Does LDS doctrine clash with the Bible?

[MikeUpton]

I have a book of Mormon, and I have read some of it. I was told to pray sincerely about whether it be true or not, but for me to pray and ask God whether these things be so is a tall order for me because I wouldn't know how to do it sincerely, sincerely speaking. For example, I am already a born-again Christian. Why would I want to trade the eternal security or life I already have for a religion that says I cannot know if I have it right now.

The question of sincerity cannot be a question of convenience in doctrine. You need to be willing to trust the Lord at his word, regardless of what may come, regardless of what he may reveal. This is the problem you struggle with.

When you begin to pray to God with the attitude of "Thy will be done" regardless of what the answer may be, the issue you bring up wouldn't even be a question. You have to be willing to do God's will even if it meant you were wrong to begin with. When you overcome your pride, you will have sufficient sincerity, and the Lord will open to you. Until you do this, he will not.

[aj4u]

My question is does LDS doctrine clash with this Bible truth I have mentioned? I will have to let Mormons answer this question?

[MikeUpton]

My question is does LDS doctrine clash with this Bible truth I have mentioned? I will have to let Mormons answer this question?

It is best to ask the Lord what he thinks. Latter day Saints also believe in the bible, though our interpretation of various scripture will naturally differ to yours. Its sort of a pointless circular motion of debate, good mostly for entertainment but not much else. The thing you need as before mentioned is personal revelation through the promptings of the Holy Ghost, which can only be obtained after you are willing to do whatsoever thing the Lord asks of you in this matter, regardless of how the question may affect you personally.

[aj4u]

The question of sincerity cannot be a question of convenience in doctrine. You need to be willing to trust the Lord at his word, regardless of what may come, regardless of what he may reveal. This is the problem you struggle with.

When you begin to pray to God with the attitude of "Thy will be done" regardless of what the answer may be, the issue you bring up wouldn't even be a question. You have to be willing to do God's will even if it meant you were wrong to begin with. When you overcome your pride, you will have sufficient sincerity, and the Lord will open to you. Until you do this, he will not.

I always pray thy will be done. That is the way Jesus prayed. What makes you think that pride is involved on my part? Let me ask you a question. Did you know the Bible says do not believe every spirit but to try them? I am being obedient to Scriptures. If Mormonism is truth, I will find it by trying it through the fire of God's already written word. The written word of God in the Bible is a sharp double-edged sword; it is a discerner of the thought and intents of the heart. I am told that LDS doctrine does not clash with the Bible, and I am told does. So far those who profess to follow LDS doctrine do not seem to agree on this particular question. That makes me think that there is either insincerity or deception or both somewhere. It is not pride on my part. I submit to you that you lack discernment if that is what you see. I am captive to the word of God. It is neither right nor safe for me to pray against my conscious eternal witness. I can only live up the truth that God has given me thus far. I have not cut you down or judged you so why do you do that to me? Is that what Jesus would do? Edited May 26, 2009 by aj4u

[mikbone]

The Book of Mormon clarifies the Bible.

In my opinion, without the use of the Book of Mormon as a reference text for interpreting the Bible many basic, pure, and simple truths can and have been easily confounded.

1 Ne. 13: 26, 28-29, 32, 34-35, 40

26 And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.

• • •

28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.

29 And after these plain and precious things were ataken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest—because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them.

• • •

32 Neither will the Lord God suffer that the Gentiles shall forever remain in that awful state of blindness, which thou beholdest they are in, because of the plain and most precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, whose formation thou hast seen.

• • •

34 And it came to pass that the angel of the Lord spake unto me, saying: Behold, saith the Lamb of God, after I have visited the remnant of the house of Israel—and this remnant of whom I speak is the seed of thy father—wherefore, after I have visited them in judgment, and smitten them by the hand of the Gentiles, and after the Gentiles do stumble exceedingly, because of the most plain and precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, which is the mother of harlots, saith the Lamb—I will be merciful unto the Gentiles in that day, insomuch that I will bring forth unto them, in mine own power, much of my gospel, which shall be plain and precious, saith the Lamb.

