Margaret Barker has written something like 18 books now..? And many many essays and lectures on what the “older” testament may have been. She is a lay Methodist preacher and biblical scholar from the UK who uses all available ancient texts (nag hammadi library, gnostic, Dead Sea scrolls, Septuagint, masoretic text, pseudoepigraphica, apocrypha/deutero canon, etc etc etc) to tease it out. She’s given lectures at BYU, I’ve heard Mike reference her work on his scripture podcast, and she’s given several lectures to LDS audiences at like FAIR and Interpreter Foundation. I don’t agree with all of her conclusions, but I’ve also only read half of The Great Angel (where she makes the case that Yahweh/Jehovah of the Old Testament IS Jesus, like LDS believe), and a few of her essays and lectures, but I find her research to be fascinating. There’s a video series of lectures from like ten years ago put out on the Academy for Temple Studies channel that deals with “the lady in the temple”/Heavenly Mother that is really interesting (she is one of the speakers, along with LDS scholars and non-LDS academics of varying sorts). It would be great if there were more LDS people doing research like hers, but it is always so nice when non-LDS academics do research that serves to bolster LDS doctrine and beliefs!

@@gingersnaps215I listened to her and her finding Heavenly Mother . Even though we agree we have a heavenly mother I found she did Botha e the Holy Ghost with her at all. Sorry

Both high Nibley and Cleon Skousen are not apostles

The most ridiculous thing Nephi boo the spacious building as the fake temple . Sounds like you guys are starting your own church .

I watched one with David Butler that I really liked . But then he took out of context about the salt that looses its savor is good for nothing and to be trampled on . He then used as a n example how Coriantian teaches there is no Christ and is killed trampled on saying that is a penalty in the temple . No it is not . There is no such thing as that taught in the temple and you know it . This is why some people think it is a cult because of false teachings like this . They think a pact is madero get killed or kill yourself or a pact made to lil for revenge . First of all we never killed to get revenge or made a pact to do so. Only self defense and we were the ones getting killed . Next you know that there are many many people who have left the church wrote books told whatever they thought they knew which is nothing go on Mormon stories . Do or try to do much harm to the church . Could David Butler please tell us who is going to kill them or who is trying to kill them or who is so scared or hiding out ?? Or who is getting trampled under feet ??? Please do tell us . Who has that ever happened to ever ? Oh yes God is Going to kill them ?? Kill them when they die ?? How laughable. Stop with these lies David Butler . The only thong they loose has nothing to do with this earth at all. What they lose is which includes whicheternal life . Not going to celestial kingdom

If anyone would like to worship the True Lord God, please head over to Cornerstone Chapel Online, Leesburg Virgina. There are online services Sundays at 830, 10 and 1130 EST

I think that it is a key*to understanding our creator that we must first become parents ourselves. Until we do, our knowledge cannot be complete about the love of a parent for their child and their spouse. Now I’m waiting for my kids to get older and have their own children so I can become a grandparent and the circle will almost be complete.

I can see the garden of Eden for sure being a temple. And Jesus is the tree of life. The ending in revelation is of course the celestial degree of glory and of course it is book ends. We see the tree of life for sure Jesus Christ. The living water . What do you want? Try what is wanted ? What is wanted ? Do you know?to converse with the Lord through the veil. Meaning through Jesus you come to the father . No man comes to the Father except through Jesus Christ. What is the love of God? It is Jesus Christ. For God so loved the world that he gave his only gotten Son. That who so ever believeth shall not perish but have ever lasting life. . All things point to Jesus Christ . Don’t get off the mark guys.

We love our families and our children. A mothers love is of course more christ like then anything . When showing what the tree of life means of course they will show Mary holding Jesus. The baby Jesus Mary is holding in her arms is the tree of life. Mary is not the tree of life fellas . If that isn’t clear enough for you then Nephi is told to look . What does he see? If this isn’t easy enough for you ? Nephi sees Jesus his mission his life his trial his healing the sick and blind and healing leopards and all manner of disease and sickness. The last supper . Jesus dying on the cross . Jesus being resurrected . How more plain and simple can it get guys who the tree of life is. The bread of life living water . Mary is not the tree of life . Mary is a mortal who needs her Lord and savior just like we all Do. Jesus gives us life . Don’t make something so simple complicated. Nephi sees the New Testament teachings. Jesus birth his whole life his ministry and His death and resurrection . This isn’t hard to understand at all.

