Uncomfortable Doctrine

[Guest ceeboo]

Thanks Ceeboo. I appreciate that. :)

It is clear that you have doubts about the Book of Mormon. That is all good. You are not the first with your list of concerns.

Will you read it anyway?

Hey Misshalfway,

You are most welcome, thanks back at ya :)

I am not putting you on the spot and for whatever reason you may not feel comfy please do not feel the need to respond but you did not offer your perspective to my " academic question "??

Peace,

Your wacky friend Ceeboo

[Guest ceeboo]

:DIn all fun Ceeboo,

I used to be as stubborn as you!

(just needed to break things up a little, ya know?)

Friends, Candace

Hello candyprpl,

YES INDEED, my gorgious bride can second, third, and fourth that. I AM A VERY STUBBORN CREATURE OF GOD.

How, if I may, did you become unstubborn??

Peace,

Carl

[candyprpl]

Hello candyprpl,

YES INDEED, my gorgious bride can second, third, and fourth that. I AM A VERY STUBBORN CREATURE OF GOD.

How, if I may, did you become unstubborn??

Peace,

Carl

:lol:I wouldn't quite say I became unstubborn -- my husband and kids can attest to that!

Just became a little more humble in some matters. I had to almost die (i.e. my profile story) before that could happen.:)

God bless you too Carl,

Candace

[Misshalfway]

Hey Misshalfway,

You are most welcome, thanks back at ya :)

I am not putting you on the spot and for whatever reason you may not feel comfy please do not feel the need to respond but you did not offer your perspective to my " academic question "??

Peace,

Your wacky friend Ceeboo

To my wacky catholic friend,

Sorry!!! I didn't mean to over look your concerns. Just felt like a typed a book in my last few posts! LOL Giving the ole fingers a break.

Let me see if I can list your objections to the bofm.

Concern #1) You think Joseph copied passages from the bible.

My answer: When Lehi left Jerusalem, he took with him the Five books of Moses. They had the writings of Isaiah and they quoted them in their records. 2 Nephi contains Isaiah quotes and references as Nephi uses Isaiah's words to teach doctrine. They also lived the law of moses and needed those writings to help them the same way we need the scriptures to help us.

There are also places in the book of 3 Nephi that are similar to the writings of the Savior. This is the book where Christ visits and teaches the inhabitants of the American flock and Jesus did give them some of those NT sermons and he also taught them to baptize and placed hands on heads and gave priesthood authority and organized the church.

So.....how easy is it to say "OH old Joe just copied the bible". He is a fraud! This is why I want you to read it for yourself. I can explain all day....but unless you get into the text yourself, you won't be able to decide one way or the other. And hopefully you will read and apply yourself to the Spirit for guidance as you do.

Concern #2) Why doesn't the Bible refer to these Jews living in America? That must be proof that there was no connection or validation for such claims.

Well, I am not sure they didn't know of the Nephites. It is clear that OT and NT prophets had visions. It seems though, that they didn't write about them. Maybe that is because God told them not to. Maybe it is because their writings were lost. That is my guess....I really don't know.

But....it is clear that their was a scattering of Israel....10 of the tribes were "lost" and scattered thru out the earth. Our BofM....and I posted the passage on another thread....makes it clear that God talks to more nations than one and that he commands all the houses of Israel to write.

It is also clear in John 10:16 that Jesus teaches the apostles that he has other sheep which are not of the fold in Jerusalem. Here is the verse.....

16 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.

Ceeboo......We believe that God speaks to whomever he likes and that he follows patterns. Those patterns include calling prophets, giving them revelations, and writing those revelations. We believe that God caused more to be recorded than just the bible.

But.......you want proof. You want the archeology and the bones and the undeniable facts before you will believe. BUT.... I think I can convince you....at least a little if I am lucky, that at the end of the day...this is a matter of faith. You must start with faith. You must believe or desire to believe or desire an answer one way or the other.....and God confirms and follows such faith with HIS kind of proof! With personal revelation. Just like Peter. It was GOD that made those things known to him. Not man. Not flesh. But God.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Misshalfway

[richlittell]

First, Ceeboo, if you don't want to read my whole thread, don't comment on it. Thank you.

Hello richlittell,

In an attempt to create an even playing field so that our discussions can have a chance to benefit us all, I will try and offer a few points for consideration.

