tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post7568905394363011373..comments2023-09-28T06:26:07.114-04:00Comments on Hugh McBryde (<i>the Modern Pharisee</i>): Conversations with Latter Day SaintsHugh McBrydehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-39343824909960849562009-08-17T21:43:14.791-04:002009-08-17T21:43:14.791-04:00>>"Man, you are so off the FLDS Christm...>>"Man, you are so off the FLDS Christmas card list...."<br /><br />I think whatever Pharisee does it out of conviction, and not whether he will make it on some list.karatekahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07552697265294046621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-44109401032411832182009-08-14T15:48:48.531-04:002009-08-14T15:48:48.531-04:00Since Pharisees had no prophets for 4 centuries (n...Since Pharisees had no prophets for 4 centuries (not true actually, there was John the Baptist), tell me, what books of scripture were written in that time (prophetic revelation) that we reject?Hugh McBrydehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-25549773812823837782009-08-14T15:18:11.089-04:002009-08-14T15:18:11.089-04:00Here are the most important similarities between a...Here are the most important similarities between ancient Pharisees and modern sectarian Christians:<br /><br />1. The Jews, under the religious dominance of the Pharisees, had not had any prophets or revelation for four centuries. Modern Christians have gone 18 centuries denying that further revelation would ever occur.<br /><br />2. When God sent contemporary prophets to the ancient Pharisees to call them to repent (John the Baptist), they rejected him. When God called a prophet in modern times (Joseph Smith) the sectarian world rejected him.<br /><br />3. Pharisees and modern sectarians believe in a closed canon of scripture.<br /><br />4. Pharisees used scripture to justify their rejection of living oracles of God: Jesus and his apostles. Likewise, sectarian Christians use scripture to justify rejection of living prophets and apostles today.<br /><br />5. The Pharisees used their influence with government officials to have Jesus arrested and executed. Modern Christians conspired with local and state authorities in the 19th century to have Joseph Smith arrested and assassinated.<br /><br />6. The blood of the prophets is to be found on the hands of both groups.<br /><br />Those are the primary similarities. I would invite you to do as Paul did, to forsake the wickedness and hypocrisy of those who reject God's messengers and persecute his Church. All the blessings that came to Paul, visions, revelations, spiritual gifts, and most of all, eternal life can be yours. Follow Paul's example, not the example of Annas and Caiaphas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-16992623994578175652009-08-14T10:59:20.292-04:002009-08-14T10:59:20.292-04:00As long as we understand each other.As long as we understand each other.Hugh McBrydehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-13812240830413498362009-08-14T10:55:56.132-04:002009-08-14T10:55:56.132-04:00It's pretty silly for you to tell us members o...It's pretty silly for you to tell us members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that we aren't Christians. It's like walking up to a Parisian and telling him that he isn't really French.<br /><br />At the heart of our beliefs is that it is through Christ's atoning sacrifice that we all may be saved.<br /><br />What we are not is Catholic or any of the Protestant groups that broke away from them for they all lost their way long ago. (There is much good there but not the fullness of the gospel.)<br /><br />What we are is the restored Church of Jesus Christ. But then I'm sure you already know that is one of our beliefs.<br /><br />In the end it matters very little how you classify us. It only matters what God thinks of any of us anyway.<br /><br />But I still like you and your blog, Modern Pharisee, and I hope your Vermont experiment goes well for you.Dale https://www.blogger.com/profile/15891930614860047978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-88283056949023659042009-08-14T10:48:31.059-04:002009-08-14T10:48:31.059-04:00I have said this all along. Apparently it has not...I have said this all along. Apparently it has not been clear to friend and foe alike.<br /><br />They are my coincidental allies for several reasons on this "Long dark ride."<br /><br />I am a polygyny advocate.<br /><br />I am a political libertarian.<br /><br /><i>"The key to understanding the American system (of government) is to imagine that you have the power to make nearly any law you want. But your worst enemy will be the one to enforce it."</i>Hugh McBrydehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-22339007937816334532009-08-14T10:34:57.405-04:002009-08-14T10:34:57.405-04:00Man, you are so off the FLDS Christmas card list.....Man, you are so off the FLDS Christmas card list....Ron in Houstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02496306119920809104noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-74324595850207319562009-08-14T09:59:46.862-04:002009-08-14T09:59:46.862-04:00This is in fact where I derive the blog name "...This is in fact where I derive the blog name "<a href="http://hughmcbryde.blogspot.com/2006/07/why-i-choose-that-name.html" rel="nofollow">Modern Pharisee</a>." In human terms, all true Christians are the successors of all true Pharisees. All true Pharisees were true believers in Judaism. There is no Christ without Judaism.