Very true. Having kids helps you understand so much about the gospel. The love of God being at the top of that list.

Do you remember what is the name of that discussion?

I have been listening to Amir and One for Israel for almost 4 years. He is an evangelical and after many years started really bashing the “Mormon” Church. Then some of the other evangelical ministers started doing the same thing. They are also telling everyone that they won’t live through the tribulation which is NOT what Jesus says. They also do not believe in baptism. I feel that they are teaching a lot of truth and the. Throw in some untruths that are actually going to cause huge problems for his thousands of followers that aren’t prepared physically or spiritually. He has helped me to understand the Bible better through understanding what it means in Hebrew.

Also…this is not Greta but Greta’s mom on her account! Haha!

@GretaGirl “Also…this is not Greta! This is Greta's mom on her account! Haha!” 😆😅😂🤣😁

Nailed it!

Thank you!

If anyone would like to worship the True Lord God, please head over to Cornerstone Chapel Online, Leesburg Virgina. There are online services Sundays at 830, 10 and 1130 EST

I hope our assertion the Bible isn't inerrant doesn't lead you to believe we don't believe the Bible. We believe the Bible. We study from the KJV in English in particular. We hold it up alongside the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon testifies of the Bible. But we also believe church leaders, Latter-day Prophets, etc. are also fallible. If we believe everything from holy scripture to the words of holy prophets are neither inerrant nor infallible, are we just faithless wanderers? No. We believe in the gift and power of the Holy Ghost to teach us truth, to help us discern between truth and error. What this challenge does is it puts the onus back on us as individual disciples to become familiar with the word of God in all its complexities and to learn the voice of God for ourselves. We will all make mistakes along the way, but I have had enough experiences to know God is real, Jesus Christ is Savior, and that the Book of Mormon and Bible are true in part because they testify of Them. I know this because of the power of the Holy Ghost which teaches us all things (John 14:26). I appreciate and admire what Christian and biblical scholars, philosophers, and other disciples have done. I devour books from other Christian authors because they can provide perspectives outside the LDS framework that helps me better understand God. God is clearly guiding people of all faiths. I can read and study from them and it only strengthens my confidence in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and in the Book of Mormon because my faith in those are founded in faith in Jesus Christ.

When Jesus appears in the Book of Mormon, the first thing he does is testify of His divine role, then He dispels some of the confusion that existed at the time. He makes plain what His doctrine is, again affirming it is centered around His divine role, and that through believing in Him and is baptized shall be saved and inherit the Kingdom of God. He comments that "the gates of hell shall not prevail" against those who build upon this doctrine (3 Nephi 11:39) but not to proclaim anything more or less than that as His doctrine. This means, yes, there can be more to God's word than the doctrine of Christ. That is the foundation. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claim is that we have the simple doctrine of Christ, the authority to baptize in His name, and we've been given more on top of that foundation and that is our offer to the world.

Seriously!

A única maneira que o mundo reconhecerá ao obra do livro de mórmon é quando eles aceitam mesmos. Por que eles aceitarão algo que não concorda com os ideologizas deles mesmos? Se for tão lógico, ninguém poderão contestar as ideas e “problemas” que existem. É bem similar ao bible bashing. Só o espírito pode converter uma pessoa e deixa eles abertos ao verdade.

I know, right? This all just spilled out of his brain haha

Asking out of curiosity, What significance is this channel and Mike Day of to you as an RLDS (and correct me if I’m wrong) don’t believe in the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon and don’t believe in the restoration of the temple?

@@zachariahqureshi3452 Wow! Ok I have to say the way you come across is a bit offensive because it makes eme wonder if you understand the difference between RLDS and the Community of Christ. There are those within the CofC who do not agree with your claims. We believe in the Book if Mormon and we keep the original name of the church on our congregations. So, I am a history lover and I am also of Mexican ancestry. I enjoy hearing different points of view regarding the Meso or Heartland theories. Not being LDS should not negate my appreciation for this channel. Wayne May has spoken to Restoration branches in Independence. Zion will not be achieved thru division.