I don't think you really mean that.

For me, non-LDS, it is not just the King Follet that is a tough and difficult concept, rather it is all of JS claims, including but not limited to the BofM.

Of course, what's your point?

To try and add additional flavor, I ( Catholic ) believe that when Jesus ( God ) came to earth ( filling and completing all OT prophesy ) he ALONE is the way the TRUTH and the light. So forgive me but any other claims that differ, add on, or make completly anew, are simply blasphemy.

Agree.

To further be clear with you, It is NOT that I have difficulty in the King Follet sermon ( I certainly do not believe anything JS claims to prophesize nor any other human being over the last 2000 years ) It is my TOTAL and COMPLETE confusion as to why so many LDS people do or don't believe or accept his ( JS ) prophetrized teachings.

I have decided on this last point that you are simply trying to rustle or feathers. My post and several others have been very clear about the difference between the accepted canon of scripture and any additional teachings, comments, sermons etc. made by men as they speak on diverse topics for diverse occasions to diverse audiences.

Maybe the trouble is you can't understand what LDS saints face in everyday study. Take the Bible, it's dictionary, the cross references, the topical guide, the Book of Mormon, D&C, the Pearl of Great Price, and all the General Conference talks in our history, most especially the most recent ones, and pile them up in one high stack, and you'll get a sense of what a Mormon faces when they attempt to study the doctrines that our pertinent to our salvation. We don't have a lot of time to spend on issues that are not relevant to our salvation-- we have families, jobs, volunteer work, and no paid ministry, so it is hard enough to incorporate those basics from our canon into our lives and try to live accordingly without mucking it up with something like the King Follet sermon (and not just that great discourse, but many other great discourses we have that you are probably unaware of that in themselves make up volumes of works spoken directly from the mouths of our prophets from Brigham Young to the present--all of which is not canon).

Unlike my Christian friends whom I grew up with (not directed at you as I don't know you), but unlike them, we actually read and study that huge stack of information we consider canon, and not just once, but again and again (again, I'm sure you are well read, so that was not directed at you but others from my own history).

The King Follet is a great read and serious food for thought, but as I and others have said, it is not pertinent to our salvation, so we are free to understand it, misunderstand it, or even reject it.

Hmmm, maybe that's something else you don't know about us LDS, unlike how many may perceive, we do not live in a church that tries to control our lives and our minds, we are quite free to take our little brains anywhere soever we choose--it's called free agency and so important is free agency to the Lord, that a war in Heaven was waged to maintain it, So I can stand face-to-face with Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Moses, and any other great prophet and disagree with them all I want, so long as we are not talking about issues relevant to our salvation. And yet, we shall all meet in God's kingdom, assuming we've lived according to the principles of salvation, and fall on each other with hugs of happiness. We don't mind disagreeing with each other on issues not relevant to our salvation, so why should you care?

Jesus Christ is the way to salvation, THERE IS NO OTHER WAY. His words and his teachings are the only way to salvation. The only difference between you and us is that we believe we have additional scriptures and revelation that we, in turn, believe give a more full account of his teachings. I don't know why you talk as if we believe there is some other way to salvation, for there certainly is not. We get baptized because Christ was baptized, we pray to heavenly Father because Christ directed us to do so as he did, we believe in the Holy Spirit because Jesus Christ promised us he would send us a comforter, we receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of Hands because Christ has directed us to do so. We accept Christ's atonement as the only one who could pay the price of our sins, we accept his teachings to love the Lord our God and our neighbors for all the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments. We do not place our selves now or ever above our God or our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. I fail to see the "blasphemy" in any of that.

I don't think anyone here has ever said your beliefs are blasphemous even though we might disagree strongly with them. We respect your right to work out your own salvation.

Blasphemy is a very strong word, a word directed once upon a time at our Savior, Jesus Christ, whom we love, serve, and follow, to the best of our abilities.

Edited September 6, 2008 by richlittell

[Guest ceeboo]

Hi Misshalfway,

Thank you for your efforts.:)

I am not sure " I want proof, archeology etc etc " I was simply using your suggestion from an academic view. Although I greatly appreciate your efforts , from an academic view only, it was very weak at best ( I am sorry to be so blunt but t is only from an academic view ).