35 For, behold, saith the Lamb: I will manifest myself unto thy seed, that they shall write many things which I shall minister unto them, which shall be plain and precious; and after thy seed shall be destroyed, and dwindle in unbelief, and also the seed of thy brethren, behold, these things shall be hid up, to come forth unto the Gentiles, by the gift and power of the Lamb.

• • •

40 And the angel spake unto me, saying: These last records, which thou hast seen among the Gentiles, shall establish the truth of the first, which are of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, and shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them; and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved.

Edited May 26, 2009 by mikbone

[MikeUpton]

I always pray thy will be done. That is the way Jesus prayed. What makes you think that pride is involved on my part? Let me ask you a question. Did you know the Bible says do not believe every spirit but to try them? I am being obedient to Scriptures. If Mormonism is truth I will find it by trying it through the fire of God's already written word. The written word of God in the Bible is a sharp double-edged sword; it is a discerner of the thought and intents of the heart. I am told that it does not clash with the Bible, and I am told it does. So far those who profess to follow LDS doctrine do not seem to agree on this particular question. That makes me think that there is either insincerity or deception or both somewhere. It is not pride on my part. I submit to you that you lack discernment if that is what you see. I am captive to the word of God. It is neither right nor safe for me to pray against my conscious eternal witness. I can only live up the truth that God has given me thus far. I have not cut you down or judged you so why do you do that to me? Is that what Jesus would do?

my answer was not to cut you down or judge you, but to prescribe to you the reason you would worry about whether or not you were saved now or later to the point it would effect your sincerity in a prayer. This is the reason. I say it knowing full well I and everyone else struggle with pride, though we all do so in our various ways.

I understand your concern about not believing "every spirit" which speaks to you. However at some point if you want to communicate with the Lord, you will need to understand how to recognize the promptings of the Holy Ghost and distinguish between them and some other spirit.

edit:

Is that what Jesus would do?

In my experience, if I struggle with pride, then yes it tends to be exactly what he lets me know, in no uncertain way.

Edited May 26, 2009 by MikeUpton

[the Ogre]

As I do a study of Mormonism, I have come to learn there are different sects within the same religion as well. I was born and raised Catholic and now I am part of the body of Christ in general. I don't go much for demoninational tags.

You don't go for denominational tags except when you say "Mormonism" above. You have excluded Latter-day Saints from Chr-stianity as a whole. How kind of you.

Any modern day prophet is subject to the already written word.

Latter-day Saints do not believe this (see what President Ezra Taft Benson had to say about that here). You might precedence is important, but we do not agree that a prophet needs to seek biblical precidence.

But wait a second, this was explained to you already. You have been told how much we value Modern Revelation, but here it seems you have chosen to ignore those previous explanations. Hmmmm . . .

That is why Paul mentions not once but twice in the same paragraph Gal 1: 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemnedWhat gospel is Paul referring to?

I think this is very open to interpretation. One question I think needs to be addressed is: Was Paul talking to the people of his day (ie.. the people of Galatia?!?) who had to deal with competing brands of Chr-stianity, particularly the Chr-tian-Jews who still felt the Law of Moses must be obeyed?

I do not think you have allowed for that probability.

It is a simply message that we are saved (eternal life) by grace through faith. It is a gift; it is not something we can work for, earn merit by good works or following commands or any laws. Ep 2:8.9. If we attempt to earn or work for our salvation, we will be judged by how well we have kept all the law. If we break just one command we are just as bad off as if we done it all.

Not unless you have heard differently from a modern, living prophet.

That is why Paul said I will hear nothing among you save Jesus Christ crucified Ro. 10: 9,10 "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"[d] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

But Paul is no longer the prophet of our day. President Thomas S. Monson is the prophet of our day. It is to him that we must listen to. Paul is great, but we do not expect our sisters to be voiceless and silent in church. We do not require them to remain covered in church as well. The church has changed much from the time of Paul. In our time we have other concerns and as such we must rely on a modern, living prophet.

If we could be saved or gain eternal life by our works we could glory in it and bragg.

Yes and that would be pride, we have heard quite extensively on pride in our doctrine, but we are still taught by living prophets that faith without works is dead.