<br /><br />The term Christian was applied to those persons who inhabited Churches seeded and built up by the Apostle Paul. Those persons were gentile mirrors of the sect of Judaism known as the Pharisees, with the modification that they realized, as all true Pharisees would, that Christ was Messiah.<br /><br />This hardly makes them perfect. This hardly makes their vision the only vision of Christ as you point out with the followers of John the Baptist. This does not make them <i>right</i>. This DOES make those who believe as they did the legitimate and first claimants to the name Christian, which was interestingly enough, a derisive epithet flung at them by unbelievers. <br /><br />The Essenes are not mentioned in the texts of Scripture on which our historic understandings of Christianity rely.<br /><br />The Sadducees are in my view, most complicit of all in the murder of our LORD, and they no longer exist.<br /><br />The documentary evidence says, that whether it was a large number of them or not, it was the Pharisees, as a sect, that contributed the largest number of converts to Early Messianic belief. In all likelihood more that called themselves Pharisees did not convert, but only they are mentioned in the earliest annals of Christianity.<br /><br />"Certain" Pharisees <a href="http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=13&v=31&t=KJV#31" rel="nofollow">once "saved" the life of Christ</a>. <br /><br />Proverbs 13:24: <i>"He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes."</i><br /><br />Hebrews 12:6: <i>"For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth."</i><br /><br />Christ devotes most of his negative attention to the Pharisees, as opposed to the Sadducees. It is not proof of love that you are punished, but it is proof of hatred, that you are not.Hugh McBrydehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-2977874414775245182009-08-14T08:54:39.644-04:002009-08-14T08:54:39.644-04:00As I understand the it the "Pharisee-Cristian...As I understand the it the "Pharisee-Cristian" connection is still coming from Paul. It may be written by Luke, but it was Luke quoting Paul. Incidentally, is this where you get the "Modern Pharisee" handle?<br /><br />Moving on, though, it seems to me that the early Christians may have been more influenced by sects such as the Essenes and Zealots than the Pharisees and Sadducees. Many early Christians were also likely followers of John the Baptist, who doesn't exactly fit the mold of a Pharisee.<br /><br />Further evidence is that Jesus himself often railed against the Pharisees and Sadducees. It seems what he taught was, in part, a rejection of contemporary religious beliefs, and a rejection of the current religious leadership.<br /><br />I would think the persecution of Christians by Pharisees and other members of the Jewish establishment would further cement theological differences. As religious discussion broke down under persecution, there would be even less crossover between the beliefs of Jews and Christians.karatekahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07552697265294046621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-10570709200718032832009-08-13T20:53:54.120-04:002009-08-13T20:53:54.120-04:00Actually, these are all the observations of Luke, ...Actually, these are all the observations of Luke, who wrote Acts, not those of Paul. They are reported by Luke as a witness to those events or by Luke after receiving verifiable reports and confirmations of those events.<br /><br />In the first verses of both Luke and Acts, the writer addresses himself to "Theophilus" and states he investigated the facts.Hugh McBrydehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16926516260588481185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31762465.post-51556689701745303012009-08-13T20:46:15.398-04:002009-08-13T20:46:15.398-04:00Interesting idea, but I'm not sure it is an ac...Interesting idea, but I'm not sure it is an accurate one. There are some assumptions going into it. <br />First is the "primacy of Paul." <br /><br />Should the teachings of Paul be rated as more important as more accurate or more authoritative than those of Peter, John, or James (reputed to be the earthly brother of Jesus)? Sensible analysis would say no. Paul was not a "Christian" while Jesus was performing his ministry, and may not have even been in the Middle East during those years. The aforementioned three, along with Mark, were all in the "inner circle" during his ministry. Further, it was they who developed the church in the formative years after the death of Jesus, not Paul. <br /><br />Paul is a secondary witness, not a primary witness. Thus, in my opinion any argument in which his writings are the primary source are extremely suspect.karatekahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07552697265294046621noreply@blogger.com