In 3 Nephi, chapters 12-19 (and around there), you find an amalgamated account of Jesus’ life and teaching. I say amalgamated on purpose. Here’s how it goes in 3 Nephi, part of the Book of Mormon:
1) Jesus is crucified/dead
2) Three days of worldwide storm/darkness/tempest
3) Sermon-on-the-Mount-like teaching
4) Blessing of the little children
5) Heaven opens and fiery angels minister to these children
6) Jesus institutes the Lord’s Supper
7) Jesus ascends into heaven (the second time)
8 ) Jesus teaches “the lost tribes of Israel” in the land Bountiful (again)
9) The disciples of “the lost tribes” are called (Jonas, Jeremiah, Shemnon, Isaiah, Zedekiah, Jonas, etc.)
10) Jesus appears again then departs again after some disciples are transfigured
11) Jesus appears again then departs again after more teaching
12) Jesus appears again then departs again after more teaching
After reading this part of 3 Nephi, I admit it left me in a chaotic chronological conundrum. If anyone can correct the above time line as spelled out in 3 Nephi, I’d be willing to listen. I found myself saying several times – I thought Jesus already ascended!?
To summarize, it is utterly impossible to harmonize the chronology of 3 Nephi and those of the canonical gospels. You would sure think that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, [or Paul, Peter, and James] would have at least hinted at Jesus hop-scotching all over the globe after his ascension! Furthermore, did not Matthew, Mark, or Luke notice the three days of worldwide darkness/storm/tempest when Jesus was crucified? Why did they not record it in their gospels?
shane lems
sunnyside, wa
The Reformed Reader Blog 
You said, “You would sure think that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, [or Paul, Peter, and James] would have at least hinted at Jesus hop-scotching all over the globe after his ascension!”
Accually I would not think so because the only indication that Jesus was going all over the earth was a statment from Jesus himself, “I have other sheep.” I do not know the exact verse but he indicated that there were others he needed to go to and share the Gospel with. It was recorded in the New testimate that there was tempest storms and earthquakes when Christ died and the Temple Vail was rent in twain. Then next we hear is on the third day, that they had laid him in the tomb with the stone and it was discovered on then that the stone was removed and Jesus was not there. He had already risen. So if 3 Nephi dipicts 3 days of torment in the global weather, then it happened in this missing time in the New Testament.
-D
LikeLike
Another wonderful case of the LDS church reading INTO the text, what they need to be there in order to support their writings. To say that Jesus’ statement of “I have other sheep” means He would go over to other parts of the Earth, minister, leave, etc…, is at best mis-interpreting the text, and at worse doing exactly what I’ve already stated (reading INTO it, to support a pre-conceived notion). It was recorded in the NT that there was darkness, BUT NOT FOR 3 DAYS! The Bible doesn’t speak of this – you (and the LDS church) have pre-supposed this, to support what has been written in the LDS church. For all we know, Jesus could have been playing field hockey during those 3 days, if we’re allowed to read into it what we wish.
But here’s the thing – we can’t, so we don’t suppose. We only read (and interpret) what the Bible allows us to, and nothing more. To do so (as the LDS church does) is dangerous and misleading.
LikeLike
you just cannot accept points of view that are not in your current paradigm. From your point of view, what is it stating if not that Jesus had others to visit?
There are more scriptures than what is currently in your Bible. To limit your prespective to only the relitivally small amount of text contained in the modern Bible leads us to much supposition, or blind faith.
-D
LikeLike
you just cannot accept points of view that are not in your current paradigm.
Says the Mormon… the pot calls the kettle black ;)
From your point of view, what is it stating if not that Jesus had others to visit?
We don’t know EXACTLY who this refers to. We can speculate, based on the entire Bible, but cannot say with absolute certainty. Not sure why the Mormon church thinks it can. Oh wait, I know – b/c if it DIDN’T mean what they say it does, then their writings wouldn’t match up with the Bible, now would they? ;) Could be Gentiles, could be other Jewish tribes, could be those after the time of Christ. But to say it IS early American Mormon tribes, again, is reading something into the text that just isn’t there.
There are more scriptures than what is currently in your Bible.
There are other ancient writings, but not considered Scripture, thus not part of the Bible. But if you’re referring to Mormon writings, then those are not Scripture, as they aren’t inspired by God.
To limit your prespective to only the relitivally small amount of text contained in the modern Bible leads us to much supposition, or blind faith.
I’ll take my chances with limiting my support to the Bible, thanks.
LikeLike
Your comment,”There are other ancient writings, but not considered Scripture” proves my point about paradigms.