​@@GrouperNJ That means we have to be unified. How will that work with different sects?

@@HaleStorm49 We get over the little stuff. Do you believe in Jesus? Can you look past the differences and love your fellowman? And not just love one another as you love yourself but really want all of to be saved and work together in harmony. Zion isn’t easy! We have to put aside our human nature. There is a group of people in Independence working toward this goal and they have been blessed. Imagine if we all joined together in the cause of Zion.

@@GrouperNJ Do we both have to be willing to do those things or just me? 🤨

Caleb, thanks for listening to the “Stick of Joseph.” I (Mike Day) promised myself that I wouldn’t jump in the comments for several reasons. One is that so many are contending things I did not say, and it can be a bit frustrating. I also promised myself that by creating the document that addresses my assertions that people could simply go and check them out (see the link in the description above). That being said, here I go jumping into the comments. Some scholars, including Richard Elliott Friedman, contend that the Documentary Hypothesis (or a modification of this model) is still the most compelling explanation for the formation of the first five books of the Bible, despite recent attacks from what he calls “traditional and radical scholars.” (Friedman, The Bible with Sources Revealed, p. 7). He claims that the hypothesis is supported by a convergence of evidence from multiple sources, including linguistic analysis, literary style, and historical context. I would say that a close analysis of his evidence is compelling. Friedman (and many others) points to the existence of doublets, or repeated stories and laws, as one of the strongest pieces of evidence for the Documentary Hypothesis. I have added to his list as I have found additional doublets, and you can see them on my website at BrotherDay.org under the heading “Stories Told Twice in the Bible.” Friedman identifies several, and with my additions, as of today, I have located 35 doublets in the Torah, some of which are identical and others that differ in detail. This suggests that multiple authors were involved in the composition of the text, and that these authors may have had different agendas or perspectives. When you do a deep dive on what they are saying, it becomes clear that these authors had very different political views, and some would argue even different theological ones. Another key piece of evidence is the consistent relationship between the Priestly source (P) and the earlier sources of the Torah. Friedman asserts that P was composed later than the Yahwist (J) and Elohist (E) sources, and that it was written by someone who was familiar with J and E in their combined form. This indicates that P was composed as an alternative to the JE version of Israel's story, and that it was intended to promote the interests of the Aaronid priesthood. P was reacting to the earlier material. This is happening all over the place. I wrote a 60+ page paper on this topic of the DH and how it is viewed by past and present scholars if you would like to see the information I can provide. I am citing around 80 scholars on this topic, so I cast my net fairly wide. Just go to “Talking Scripture” and shoot me an email by going to the “About” section, scrolling to the bottom, and posting a comment. (For some reason, KZfaq does not want me to share links in this comment!) We can also discuss how the Documentary Hypothesis is supported by linguistic and stylistic analysis, which reveals distinct differences between the various sources of the Torah. Many assert that these differences cannot be explained by the traditional view that Moses wrote the entire Torah, and that they are best explained by the hypothesis that multiple authors were involved in its composition. Just my brief discussion with the Paul brothers lays out the beginning of the arguments. There is a lot of material here to work with and Jackson and Hayden and I could dig into the evidence for over 40 hours of video and bore their audience into oblivion. This is why I told them I’d write my short paper and the folks that want more can read what I have provided. The evidence of multiple authorship is extensive. That being said, I understand the arguments of David Carr in “Reading The Fractures of Genesis,” when he goes into detail that Wellhausen is incorrect in many areas. But Carr will even acknowledge what he calls “P” and “Non-P” material. I will say Friedman’s short analysis of what scholars are continuing to not engage with regards to the argument is persuasive. To read his arguments regarding how scholars generally are not engaging the evidence, go to “What is the Documentary Hypothesis? A Short Introduction” on my site “Talking Scripture” and scroll to the bottom where it says “Richard Friedman’s Defense of the Documentary Hypothesis.” I keep trying to comment on KZfaq and when I post the links to these articles, my posts are deleted automatically. Apparently KZfaq thinks I am in violation for posting these links. His contention that the evidence for the Documentary Hypothesis is profound and compelling, and that it continues to be the central model in which most scholars work. He suggests that recent attacks on the hypothesis are based on flawed arguments and a lack of engagement with the classic and current evidence that supports it. At the end of the day, you the reader get to decide what you think. I love the end of his argument (Sources, p. 31), when he says, “The combined weight of the evidence that one will observe there, together with the evidence that is collected here in this section, should make it clear why this explanation of the biblical origins has been so compelling for more than a century. And, whether one agrees with this explanation, questions it, or challenges it, one will have in front of him or her the evidence to address. It is amazing that at this point, when such a mass of evidence is available, some writers still discuss this at so low a level as, for example, arguing about whether "different names of God" constitutes proof or not, or whether doublets prove multiple authorship, or whether a beautiful literary structure (for example, a chiasm) is evidence for a single author. Or some just say that "the hypothesis was disproved long ago" or "nobody accepts it anymore." Here, rather, is the evidence, for anyone to see, evaluate, acknowledge, or refute.” I am in the space of not knowing, but I also like looking at stuff and seeing clues that show me how to reframe my ideas and beliefs. And, like the Paul brothers, I am always curious and hungry.