John 10: 16 ( from a Catholic perspective for what its worth ) is apeaking about gentiles.

I truly, truly, feel your desire to help me and come to your truth. PLEASE TRY and understand I also would love for you to take a similar journey as myself and look into, learn, and evaluate the original, universal Church that Christ himself left for all of us.

I am very sensative as to what that would also bring for you, should you decide to investigate that and atleast potentialy find a diferent perspective, but after all what is the most important thing we can possibly do on this earth other than seek the truth of the LORD and SAVIOR. ( I really hope that came across as I intended it to.)

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

First, Ceeboo, if you don't want to read my whole thread, don't comment on it. Thank you.

I don't think you really mean that.

Of course, what's your point?

Agree.

I have decided on this last point that you are simply trying to rustle or feathers. My post and several others have been very clear about the difference between the accepted canon of scripture and any additional teachings, comments, sermons etc. made by men as they speak on diverse topics for diverse occasions to diverse audiences.

Maybe the trouble is you can't understand what LDS saints face in everyday study. Take the Bible, it's dictionary, the cross references, the topical guide, the Book of Mormon, D&C, the Pearl of Great Price, and all the General Conference talks in our history, most especially the most recent ones, and pile them up in one high stack, and you'll get a sense of what a Mormon faces when they attempt to study the doctrines that our pertinent to our salvation. We don't have a lot of time to spend on issues that are not relevant to our salvation-- we have families, jobs, volunteer work, and no paid ministry, so it is hard enough to incorporate those basics from our canon into our lives and try to live accordingly without mucking it up with something like the King Follet sermon (and not just that great discourse, but many other great discourses we have that you are probably unaware of that in themselves make up volumes of works spoken directly from the mouths of our prophets from Brigham Young to the present--all of which is not canon).

Unlike my Christian friends whom I grew up with (not directed at you as I don't know you), but unlike them, we actually read and study that huge stack of information we consider canon, and not just once, but again and again (again, I'm sure you are well read, so that was not directed at you but others from my own history).

The King Follet is a great read and serious food for thought, but as I and others have said, it is not pertinent to our salvation, so we are free to understand it, misunderstand it, or even reject it.

Hmmm, maybe that's something else you don't know about us LDS, unlike how many may perceive, we do not live in a church that tries to control our lives and our minds, we are quite free to take our little brains anywhere soever we choose--it's called free agency and so important is free agency to the Lord, that a war in Heaven was waged to maintain it, So I can stand face-to-face with Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Moses, and any other great prophet and disagree with them all I want, so long as we are not talking about issues relevant to our salvation. And yet, we shall all meet in God's kingdom, assuming we've lived according to the principles of salvation, and fall on each other with hugs of happiness. We don't mind disagreeing with each other on issues not relevant to our salvation, so why should you care?

Jesus Christ is the way to salvation, THERE IS NO OTHER WAY. His words and his teachings are the only way to salvation. The only difference between you and us is that we believe we have additional scriptures and revelation that we, in turn, believe give a more full account of his teachings. I don't know why you talk as if we believe there is some other way to salvation, for there certainly is not. We get baptized because Christ was baptized, we pray to heavenly Father because Christ directed us to do so as he did, we believe in the Holy Spirit because Jesus Christ promised us he would send us a comforter, we receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of Hands because Christ has directed us to do so. We accept Christ's atonement as the only one who could pay the price of our sins, we accept his teachings to love the Lord our God and our neighbors for all the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments. We do not place our selves now or ever above our God or our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. I fail to see the "blasphemy" in any of that.

I don't think anyone here has ever said your beliefs are blasphemous even though we might disagree strongly with them. We respect your right to work out your own salvation.

Blasphemy is a very strong word, a word directed once upon a time at our Savior, Jesus Christ, whom we love, serve, and follow, to the best of our abilities.

Hi richlittell,

A very simple and short reply as to not return the contention.

Contrary to your several accusations and assumptions, I did read your whole post and beacause of the picture you have painted of me, I will choose not to reply to this one in large measure.

Your comment that " you and many others posts have been very clear as to what is and is not doctrine" Are you reading the same post, the same one I am reading:confused::confused:

God bless,

your friend that has his mind and life controlled.

