Dymmesdale

The outcome of King David was that he was a successful and godly king. I assume you are referring to his sin with bathsheba and her husband. If any of you are guiltless, let him throw the first stone. David was called a man after God's own heart. I am Anglican. I agree wholly with your statement about original sin. We are not accountable for the discrete sin Adam committed in the garden, but as a result of that sin, we are slaves to sin and death, being thus sinful in nature. There are numerous scriptures that spell this out very clearly. I can provide a few if you would like. As for infant baptism, I believe that we are sinful at birth, and should receive the sacrament of Baptism for the remission of sins. What is the difference between sin and transgression? She was deceived by the serpent. The serpent told her that if she ate the fruit, she would not suffer any consequences, but that God was guarding the knowledge of good and evil like a dragon guards its treasure. She believed the serpent, and was deceived. I believe that if a child dies before it is baptized, God will see that there are extenuating circumstances, and by His grace, and His prerogative, does not send them to Hell. And even if He does, who are we to judge God? It's not like we really deserve anything else in the first place. He is jjust, and he is almighty. I also happen to believe that he is merciful and full of grace. Surely the prophets knew about the messiah, but they worshipped without the knowledge of him that we have today. Christ came to fulfill those prophecies and set up a new church, built on himself as the foundation. One cannot accurately say that the prophets were members of Christ's Church, since he set it up himself, designating Peter, and the succession of apostles to carry it out. I have read the Bible, and I think I am pretty familiar wih it. Do you know my pastor? I haven't said anything about him, and I don't think it's fair for you to judge his knowledge and training if you know nothing about him. I ask Mormons to explain to me how the differences are reconciled because you have a better understanding of the BoM than I do, and I don't know how they are reconciled with my own knowledge. Many people in this thread have brought up the historical veracity of the Book of Mormon, even from a secular point of view. If we want to get into that topic, I have some questions about that too, but I will keep them to myself if the consensus is that they would only lead to more personal attacks and wouldn't be useful to further my understanding. Oh, and by the way I am a he, not a she. EDIT: fixed a typo.

Yes, I think we are.

I believe that the sacrifice was not infinite in duration, but in sufficiency. Christ died once, shed his blood on the cross, one time. He took upon himself the sins of the elect, all at the same time. That is why it was so unbearable. He is no longer suffering, no longer holds the sins of the elect on his shoulders, otherwise he could not be with the Father now.

Ok, I agree with you about the infinite part. His suffering was beyond our comprehension, since it included not only the most physically agonizing pain, but also the heartbreak of knowing that, for that time, his had taken all the sin of the world on himself, and the Father had turned his back on him. However, I am still confused about how his suffering could have been eternal, since that word implies an infinite length of time, and we all know that he now sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven.

I do possess an elementary understanding of the tenets of Mormonism, but I must admit that I don't know much about the Melchizedek priesthood. Please feel free to give me the cliff's notes version, or I could look it up some other time. Are you saying that it was a temporary commandment? At some point in the future, it would have been ok to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge?

I did a quick google search about specific contradictions between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, because the only ones I could think of off the top of my head were actually based in the D&C, PoGP, and other LDS documents. I was curious to see which ones came directly from the BoM. I did not take these sites at face value, and I did my best to look up the relevant passages myself and to use my own discretion in choosing which ones to mention. I do not do so out of spite or a desire to argue, I want to know what Mormons make of them. Perhaps I am at fault in that I enjoy a good intellectual debate, and if I have offended anyone, I humbly ask forgiveness.

Not being able to eat the fruit of the Tree of Life was the result of the sin of eating the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The commandment not to eat of the latter put Adam and Eve between a rock and a hard place, having already received the commandment to multiply. I think the scriptures I have referred to previously indicate that that is not something God would do. He will never cause us to sin. By giving contradictory commandments, he caused Adam and Eve to sin. The commandments are contradictory only if it was impossible for them to procreate without sinning first. According to you, God essentially told them "I want you to do this, but in order to do it, you have to sin first." That pretty much boils down to "I want you to sin."

I do not have time to respond to this right away, but in the meantime, I would like to know, am I to understand that while the sacrifice and the effects thereof are indeed eternal, the pain and suffering endured by Christ were equally as eternal? If that is your belief, is it also the belief of your church at large (i.e., is that official LDS doctrine)?

I have prayed about and studied these things. I also believe that a burning in my bosom is more likely to be indigestion than divine assurance. 1 Timothy 4:1 “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils” 1 John 4:1 “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” I try not to put my trust in feelings, as they can easily change.