Social media comment threads aren't always the most helpful (or the best place for significant discussion), so I'll save my meatiest comments for an email with you. But for the sake of anyone reading later, I'll respond here publicly. @@talkingscripture Hey Mike! Thanks for taking the time to write such a significant response. I actually found Talking Scripture through a friend of mine who's a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints while we were discussing Hebrews recently. I'll find your email on your channel, because this is a significant point of discussion. I'm not a PhD student or anything like you are, but I do hold a couple of masters degrees and I concentrated on Greek and Hebrew in grad school. When it comes to DH sources, the ones I mentioned in my comment are a few of the big names. But as with all academia, sometimes the lesser-known voices are the most beneficial. I'm sure there is a great deal you can teach me on that front. But I do find Whybray's criticisms of the DH to be weighty. 1) variation in language, repetition, and (apparent) contradictions can be explained by deliberate use of those features for aesthetic and literary purposes. 2) by breaking up the narrative into source materials the DH tends to make those literary features irrelevant. 3) variations in style and language can be explained by differences in subject matter. And (in his words) 4) "there is inadequate evidence to support the presence throughout each of the documents of a single style, purpose and point of view or theology, and of an unbroken narrative thread. (Making of the Pentateuch, 130). Granted, most of my research was done using sources that were more than a decade old. You may be aware of information that provide meaty answers to these points. My personal biggest objection to the DH models, as I alluded to earlier, is that they are all hypothetical. They begin by assuming Moses didn't write the Pentateuch, and then they hypothesize on who might have written it. No matter how complex the analysis is, DH models are still trying to build a system upon that core presupposition. My presupposition is that Moses did write it. And absent extant evidence to the contrary, I'm comfortable where I am.

@@calebschaaf1555 I’ve heard Mike talk a lot about the Documentary Hypothesis, and I’ve heard several other non-LDS channels talk about it (most notably Useful Charts’ Bible videos), but you’re the first I’ve heard argue for Mosaic authorship against the DH. If you live in Utah, do you think you could have a discussion on Mike’s podcast about it? I know I’m not the only one who would like to hear the various points presented from “opposing sides” (not in a contentious way, obviously). @talkingscriptue, what do you say?

@@psychlops924 I've reached out to Mike in an email. Before jumping into a public discussion, I'd like to talk one-on one for a bit. He's a bit further along with his academic credentials than I am. But our shared love of Tolkien, Star Wars, and the biblical languages could lay the groundwork for something down the road.