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

Hi Misshalfway,

If you would like to share, exactly what parts of richlittell's offering were you thanking??

I am just curious.

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

Well Ceeboo, you certainly know how to be direct. I will give you that.

I am not the smartest tool in the shed, nor do I claim to be. Sorry to have disappointed you.

I hoped at some point in this discussion that I could see some evidence that you were applying yourself to understand. I don't think you want to. I think you just need us to be wrong so badly.

We are all trying so hard to answer you. So very hard to let you say what is on your mind and not become offended. And I think on the balance the exercise has been successful. So....we will take what we can get I suppose.

Maybe someday you will change your position and give the BofM a go. Maybe some boring Sunday afternoon when you think of your favorite mormon "misshalfway" .

Until then. Good luck. I am sure that others here on the forum can answer your questions more adequately.

Best Wishes, Ceeboo :)

[Misshalfway]

Hi Misshalfway,

Thank you for your efforts.:)

I am not sure " I want proof, archeology etc etc " I was simply using your suggestion from an academic view. Although I greatly appreciate your efforts , from an academic view only, it was very weak at best ( I am sorry to be so blunt but t is only from an academic view ).

John 10: 16 ( from a Catholic perspective for what its worth ) is apeaking about gentiles.

I truly, truly, feel your desire to help me and come to your truth. PLEASE TRY and understand I also would love for you to take a similar journey as myself and look into, learn, and evaluate the original, universal Church that Christ himself left for all of us.

I am very sensative as to what that would also bring for you, should you decide to investigate that and atleast potentialy find a diferent perspective, but after all what is the most important thing we can possibly do on this earth other than seek the truth of the LORD and SAVIOR. ( I really hope that came across as I intended it to.)

God bless,

Carl

Btw...I would love to learn more about the Catholic perspective. I would love to participate in a thread about that sometime. :)

[Misshalfway]

Hi Misshalfway,

If you would like to share, exactly what parts of richlittell's offering were you thanking??

I am just curious.

God bless,

Carl

His line about the King follett and his perspectives on our belief in Jesus and how the characterization of blasphemous seems extreme.

I don't mean to thank any contention or to get on any contentious bandwagon whatsoever.

Hope that answers your question.

[justamere10]

Hello again justamere,

I certainly can appreciate your implication ( few books chosen by a council of men ) but would offer a very different account as to what and the reasons I ( Catholic ) believe what I do, I can assure you, for what it is or is not worth to you, it has very very little to do with your implied bias, rather has EVERYTHING to do with the words and teachings directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ ( God ).

As for the rest of your post, I do appreciate your perspective but please understand that it is NOT fact as you suggest, it is simply your testimony. We ( Christians ) all have those.

God bless,

Carl

Yes, we (LDS Christians) also have a testimony of the Bible, it's in our canon, we cherish and study it too. It's wonderful to live in a time when we have the words of a living prophet and Apostles to speak directly for the Savior who stands again at the head of His restored Church of Jesus Christ as He did anciently.

I appreciate your devotion to the Savior of all mankind and understand the tradition that drives you, having been Catholic myself. I wish you the very best...

[xanmad33]

Maybe the trouble is you can't understand what LDS saints face in everyday study. Take the Bible, it's dictionary, the cross references, the topical guide, the Book of Mormon, D&C, the Pearl of Great Price, and all the General Conference talks in our history, most especially the most recent ones, and pile them up in one high stack, and you'll get a sense of what a Mormon faces when they attempt to study the doctrines that our pertinent to our salvation. We don't have a lot of time to spend on issues that are not relevant to our salvation-- we have families, jobs, volunteer work, and no paid ministry, so it is hard enough to incorporate those basics from our canon into our lives and try to live accordingly without mucking it up with something like the King Follet sermon (and not just that great discourse, but many other great discourses we have that you are probably unaware of that in themselves make up volumes of works spoken directly from the mouths of our prophets from Brigham Young to the present--all of which is not canon).

Unlike my Christian friends whom I grew up with (not directed at you as I don't know you), but unlike them, we actually read and study that huge stack of information we consider canon, and not just once, but again and again (again, I'm sure you are well read, so that was not directed at you but others from my own history).

The King Follet is a great read and serious food for thought, but as I and others have said, it is not pertinent to our salvation, so we are free to understand it, misunderstand it, or even reject it.