It is not possible to keep the law in our strength. If we put our faith in baptism and tithings and many other such works, we will be going about to establish a righteousness of our own. This is exactly what Paul was so opposed to.

It is not the baptisms and other commandments that we place our faith. To do so would be idolatry. We are to have faith in our L-rd J-sus Chr-st.

This is not a matter of private interpretaton. This is explicitly what Paul taught by revelation of Jesus Christ and cannot be change by anyone. In fact, Paul said let that person who tells you differently than this be condemned. He said it twice let them be accursed. This is what the gospel is.

Unfortunately, I think the way you read Paul is a matter of personal interpretation. You have not even shown how your interpretation parallels with current non-LDS doctrine anywhere. So far, we have only heard the interpretations of one aj4u. Must every one in the world agree with you? That is quite a bit of pride in the work of your hands. I wonder how the Ephesian verses you quote would coincide with what you are doing now.

Baptism is a command that means nothing if we are not born again. It is a marriage to where we are hid in Christ trust in His mercy not in a ritual.

Right. We believe in being born again, we call it conversion. It is an important part of being a Chr-stian. No amount of ordinance will save a single soul if one does not accept it through faith in J-sus Chr-st.

Many that are bapised are going to hell because they went down dry sinners and came up wet ones. there has been no change God's grace and our faith has got to be first and foremost.

Yup. I agree. Grace is everything. We still believe in works, just like the Baptists and Catholics do. Different works, but still works.

It is Christ who finishes the work He started in us. the battle is the Lord's. He is the good news. We can only work out our salvation if we have received the gift by faith to work out, but it is Hiom working through us. the labourors laboiut in vain if the Lord is not building the house.

I agree.

AJ:

You still refuse to respect our belief in Modern Revelation and Modern Prophets. I think you need to agree to disagree. We are not going to change and in the same way I can not expect you to.

Aaron the Ogre

Edited May 26, 2009 by the Ogre

[aj4u]

It is best to ask the Lord what he thinks. Latter day Saints also believe in the bible, though our interpretation of various scripture will naturally differ to yours. Its sort of a pointless circular motion of debate, good mostly for entertainment but not much else. The thing you need as before mentioned is personal revelation through the promptings of the Holy Ghost, which can only be obtained after you are willing to do whatsoever thing the Lord asks of you in this matter, regardless of how the question may affect you personally.

Lord Jesus I pray that you would open both of our eyes to see you and what you are doing here. In fact, I ask it of all viewing this thread. My understanding is limited, but yours is not. I am weak but you are strong. I pray that you have you way on this thread and in my life in Jesus' name. Satan the Lord rebuke you from blocking and twisting truth. You will not be able to hinder any from seeing the truth of what Jesus doing here and from others seeing in Jesus name. I pray Lord for a clean heart and a right spirit in the percious name of Jesus Christ my Lord.

[MikeUpton]

In a mormon sense of thinking, works qualify us for the grace that saves us. There is no contradiction between that and the fact we are saved by grace. A man may begin to build a mansion with a couple toothpicks, (works) then a construction crew roars in and finishes the house. (grace) Who built the house?

[the Ogre]

My question is does LDS doctrine clash with this Bible truth I have mentioned? I will have to let Mormons answer this question?

Yes, extensively and for thousands of pages. Did you check out the JST as I requested or are you ignoring another opportunity to learn.

I am a member of the Church of J-sus Chr-st of Latter-day Saints and I say that modern prophecy has rendered entire sections of the bible redundant, and yet the bible does not contradict the doctrines of our church. I think you need to do some more work and stop insisting we agree with you and decide to agree to disagree.

[john doe]

Aj, for this exchange to work, you need to do your part. I challenged you in two posts on earlier threads and you conveniently failed to address them in any way. If you are going to succeed at having a meaningful conversation you need to actually converse instead of just claiming that people aren't really addressing your points.

[MikeUpton]

Unfortunately, I think the way you read Paul is a matter of personal interpretation. You have not even shown how your interpretation parallels with current non-LDS doctrine anywhere. So far, we have only heard the interpretations of one aj4u. Must every one in the world agree with you? That is quite a bit of pride in the work of your hands. I wonder how the Ephesian verses you quote would coincide with what you are doing now.