The Holy Ghost was bestowed on the Christians at the time of Pentecost. Luke 24:49 "And, behold, I send the promise of my Father unto you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." Acts 2:1-4 " 1And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. " Yet the Book of Mormon claims that people received the gift of the Holy Ghost as early as 545 B.C. 2 Nephi 31:12-13 "And also, the voice of the Son came unto me, saying: He that is baptized in my name, to him will the Father agive the Holy Ghost, like unto me; wherefore, bfollow me, and do the things which ye have seen me do. 13 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, I know that if ye shall follow the Son, with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism—yea, by following your Lord and your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost; and then can ye speak with the tongue of angels, and shout praises unto the Holy One of Israel." During Jesus' ministry He spoke of His church as something in the future. Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." However, the Book of Mormon claims the Christian church was established as early as 147 B.C. Mosiah 18:17 "And they were called the church of God, or the church of Christ, from that time forward."

I don't mean to change the subject, but I want to mention something, so that I do not forget it later. Alma 7:10 "And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God." Matthew 2:1 "Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,"

No, I assume that Lehi and his progeny did not hold the Aaronic Priesthood, the one given by God to Aaron and his seed to serve as priests to His people. Please do not put words in my mouth. If Nephi was in compliance with the fundamental points of the Law, then why were there multiple temples, when the Israelites were clearly instructed to have only one? Did God forsake Jerusalem as the city he chose for his Name to dwell in? There are multiple fundamental aspects of the Law that are never once mentioned in the Book of Mormon. # "laver" (15 times in Bible) # "incense" (121 times in Bible) # "ark of the covenant" (48 times in Bible) # "sons of Aaron" (97 times in Bible) # "mercy seat" (23 in Bible) # "feast of tabernacles" (10 times in Bible) # "passover" (59 times in Bible) # "house of the LORD" (627 in Bible)

Please forgive me for my careless algebra mistake. My point still stands though. if b=b, then b cannot equal not b. The BoM states that the inhabitants of the New World, the descendants of Lehi, continued to follow the Law of Moses. This was before there was anything to supersede the Law. Yet, they were descendants of Manasseh. Since there were no descendants of Aaron or Levi among them, they would not have had a legitimate priesthood.

It concerns me because, if the Book of Mormon is true, and the Bible is true, then they will agree with each other. If a+b=c, and a+x=c, then a=x. If they do not agree, then one of them must be incorrect.

I had always thought that they clothed themselves because they were guilty and ashamed of their disobedience, and were trying to hide from God. But your explanation is fair and square, thanks. So if they were unable to procreate without first sinning, then God gave them the command to multiply, knowing full well that in order to obey the first command (multiply), they would have to break the second (don't eat the fruit). Am I right?

If the darkness was given as a sign to the inhabitants of the isles across the sea, and to those of the house of Israel, then why would the length of darkness differ in different parts of the world?

But where in the Bible is the evidence that they could not have been fruitful and multiplied even if they had never sinned?

So the tempests and earthquakes and hullabaloo lasted for three hours, and the darkness lasted for three days...the Bible still says that the darkness lasted about three hours.

1 Corinthians 10:13 says, "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." God, having infinite knowledge, knew that they would disobey him and eat of the fruit, but that does not change that he does not desire that any man should sin.

To put Psalm 58 in context, David is accusing the rulers of judging unjustly, and later asserts that only God can truly judge justly. As for Romans, Paul tells how Christ died for us while we were still sinners, and did not die for us because we were righteous. Therefore, even though we are all sinful because of the sin of Adam, and sin is increased, grace is increased all the more.

Romans 5:12-14 "12Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Psalm 58:3 "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies."

In Moroni it seems to indicate that we are not touched by sin until we actually commit some discrete sin, but the psalm seems to say that we are sinful from birth.

The topic of contradiction between the Book of Mormon and the Bible came up in aother thread, and I would like to hear address it here, so that it can be discussed better, without distraction. First, Moroni 8:8 "Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me." Psalm 51:5 "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Second, 2 Nephi 2:22-25 " 22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. 23 And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin. 24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things. 25 Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy. Genesis 1:28 "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." This occurs BEFORE his command not to eat the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:17). Thirdly, Helaman 14:27, speaking of the time when Christ would be crucified: "And he said unto me that while the thunder and the lightning lasted, and the tempest, that these things should be, and that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days." 1 Nephi19:10 "10 And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel." Matthew 27:45 "Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour. " And finally (for now), 2 Nephi 5:10 "And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the law of Moses. " however, Deuteronomy 16:5-6 " 5Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover within any of thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee: 6But at the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun, at the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt. " God chose Jerusalem as his the place where his name should dwell. 1 kings 11:36 "And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there." Please understand that I am not trying to cause trouble, I only want to understand how these discrepancies have been reconciled.

I really feel that that topic would be better discussed in its own thread. I will start one now.