Hmmm, maybe that's something else you don't know about us LDS, unlike how many may perceive, we do not live in a church that tries to control our lives and our minds, we are quite free to take our little brains anywhere soever we choose--it's called free agency and so important is free agency to the Lord, that a war in Heaven was waged to maintain it, So I can stand face-to-face with Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Moses, and any other great prophet and disagree with them all I want, so long as we are not talking about issues relevant to our salvation. And yet, we shall all meet in God's kingdom, assuming we've lived according to the principles of salvation, and fall on each other with hugs of happiness. We don't mind disagreeing with each other on issues not relevant to our salvation, so why should you care?

I was wondering WHAT is pertinent to your slavation? What "issues" are specifically relevant to your salvation that you spoke of? Is there one special book or belief that is above all else?

Edited September 6, 2008 by xanmad33

[candyprpl]

Ceeboo,

I'm curently following a thread on Catholicism on www.CTR1.org. The person doing most of the answering of questions is very knowledgeable. I've learned a lot. I haven't posted on that thread, just read. But I'm afraid I'm like you are here -- I don't agree with the teachings of the Catholic church. Sorry -- I guess we call it stalemate?:)

Still enjoy your company and posts.:)

Edited September 6, 2008 by candyprpl

[justamere10]

Ceeboo,

I'm curently following a thread on Catholicism on www.LDS1.org. The person doing most of the answering of questions is very knowledgeable. I've learned a lot. I haven't posted on that thread, just read. But I'm afraid I'm like you are here -- I don't agree with the teachings of the Catholic church. Sorry -- I guess we call it stalemate?:)

Still enjoy your company and posts.:)

There is a huge amount of information about the Catholic faith and a very knowledgeable Catholic to interact with in the Catholic Forum at http://www.CTR1.org

[candyprpl]

There is a huge amount of information about the Catholic faith and a very knowledgeable Catholic to interact with in the Catholic Forum at http://www.CTR1.org

That's the site I meant -- I went back and changed that. Sorry about that.

[richlittell]

I was wondering WHAT is pertinent to your slavation? What "issues" are specifically relevant to your salvation that you spoke of?

In a nutshell, here are the issues relevant to our salvation:

1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.

2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.

3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Is there one special book or belief that is above all else?

No.

Our canon is, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and the General Conference talks that are given by the prophet and apostles every six months.

All the scriptures complement each other in giving us a fuller understanding of Christ and his mission and teachings, and a fuller understanding of the nature of God, and of the differing places in the spirit world, of Christ's reign on earth, and of the degrees of glory in the afterlife,

However, Joseph Smith said that a man would come closer to God through studying the Book of Mormon than by any other book, but I don't think he meant that it overshadows all other scripture, personally, I think he meant that if anyone could choose a single book to know concerning spiritual matters, the Book of Mormon would be that book. For me, it was a long and lengthy study of the Bible combined with a later serious study of the Doctrine and Covenants that finally converted me to the church, so the Book of Mormon didn't hold that prominence for me at that time. I think we would treat all scriptures equally, but we may be touched more by one than another at different times in our studies.

Edited September 6, 2008 by richlittell

[xanmad33]

Our canon is, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and the General Conference talks that are given by the prophet and apostles every six months.

Do these all hold equal weight?

All the scriptures complement each other in giving us a fuller understanding of Christ and his mission and teachings, and a fuller understanding of the nature of God, and of the differing places in the spirit world, of Christ's reign on earth, and of the degrees of glory in the afterlife,

To a Christian (myself), this statement is completely false, it's probably also one reason I think maybe Ceboo said what he did. One simply cannot in good conscience truly reconcile Mormon doctrine's found in the POGP, D&C, BOM, and J&D (not to mention countless prophets who have "heard" countless revelations from God) to The Holy Bible.