​@@calebschaaf1555Thank you for commenting on the DH. As a non LDS Christian who also approaches the Bible as the word of God, I too reject the DH. Well, maybe not all together, but no matter how the books of the Bible came together, I'm 100% certain that God was guiding the process into the end result. I've enjoyed many of the presentations from Chuck Missler. Here's one of his quotes..."In fact, as we begin to understand the Bible from an information science point of view, we discover the integrity of the total package manifests a strategy to avoid hostile jamming. It’s interesting to note that we can’t say, “Where’s the chapter in the Bible on baptism? Where’s the chapter on salvation?” There is no critical subject in the Bible that is found in only one passage. Every major issue is explained or portrayed repeatedly by a wide variety of authors in a multitude of passages." If you search online for "hyperlink text Bible image" you will find a stunning image of this very thing. It shows how interwoven every chapter of the Bible is with all the other chapters. So, no matter how much editing and redacting might have gone into the books of the Bible, at the end of the day we have what God intended to be there. The Welsh revival didn't come about by believers who were doubtful about the authenticity of the Bible. Desmond Doss didn't accomplish his super human feat of saving all of those lives while surviving hell on Earth with doubts about who the author of the Torah was. God will bless those with a childlike faith and will use them to confound the "wise" of this world. I believe/know Adam and Eve were created about six thousand years ago. I believe/know there was a worldwide flood. I know Jesus was crucified, buried and raised back to life. The world thinks I'm a fool, but the world gets more and more foolish everyday. Have a blessed day. I pray readers will be blessed by this post.

Interesting- thank you

Before anyone writes a book they are to take it ti the first presidenecy first for approval . That is the law laid out for writing books . Why do people not listen ?? Too scared your book will not be approved ? Why not do as you are asked ??

@@lindamartinez7006 I guess you better tell Deseret Books. I doubt 99% of those books were passed 'for approval'. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and at no point did he say this is the official position of the church. No approval is needed.

Thanks for the insight! We will look into it. Stay curious and hungry!

Hahaha I love that you get as pumped as us!!!

Hell yeah dudes! This is the meat and potatoes, we gotta sink our teeth into.

Can you give sources of this? You sound very certain, but several things you said are new to me. I'm curious where you're coming from.

Keyword was was now its across the river from nauvoo in Illinois or didn't you get the memo.

The test of a prophet is whether they are consistent with the reveled word of God. Joseph Smith rejects saved by grace alone. He rejects Monotheism, He rejects the SHEMA, he rejects Jesus as the one true God (since there is but one). The book of Abraham is enough to draw into enormous question the validity of him as a prophet. I highly commend to you to read the New Testament without any preconceived notions and watch "apologia studios" videos on here when they visit with mormons. Isaiah tells us there is only one God... none before or after. Because the teachings of the church contradict the old and New Testament, it is decidedly false.

​@@Golfinthefamilylol you read the New testament with the preconceived notion that by grace alone we are saved. Is choosing to follow Christ not works in itself, what does it mean to follow Jesus Christ. Simply believing is not enough you must follow him. The Bible says so, to know him is to follow him and to keep his commandments. His grace is sufficient for those who follow him. You don't know him. The godhead is 1 god with three bodies. The early Christians prayed with Jesus to the father. Did Christ pray to himself, how can you do the will of the father if you are the father . You my friend are being misled. And I say that in the name of the only begotten Jesus.

Trinitarians don't believe the father is the Son. I don't think you understand what Christians believe about the Trinity, or have rejected it.@@christianerwin3964. Questions for you: How many Gods are there according to Isaiah 44:6 & Isaiah 43:10? Is the Book of Abraham what Joseph translated correctly, or what the Rosetta Stone revealed to be Egyptian burial instructions? Colossians 1:16-17 Demonstrate EVERYTHING was made through Jesus. Which means Satan was created by Jesus, and they weren't created at the same time. When it says begotten it means "pre-eminent"--- He is above all. He was uncreated. "Before Abraham was, I AM" Ephesians 2:8-9 fly right in contradiction to what you have professed. "For it is by GRACE you have been saved, not of works, lest anyone should boast, it is the gift of God" --- Grace by definition is a gift. Trusting in Jesus is the opposite of doing works. You seek to justify yourself by works, but that cannot save you. I am not saying that saving faith doesn't come with good works... but Ephesians 2:10 tells us that: For we are Christ's workmanship, created FOR GOOD works... those who are saved are created for good works but we are not justified by works. Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness. An honest reading of Galatians Chapter 3 will differentiate between what you believe and the teachings of the Apostles. There is no line of evidence that validates Joseph Smith as a Prophet. Only evidence to the contrary. Even dying while armed is an obvious evidence of his lack of Godliness. From Birth to Death it is clear that Joseph was a false prophet. NOW... you can actually investigate these things with an open mind, or you can remain entrenched in a cult... but I have given you the biblical truth. We agree the Bible is true. Read it like a child and ask "What was the original author saying?" and decide if what you say lines up with it. You have been deceived. A burning of the bosom is a subjective feeling you can get at a Taylor Swift concert... we rely on what is written, as Jesus did!