Aaron the Ogre

It is an interesting point you bring up, one very odd attribute of many churches. "This is the correct way to interpret the scriptures, it is the Word of God, no you may not ask the Lord in prayer if our way is correct, lest the devil answer you."

All the while, one (not counting translations) bible leading to 38,000 different Christian denominations in the world, each one of them understanding the bible in a different manner, (many or most) of them saying "This is the word, this is exactly what it said, the way we interpret the scriptures is the correct way, no you may not ask for personal revelation, lest the devil answer you..."

Can God be said to be the author of this confusion? No, but I might still be called a heretic for even pointing this out. It becomes obvious that the thoughts one has, or what one believes a scripture said can only amount to exactly that. The thoughts one has, or what one believes a scripture said. I believe most people do this unknowingly, but I think you are correct: when you end up passing off what you thought a scripture said as the very word of God, without first an appeal to the continuing revelation of God, you are putting the ideas of man on the same level as the truths of God, which is a very dangerous thing.

How do you know? Obviously (psst the Holy Ghost) something else has to enter the equation when it comes to a confirmation of what truth is.

"But it said it in the bible!"

"Yea that's not what the 37,999 other churches said."

It is little wonder God would appear to a boy of only 14, who was not so indoctrinated the following scripture would mean nothing to him in his search for the true church:

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

James 1

Edited May 26, 2009 by MikeUpton

[aj4u]

In a mormon sense of thinking, works qualify us for the grace that saves us. There is no contradiction between that and the fact we are saved by grace. A man may begin to build a mansion with a couple toothpicks, (works) then a construction crew roars in and finishes the house. (grace) Who built the house?

This I think is one of the clashes. According to the Bible it is faith that qualifies us for the grace not works Ep 2: 8,9. This is what Paul explicitly states. What you mentioned is putting the cart before the horse. Paul opposes this very strongly. This is not my interpretation; this is exactly what Paul was saying. To trust in the works as the qualifier, is to fall from God's grace. What I am hearing from you is your trust is in modern day revelation over the Bible. The Bible, however, is all we have to judge whether something is from God or not. If we say the Bible is not accurate and not inspired of God there remains no yard stick for measurement and all safety is taken from us.

[bytebear]

If only you could eliminate churches based on a single Bible verse(or a few select verses). I could just as easily quote Amos 3:7 and eliminatate all churches not led by prophets. Or I could quote Paul on issues of women's role in the church, or Leviticus on dietary laws. The point is, the Gospel is not a riddle to be solved by reading the Bible. It is a spiritual question that requires the spirit to answer.

My personal experience is that the more I understand LDS theology, the more I understand the Bible. Just the concept of Spirit Prison alone tells me the Mormons have it right. There are many other examples. But you are asking the question wrong. You ask, Does Mormonism conform to the Bible, when you should be asking, Does the Bible conform to Mormonism. Turn the question around, and ask it of your own beliefs. But you may not like the implications.

[bmy-]

It's simple really -- the one and only answer should be this:

It's the same gospel.. and faith without works is dead.

[Kawazu]

Howdy,

After reading the discussion, I am inclined to interject a pertinent quote. Protestant Bible scholar Floyd V. Filson, reacting to the tendency to believe that the Bible is the sole word of God, wrote:

"It is possible, however, to stress the Bible so much and give it so central a place that the sensitive Christian conscience must rebel. We may illustrate such overstress on the Bible by the often-used (and perhaps misused) quotation from Chillingworth: "The Bible alone is the religion of Protestantism." Or we may recall how often it has been said that the Bible is the final authority for the Christian. If it will not seem too facetious, I would like to put in a good word for God. It is God and not the Bible who is the central fact for the Christian. When we speak of "the Word of God" we use a phrase which, properly used, may apply to the Bible, but it has a deeper primary meaning. It is God who speaks to man. But he does not do so only through the Bible. He speaks through prophets and apostles. He speaks through specific events. And while his unique message to the Church finds its central record and written expression in the Bible, this very reference to the Bible reminds us that Christ is the Word of God in a living, personal way which surpasses what we have even in this unique book. Even the Bible proves to be the Word of God only when the Holy Spirit working within us attests the truth and divine authority of what the Scripture says. Faith must not give to the aids that God provides the reverence and attention that Belong only to God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Our hope is in God; our life is in Christ; our power is in the Spirit. The Bible speaks to us of the divine center of all life and help and power, but it is not the center. The Christian teaching about the canon must not deify the Scripture."