There are several things considered scripture by many differing religions. What you mean is that you do not consider these things scripture.
LikeLike
Your comment,”There are other ancient writings, but not considered Scripture” proves my point about paradigms.</b
Your comment, “the only indication that Jesus was going all over the earth was a statment from Jesus himself, ‘I have other sheep,’” proves MY point about paradigms. Care to continue?
We’re dealing with what you or I (as Mormons or Christians) would consider Scripture, not anything from any religion. Do you consider the Koran “scripture”, as we think of it (inspired by God)? A wacky religion might consider “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” their piece of “scripture” – would you recognize it as such?
LikeLike
Your comment,”There are other ancient writings, but not considered Scripture” proves my point about paradigms.
Your comment, “the only indication that Jesus was going all over the earth was a statment from Jesus himself, ‘I have other sheep,’” proves MY point about paradigms. Care to continue?
We’re dealing with what you or I (as Mormons or Christians) would consider Scripture, not anything from any religion. Do you consider the Koran “scripture”, as we think of it (inspired by God)? A wacky religion might consider “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” their piece of “scripture” – would you recognize it as such?
LikeLike
The Koran scripture? Yes in a way, from a folklore perspective anything sacred to a group has a validity to be sacred. My prior point is that you consider only the bible scripture but I consider that there is more scripture out there that is not contained between the binding of your bible. In point of fact if you consider the things written by the apostles of Christ to be scripture then you must know not all the writings inspired of Christ written be his disciples later known a apostles were accepted in the first cannon of the Bible. I do not boast to know these writings for some have vanished into obscurity. But to keep to a limited view point that you are the only one who can proclaim to have the only scripture in your book is absurdly arrogant. Do I know the Koran to be scripture? No, I have not read it yet. To be sure you must know what it is you are evaluating. Do you consider the Torah to be scripture? Just because you did not read about something Christ did in your scripture does not confirm that he did not do it. It does not mention what Christ did after his ascension. How are you to know?
-D
LikeLike
The Koran scripture? Yes in a way, from a folklore perspective anything sacred to a group has a validity to be sacred.
It’s a long jump from “sacred” to “inspired by God.” Only 1 book meets that criteria – the Bible.
My prior point is that you consider only the bible scripture but I consider that there is more scripture out there that is not contained between the binding of your bible.
And I consider you wrong. What other God-inspired Scripture is there, do you think?
In point of fact if you consider the things written by the apostles of Christ to be scripture then you must know not all the writings inspired of Christ written be his disciples later known a apostles were accepted in the first cannon of the Bible.
I believe that the Bible we have today, what I call Scripture, is fully inspired by God. Anything else, and we can only view it in light of the Bible, but cannot include it in the Bible.
I do not boast to know these writings for some have vanished into obscurity. But to keep to a limited view point that you are the only one who can proclaim to have the only scripture in your book is absurdly arrogant.
Call it what you want. I believe the Bible alone to be inspired by God, and all other “scriptures” that any other religion may drum up to simply be writings of men, but NOT inspired by God. That includes all Mormon writings, Muslim, Buddhist, JW, Hindu, etc… All of them. You can call that arrogant, doesn’t matter to me what you call it. I call it correct. Prove it wrong.
Do I know the Koran to be scripture? No, I have not read it yet.
Does the teachings of the Koran line up with the teachings of the Bible? No. Therefore, not Scripture. Not hard.
To be sure you must know what it is you are evaluating. Do you consider the Torah to be scripture?
I consider what is in the Bible today, alone, to be Scripture. I’m not sure how to make it any clearer to you.
Just because you did not read about something Christ did in your scripture does not confirm that he did not do it.
Who said any differently? What I said was that any speculation as to what He did, if NOT in the Bible, is just that – speculation. What you (and Mormons) do, is say you KNOW what the Scripture means, based on your “paradigm”. Wrong.
It does not mention what Christ did after his ascension. How are you to know?
Maybe I’m not – how are YOU to know?
LikeLike
I know what the Holy Spirit witnessed to me. This is how I know what is true. What is it that makes you right as to what is scripture and every other opinion to be wrong? I think you are missing the point that your Bible, though inspired of God, is not complete, that there were some works inspired of God left out in the Cannon constructed in 325 AD and latter many items were removed as well. Also you seem unable to consider any writings from other cultural references to Christ as inspired of God. How did you come to this limited view that only the Bible is the inspired word of God? Do you have another definition of inspiration/inspired than what is common to the English language (in the dictionary)? There are sets of scripture that concur with the Bible and hold no contradiction that are not included in your cannon. Are you holding to this limited view out of fear? Fear of heresy or angering God? The first I can then understand in light of the middle and Dark ages. The second I would argue that God would want you to confirm the truth, if these other scriptures are true or false he would reveal it unto you, but only by investigating it and asking for his guidance, then the holy spirit can show you the truth and thus the truth would be confirmed. But how can you know without this testimony, and how would you attain this testimony without ever reading these other scriptures?
