictionary strongly suggests that shem might be melchezidek (look under shem), and I know I’ve heard it from a reliable (church) source. I agree with you that we (as a church) tend to under-value the bible a lot. It’s a wild, crazy book in places, but it’s scripture every bit as much as the Book of Mormon. We talk a lot about how the Bible prophecies about the Book of Mormon, but it’s easy to miss the many times Book of Mormon prophets emphasized the important mission of the Bible, and the sacredness of it’s writings. |
Well, Mcq, that was the last time I was there and no, someone else had already cleaned the chapel. We vacuumed the hallways. It just struck me this time that I was going around. Never gave it much thought. I can’t say for sure about now and the emphasis on the Bible because I haven’t been to SS regularly in years. I don’t hear a lot about the Bible in meetings or RS, though. I bring it up sometimes when I’m in a class, etc. I can’t remember how I came to the Jesus/Melchizedek possibility. I’ll have to look it up again. It wasn’t on any LDS site. It was some other speculation. “Wild and crazy book” that made me think of Steve Martin. |
I love the New Testament. The Old Testament is way too incesty, women killing, concubiney for my tastes. I’ve never been a fan of the D & C, either. I am B of M all the way. |
Just saw this, LIZ. I’m glad you love the Book of Mormon because I was feeling guilty about hurting its feelings by preferring it over the Bible. I think that’s some kind of mental illness. |
My grandparents were not LDs so I grew up hearing different hymns. At my father’s funeral I and others sang 2 old Christian hymns not in the LDS hymnal, stuff my father grew up with. My Uncle (father’s brother) told me the hymns reminded him of when they were young and how the hymns were sung during family gatherings and other occasions. I saw him cry while we were singing. |
JR, I don’t think there is a “real reason” that latter-day saints don’t use crosses. I think it is pretty much just an informal tradition. Why does that matter? FWIW, I have run across the following explanations before: 1) Not using the symbol of the cross is a way of distinguishing us from other churches. (I suspect that this was the original reason that we avoided using the symbol of the cross. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is a divine restoration of Christ’s original church. It is not yet another Christian sect.) 2) We prefer to emphasize the living, resurrected Christ’s continuing ministry and not focus on just that one part of His life. (I was surprised on my mission to discover how the “14 stations of the cross” dominated the decor of a certain Christian denomination. As that church was heavily frowned upon in Joseph Smith’s day, I doubt that there was much pressure for the early saints to particularly revere the symbol of the cross.) 3) We believe that the Atonement began at least with His suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane and culminated in his resurrection from the Garden Tomb. It is so very much more than just what happened upon the cross. 4) As far as I can tell, Christ Himself doesn’t talk all that much about the cross in modern revelation. 5) On the other hand the imagery of an “angel crying through the midst of heaven, saying: Prepare ye the way of the Lord” comes up a lot (see D&C 133:17, etc.) |
Well, it’s kind of a pretty necklace. It’s silly that wearing a cross should be considered sinful. Plus, vampires, hello, you never know. |