Mormons on this very site have already admitted as much, claiming that to be the precise reason you NEED more books (as Mormons have)... Because the teachings of Mormonism are just not there. Maybe that was his point about blasphemy, which I'm sure you could understand was not (at least the way I read it) a "dig" at Mormons but rather I think a statement of his personal faith...JMO :)

However, Joseph Smith said that a man would come closer to God through studying the Book of Mormon than by any other book, but I don't think he meant that it overshadows all other scripture, personally, I think he meant that if anyone could choose a single book to know concerning spiritual matters, the Book of Mormon would be that book. For me, it was a long and lengthy study of the Bible combined with a later serious study of the Doctrine and Covenants that finally converted me to the church, so the Book of Mormon didn't hold that prominence for me at that time. I think we would treat all scriptures equally, but we may be touched more by one than another at different times in our studies.

Is the Bible considered as correct as the BOM in your view?

Thanks!

[Snow]

Do these all hold equal weight?

To a Christian (myself), this statement is completely false, it's probably also one reason I think maybe Ceboo said what he did. One simply cannot in good conscience truly reconcile Mormon doctrine's found in the POGP, D&C, BOM, and J&D (not to mention countless prophets who have "heard" countless revelations from God) to The Holy Bible.

I notice that you merely complain but post absolutely nothing that supports your allegation and I propose that the reason that you merely allege instead of offering evidence is that you can't.

... and by the way, the JOD is not doctrinal.

Mormons on this very site have already admitted as much, claiming that to be the precise reason you NEED more books (as Mormons have)... Because the teachings of Mormonism are just not there. Maybe that was his point about blasphemy, which I'm sure you could understand was not (at least the way I read it) a "dig" at Mormons but rather I think a statement of his personal faith...JMO :)

Having beliefs that are not in the bible is not the same as having beliefs that are contrary to the bible.

I am going to assume that you believe in the Trinity... It's not in the bible and in fact did not reach it's current form until after 400CE.

... I would be interested to know where you get the idea that true beliefs must be found in the bible. Such a belief itself is not in the bible and God has never said a word about it... so where did you come up with the idea?

Is the Bible considered as correct as the BOM in your view?

Thanks!

[prisonchaplain]

Xanmad, on another thread we discussed this "weighting." The impression I get is that canon is canon, but that latter canon interprets earlier canon, since it's all true--much as we use the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament. Therefore, the BoM, D&C, and PoGP could all be used to interpret the Bible, and, indeed, authoritative speeches by current prophets could interpret those three writings.

[Guest ceeboo]

Ceeboo,

I'm curently following a thread on Catholicism on www.CTR1.org. The person doing most of the answering of questions is very knowledgeable. I've learned a lot. I haven't posted on that thread, just read. But I'm afraid I'm like you are here -- I don't agree with the teachings of the Catholic church. Sorry -- I guess we call it stalemate?:)

Still enjoy your company and posts.:)

Hello candyprpl,

" You are afraid I am like you are there, that YOU ( LDS ) don't agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church ":confused: " sorry a stalemate ":confused:

This is not a contest at all.

On the contrary.IT is not about what I don't agree with in regards to LDS teachings,

IT IS ALL ABOUT WHAT THE LDS DON"T AGREE ABOUT CONCERNING LDS TEACHING.

A simple look back over the last 10 or so pages on this one thread ( A sermon given by your first prophet (JS) and his teachings about God ) would without question display this enormous contradiction and differences among LDS ( NOT ME ).

God bless,

Carl

[a-train]

There are many so-called Christian traditions, beliefs, and notions that are irreconcilable with the Bible. Mormons don't reject Biblical teaching because of the Book of Mormon, but rather we reject creeds and teachings incorrectly attributed to the Bible in an effort to maintain true Biblical perspective.

-a-train

[richlittell]

Do these all hold equal weight?

So far as they are translated correctly, yes, although we hold modern revelation (the General Conference talks) to be most relevant to our needs of today.

To a Christian (myself), this statement is completely false, it's probably also one reason I think maybe Ceboo said what he did.

No problem, you are welcome to feel that way. So is Ceeboo.

One simply cannot in good conscience truly reconcile Mormon doctrine's found in the POGP, D&C, BOM, and J&D (not to mention countless prophets who have "heard" countless revelations from God) to The Holy Bible.