How do you know that the Bible is true? Just because it says so?
I know that it takes Faith, but you should know that your Faith cannot cancel out other’s Faith. The more you stiffen your neck and harden your heart, the less flexible you become and when God wants you to act you cannot least you break. Like a reed dried in the drought, cannot bend with the return of the stream.
-D
LikeLike
I know what the Holy Spirit witnessed to me. This is how I know what is true.
But how do you know, for sure, that it was actually the Holy Spirit who witnessed it to you, and that you haven’t just been misled? The Holy Spirit has witnessed to me that Mormonism is NOT true. So, we’ve each said we’ve received witnesses from the Holy Spirit, yet we’ve received COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ANSWERS about the same thing. How do we know which of us is right, Ditchu? That’s the first question you have to answer, b/c though you accuse me of doing the same, you are ALSO working on the assumption that you’re right about what you believe.
What is it that makes you right as to what is scripture and every other opinion to be wrong?
Has nothing to do with “me” being right. Has to do with the definition of “scripture.” If defined as what God has inspired, then it would ONLY be the Bible. If defined as anything that any particular person or religion holds sacred, it could be anything. But if defined that way, then anything that would run contrary to that written in the Bible or the beliefs derived from proper interpretation of it, would by default be not true.
I think you are missing the point that your Bible, though inspired of God, is not complete, that there were some works inspired of God left out in the Cannon constructed in 325 AD and latter many items were removed as well.
Prove they were inspired by God, and left out of the canon. Exactly which books, and exactly how we know God inspired them.
Also you seem unable to consider any writings from other cultural references to Christ as inspired of God. How did you come to this limited view that only the Bible is the inspired word of God?
Just b/c the word “Jesus” or “Christ” is mentioned, doesn’t mean it is inspired by God. I could write a whole story on circus monkeys, and include the word “Jesus” at the end – does that make the circus monkey book “inspired?” Nope.
How did you come to the view that works APART from the Bible ARE inspired by God? I’ve explained above what I view as Scripture.
Do you have another definition of inspiration/inspired than what is common to the English language (in the dictionary)? There are sets of scripture that concur with the Bible and hold no contradiction that are not included in your cannon.
What sets are those? Please outline, and be sure that what you list concur exactly with the Bible, and have no contradictions with a proper interpretation of the Bible.
Are you holding to this limited view out of fear? Fear of heresy or angering God?
Oh, darn, you’ve pegged it. Yep, I’m just running scared. ;) Seriously, I’m holding to this view (limited as you may think it is), b/c it is correct.
The first I can then understand in light of the middle and Dark ages.
The first is retarded.
The second I would argue that God would want you to confirm the truth, if these other scriptures are true or false he would reveal it unto you, but only by investigating it and asking for his guidance, then the holy spirit can show you the truth and thus the truth would be confirmed.
I’ve already done this. Additionally, see my first comment above. How do you know it is the Holy Spirit witnessing it to you, and not your personal feelings or being misled? Remember, other people have received differing witnesses from the Holy Spirit, so you can’t just say “it’s true b/c the Spirit told me so”, b/c anyone can use that line, and use it for proof of anything. What is behind your proof, Ditchu? Interestingly enough, the Bible tells us that we must investigate the Scriptures, to see if what we’re told stands up to what is written in there. We’re not told to rely solely on the Spirit to know the truth. I’ll wait for your barrage of standard Mormon references to why you believe that, and if I get them, I’ll give you my standard response of why those references are crap, completely misinterpreted, completely out of context and completely wrong.
But how can you know without this testimony, and how would you attain this testimony without ever reading these other scriptures?
Lot of assumptions going on in your mind, Ditchu. Lot of assumptions. Who says I haven’t?
How do you know that the Bible is true? Just because it says so?
Nope. Evidence, as well as faith.
I know that it takes Faith, but you should know that your Faith cannot cancel out other’s Faith.
I agree – you should also realize the same about your Mormon faith, b/c that’s what you claim every day, that your “witness” trumps anybody else’s “witness” that they’ve received about the church. If it truly takes more than “faith”, that “more” being evidence, then let’s focus SOLELY on the evidence. Would you like to start looking at the truthfulness of the LDS church, based SOLELY on the evidence?