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Kawazu

[MikeUpton]

This I think is one of the clashes. According to the Bible it is faith that qualifies us for the grace not works Ep 2: 8,9. This is what Paul explicitly states. What you mentioned is putting the cart before the horse. Paul opposes this very strongly. This is not my interpretation; this is exactly what Paul was saying. To trust in the works as the qualifier, is to fall from God's grace. What I am hearing from you is your trust is in modern day revelation over the Bible. The Bible, however, is all we have to judge whether something is from God or not. If we say the Bible is not accurate and not inspired of God there remains no yard stick for measurement and all safety is taken from us.

That "yardstick for measurement" is working pretty well with 38,000 christian churches. </sarcasm> You are misstating the stance of the LDS Church if you claim we believe the bible is not inspired. You are also misstating our argument on the forum: Its not that we do not believe the Bible is inspired. Its more that we do not believe you are inspired in your interpretation of what the Bible is saying.

That sort of interpretation creates the perceived "clash" which ends up being a difference in doctrine and scriptural interpretation, and is exactly the reason this sort of discussion is pointless as i described earlier. You can go in circles with this sort of thing, saying, but its not what the bible said! Now its my turn. Oh hmm ho whats good:

21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Matthew 7

and oh by the way,

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

James 2

with us saying our doctrine makes more sense in the context of both blah blah blah, and you saying, but it goes against the word! and in the end who cares anyways, did anyone care to ask God about it directly? I know you say

It is neither right nor safe for me to pray against my conscious eternal witness.

which in other words translates as you saying its incorrect to ask God which church belongs to him so you can know you're doing the right thing, but boy you sure make it a tough struggle with this. Seems like it would save a whole lot of time to cast aside your pride and ask God simply "Dear Father, is there a better path for me? Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints thy true church?" (with sincerity! not what you're coming in here with) Instead you're throwing down the bet that the interpretation you got from one of 38,000 churches was correct, by reasoning "heck no asking god is dangerous!" Did you ever stop to think that if your church was correct, you would not be praying against your "conscious eternal witness" but in favor of it? Did you ever think that if maybe you are not praying against the will of Jesus, but to know it? And that by refusing to prepare yourself to receive personal revelation (which you probably exercise a form of anyways on a day to day basis when you ask God to help you find your car keys), because of your fear of whatever spirits may be out there, you are also shunning the light and knowledge you could receive from the Holy Spirit? Again, if you are having difficulty discerning what is the Spirit of God and what is the spirit of the devil when you pray, perhaps you have a problem there.

Think of God in his infinite perfection, his infinite majesty, his infinite mercy and wisdom. He loves you as his child and cares deeply for you, for he is your father. Do you really think he'll be upset if you ask him whether the Mormon Church is true? Do you really think he's going to say "What are you asking me for! Its dangerous to ask questions, when you already belong to Church # 24,553! Doesn't it say it in the Word already?" He might be upset if you put that list of doctrinal conveniences in his face and say ok I know you gave me the answer, but this one does this and this and this! So yea never mind, God. "Its in the Word"

It is my experience that when God says he "upbraideth not" he means it.

Edited May 26, 2009 by MikeUpton

[Justice]

My question is does LDS doctrine clash with this Bible truth I have mentioned? I will have to let Mormons answer this question?

How can you, when you don't understand them, and are not willing to open your mind and learn them?

All you have done is taken a list that antis use and seek for those differences.

Can't you see that that will never allow you to understand our beliefs?

Read Mike's post just before this one... it's what I've been trying to tell you for a couple weeks now. Maybe Mike can help you understand better than I.