Why not? In good conscience, I did. I am a convert, I studied my Bible many years before carefully considering the LDS church, reluctantly l might add, because I didn't really want something like that disturbing my set world, but alas, I took the plunge after serious study, reflection, and prayer. All my family are protestant. My favorite Uncle is a protestant minister whom I may very well love and respect more than any man on earth. My parents are deeply involved in their church, my sisters as well. One of my cousins is also a protestant minister. Both sets of my grandparents were the old-fashioned bible thumping Christians who could quote their Bible front to back and front again--I miss them dearly. I am completely and fully immersed in non-LDS Christian doctrine and way of life as well as in LDS-Christian doctrine. (I hold that we are all Christians---protestant, Catholic, and LDS--- but you can choose to disagree). So it is a moot argument for any one to discourse with me as if I have never studied out these things for myself. There is nothing blasphemous neither in our canon nor our way of life.

Mormons on this very site have already admitted as much, claiming that to be the precise reason you NEED more books (as Mormons have)... Because the teachings of Mormonism are just not there. Maybe that was his point about blasphemy, which I'm sure you could understand was not (at least the way I read it) a "dig" at Mormons but rather I think a statement of his personal faith...JMO :)

I'm not sure what you mean. I take the position that the Book of Mormon and D&C etc.. are necessary to have a fuller understanding of the Bible. There are no Doctrines taught in the church's canon that are contradicted in the Bible, though you might say we have additional beliefs, but those beliefs are not disputed in the Bible either, if you study it as a whole. All our teachings point to Christ as our one and only Savior, and salvation can come by no other way but through him.

I had read and studied my Bible many times over, from my days as a child until adulthood, before I ever knew there even was an LDS Church. I came to the LDS church, in fact, because they were teaching about the things I read and understood from the Bible, unlike the churches that I grew up in.

No one should label any others' religion blasphemous unless they have a clear knowledge that these people or their teachings are intentionally attempting to destroy truth and righteousness. Everything our church teaches inspires people to do good, and to better themselves, and to serve one another, and humankind, and to live the example Christ set for us. I love the sermon on the mount more than anything else from ALL the scriptures combined--that is from the Bible.

Is the Bible considered as correct as the BOM in your view?

Thanks!

Sure, as far as it is translated correctly. I LOVE my Bible-- I have read it from cover to cover more times than I can count (okay, I confess, I skip over a lot of the begats).

[richlittell]

Xanmad, on another thread we discussed this "weighting." The impression I get is that canon is canon, but that latter canon interprets earlier canon, since it's all true--much as we use the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament. Therefore, the BoM, D&C, and PoGP could all be used to interpret the Bible, and, indeed, authoritative speeches by current prophets could interpret those three writings.

That is very insightful PC, better than I tried to say myself. Thanks!

[Guest ceeboo]

Well Ceeboo, you certainly know how to be direct. I will give you that.

I hoped at some point in this discussion that I could see some evidence that you were applying yourself to understand. I don't think you want to. I think you just need us to be wrong so badly.

We are all trying so hard to answer you. So very hard to let you say what is on your mind and not become offended. And I think on the balance the exercise has been successful. So....we will take what we can get I suppose.

Until then. Good luck. I am sure that others here on the forum can answer your questions more adequately.

Best Wishes, Ceeboo :)

Hello Misshalfway,

It sounds as if you are done sharing with me:( I am indeed sorry to see that )

Because I always try and respond to all who post me, I will offer this to you for ( maybe the last time )

It is probably a weakness I have in being direct ( sorry as it obviously offended you ) But when it comes to beliefs and teachings ( not personal things ) I can see no better way to communicate with eachother. I would add that I wished many LDS posters here were more direct and clear when offering Non LDS information as to what it is that they teach and when it is that their LDS prophets are teaching things that are " really teachings ".

It is my very humble opinion that if the LDS were in fact more direct atleast one could measure, digest, consider, and possibly continue a conversation on a number of different levels that may be beneficial to all. In this instance, I would suggest, we have spent days ( several pages on this thread ) "completly stuck" and filled with LDS contradiction over a JS teaching ( King Follet ) that I still am enormously confused as to why LDS ( NOT ME ) do not fully accept. I already knew ( days ago ) what I thought of the King Follet teachings and what it claims about God, what I STILL DO NOT KNOW IS WHAT LDS BELIEVE ABOUT THEIR OWN TEACHINGS??:confused:

You think I need you to be wrong so badly??

I am not sure what that implies but I think I understand your need to suggest it:confused:

At any rate, I feel I am beating a dead horse.

God bless,

Carl