The more you stiffen your neck and harden your heart, the less flexible you become and when God wants you to act you cannot least you break. Like a reed dried in the drought, cannot bend with the return of the stream.
I’m not disagreeing with you. But you speak from the pre-supposition that you have the correct beliefs, and I the incorrect. Perhaps it’s YOU who needs to be a little less “stiff-necked”? Thought of that?
LikeLike
I do not assume that you are wrong about what you beleive, just in error by assuming others are wrong because they do not fully agree with you.
You speak of evidance. what evidance you you have that is not surcumstantial and depends on inturpratation?
You also replied to my; I know that it takes Faith, but you should know that your Faith cannot cancel out other’s Faith.
You said, “I agree – you should also realize the same about your Mormon faith, b/c that’s what you claim every day, that your “witness” trumps anybody else’s “witness”…”
You are in error here, I do not think my witness or my faith can trumph anyone elses faith or witness. If you are after ultimate truth you must be willing to bend your mind and remove your paradigms, accept opinions and ideas as they are even if they conflect with your current ideals. But if you want to hang on the that part of the truth you now have, and ignore the rest, then do so, but do not claim that you have the truth and others do not, For you know not the truth you have not yet seen.
I know that it takes Faith, but you should know that your Faith cannot cancel out other’s Faith.
You continued, “…If it truly takes more than “faith”, that “more” being evidence, then let’s focus SOLELY on the evidence. Would you like to start looking at the truthfulness of the LDS church, based SOLELY on the evidence?”
No, I do not think it will “take more than faith” to know truth. You however do not have evidance to convience others of the truth, they must discover it. I cannot convience you that the Book of Mormon is the true word of God any more than you can convience me the Bible is the only true scripture. I am not trying to convience you of the truthfulness of any scripture here. I just do not think you are fair to yourself and others. You are just like many others that claim exclusive access to the truth. I do not agree in this exclusivity, also I have found truth in places you consider not to be scripture that proclaim the Gospel of Christ and are in no conflect to the Holy Bible. These books of truth shine with the inspiration of God.
Again, I doubt that I will convince you of anything here but that to say others have not the truth is presumptous and arrogant for you know not what others do and do not have.
-D
LikeLike
Then clearly we’re at the end of this conversation. You are, of course, free to think it “presumptuous and arrogant” what I believe about absolute truth, and all other beliefs wrong. God has given you that free will in order to have such thoughts.
It is not hard to ascertain what others “have” or “believe”. Simply asking them often does the trick. I believe there is ONE way to Heaven, and that those who do not have that correct way, do not have salvation. I believe that by knowing the beliefs of others, it is possible to know whether they have truly accepted that way, simply by knowing what they believe, and comparing it to what the Bible teaches. You are free to disagree.
LikeLike
Thanks for the exchange fellas. We appreciate your dropping by!
LikeLike
Brad,
Ahhh…I see you’ve met my “oh-so-circular-reasoning-using-red-herring-throwing-rabbit-trailing” friend “Ditchu”…
Good luck having a logical rational discussion about the issues with him…I usually have to delete every comment he makes over at my blog because as you noticed…he’s (like LDS theology) a moving target :)
bob
LikeLike
Robert,
Thanks for the list on how you view me.
Well, as for tha labling, I can do without… What have you witnessed me going back on my statments about? not much, but I am willing to move my position if given sufficant reason, your provocation has not produced this, however, thought should not be stagnant nor static, we must be willing to move in thought as we come to better understanding. I often ask for better reasoning, clairification, and answers to fill in the holes in the logic offered by many.
As far as “red-herring-throwing-rabbit-trailing,” Your comment was the redirection on the string of conversation, that I think you could have read from 3 months ago Brad put it, “clearly we’re at the end of this conversation.”
In consideration of this comment I think you are more talking of yourself than your “friend.”
-D
LikeLike
I just stumbled upon your blog. Sorry for being so late to the conversation. Here are my thoughts on a couple of things you said:
“You would sure think that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, [or Paul, Peter, and James] would have at least hinted at Jesus hop-scotching all over the globe after his ascension!”
John records in 10:16 Jesus saying “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” Those “other sheep” included those people who Jesus visited in 3 Nephi. So there WAS a hint in the New Testament.
—
“Furthermore, did not Matthew, Mark, or Luke notice the three days of worldwide darkness/storm/tempest when Jesus was crucified? Why did they not record it in their gospels?”
The darkness/storm/tempest was not necessarily worldwide. It was experienced from the perspective of those people in 3 Nephi, which was somewhere in the Western Hemisphere.
Hope that helps. Thanks for the interest.
LikeLike