In this interview after telling his own anecdote on the futility of bashing they advise against combating with people who have alternative faith perspectives. Unless the group of pastor's you are conversing with are uniquely open minded and prepared to consider your point of view you will be pointlessly banging your head against a brick wall. They almost always have no intention of listening to what you have to say with any genuine intent to consider the validity of your perspective, their only purpose is to have you jump to a series of their pre conceived ideas as to what it is they claim you believe in. If after a few attempts you find yourself going around in circles save yourself the bother of trying to get through to them, their just not interested in what you have to say with any genuine intent to understand.

If anyone would like to worship the True Lord God, please head over to Cornerstone Chapel Online, Leesburg Virgina. Sundays 830, 10, 1130 EST

Hahah he has one called “Talking Scripture” but I think your name is better

Glad you like them!

Ohh it’s a good one IMO!

What's his podcast called?

@@cindlou7335 www.youtube.com/@talkingscripture

@@cindlou7335 talking scripture

@@cindlou7335 Bryce Dunford his cohost also has such an amazing podcast about symbolism and the temple literally mind blowing!!!

You can't just make stuff up though. "A tree bears fruit so it must be about a mothere..." This is a totally unjustified conclusion. I was forced to listen to some "christians" doing a zoom seminar on transgender kids. She said that Adam was created non-binary because Eve had to be taken out of Adam. Everyone there thought it was beautiful but all it was was a perversion of scripture.

I agree, or at least, I think these things were tactfully not included in the relevant texts. It might have been dangerous to publicize widely His relations. After all, His brother James was stoned to death like the other Apostles and Mary His mother goes into obscurity. Being the familial relations of the founder of this new faith may have been very dangerous. The post-resurrection encounter with Mary Magdalene is extremely evocative, and I wonder if it was included for those "in-the-know" to get the hint.

⁠@@TheYgdsI’ve never thought from the perspective that it was edited out “tactfully” so as to protect the rest of the family before. Great insight! And I too see the Mary Magdalene encounter is exactly what you say it was; for those “in the know”.

No doubt about it, He was married to Mary & Martha.

The Marriage at Cana is at least one of his marriages. Based on Jewish culture it's a dead give-away. Jesus was 100% married at least once.

​@deborahbarlow4309 who might that have been to?

Write?!? He’s a legend!

On my mission in New Zealand, I had a Bishop broke it down to me that the Garden of Eden is the Temple. I fully didn’t understand what he meant until I saw the podcast with Mike Day and David

Boom! Never even thought about that.

I like the "Big View"

I would have thought there were many other 'originals'. I always thought of the Brass Plates as being the 'Family Scriptures'

@@susannaholdfield7499 they likely were for their tribe or descendants of Joseph. But they would have made copies onto scrolls for regular use (See Deu 17:18). The scrolls would be much easier to handle etc, and multiple copies could be made. Paper, papyrus, or even animal skins would not last as long as brass. Even when Moses wrote the law down it was on tables of stone because of it's long lasting permanence (the Hebrew word translated table is "luach" which means something which glistens or is polished, and could refer to polished stone, metal, or wood). Some scholars think the commandments were on stone, and the rest of the law was on metal plates bound like a book.

Yes, but Moroni does not say he buried them in Cumorah. That’s what matters.

Send a link for this reasearch?

A tree bearing fruit is not the same thing as calling the tree female. People here are taking such leaps and without any justification.