Personally, I think we are biting off too much. You asked too many questions at once. There are too many topics.

I'd like to see you answer my question about baptism, then we have something solid and firm to stand on and can use both the Bible and Book of Mormon, hoping and praying the Spirit can work, and arrive at a conclusion on one specific thing.

[the Ogre]

I might be wrong, but I want to try something.

AJ:

You have brought-up Eph 2.8&9. I think if you do so we better look at Eph 2.10:

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

This is the problem with vs 8 & 9 according to the protestant tradition. They discuss only "by grace are ye saved (8)" and yet in the very next verse do we hear: "workmanship", "unto good works", and "walk in them". This is the divergence with the LDS tradition. We believe that we, the members of the church (and all humanity), are the workmanship of Chr-st: the creation of Chr-st to do work. So then to what work are we to do? "Good works". We believe we were created to do these "good works". That is the ordination we receive: do good works. Why? "That we may walk in them." What does this mean? In our footnotes, we see for the keywork 'walk': "TG Walking with G-d" (the scriptures do not hyphenate). SO with that I turn to the Topical Guide "Walking with G-d" where we see over a hundred references leading through-out the bible much of which refers to salvation. Look at the topical guide contraction for v10: "good works . . . ordained that we should walk in them".So an LDS thinks of this section as three full verses (to only think of this as two verses is incomplete, the sentence begins in verse eight and ends in verse 9, your reference is grammatically incorrect: a sentence fragment and as such is an incomplete sentence -- read the complete sentence as it is supposed to go) saying: we are saved by grace, but we are ordained to work with the warning to avoid pride. The LDS interpretation of this section is different from yours, but we can clearly see that the verses you wanted to use to disprove our "work" is incomplete and still reinforces LDS doctrine.

Ephesian still has more to say on this. You question the reason why we would interpret differently than do you. To explain that, I turn to Eph 4.11&14:

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers . . .

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive . . .

Paul explained why we need Prophets. You, the disciple of Paul, have selectively forgotten the reason for a prophet: to keep the church from being tossed to and fro with the winds of wild human interpretations through philosophy and deception. AoF#6: "We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth." Why? The world is filled with people who would lead us away from the word of G-d. People who would lead us from our work. People who rely on the philosophies of men forgetting what G-d wanted us to do: accomplish the salvation of all men.

You ignore the need for modern revelation and living prophets when Paul was very explicit as to why we need it. If you are such a disciple of Paul, why would you ignore this?

[Hemidakota]

I have a book of Mormon, and I have read some of it. I was told to pray sincerely about whether it be true or not, but for me to pray and ask God whether these things be so is a tall order for me because I wouldn't know how to do it sincerely, sincerely speaking

This is where you failed...even in the church, many have failed in following the council of Joseph Smith in seeking the Godhead as a personal testimony; lacking faith in themselves and not living every principle as given by GOD.

[aj4u]

Hi, Aj4u.

I can't answer your questions for you. But, this isn't through any fault of my own, but it's just an artifact of the way you've set up the question. Look at this:

With this statement, you have rendered it literally impossible to discern truth from error.

My only response can be, "Why do you consider the Bible immune to this fault, but not the Book of Mormon or the Qur'an or the Bhagavad Gita?"

This is not a question. If anyone is ignorant of the Satan's devices, he or she is sure to be deceived by it. Do you agree? It is written: 2Corn. 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. One of Satan's traps is to get people to think that the Bible is not reliable and another is to have people believe that they have to earn or merit their own salvation. There is a righteousness that comes from man and one that comes from God. It is written that "My people says the Lord perish for lack of knoweledge." Ro. 10:3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. I will submit to the authority of the Bible, and I will learn from whatever clarifies and confirms what is written. If, however, something clashes with it, red flags go up for me and don't you think it should? That was a question:D Edited May 26, 2009 by aj4u

[Traveler]

Diversity is a good thing. As I do a study of Mormonism, I have come to learn there are different sects within the same religion as well. I was born and raised Catholic and now I am part of the body of Christ in general. I don't go much for demoninational tags. Those that wear them can, but I believe if they go to heaven it will fall off and in hell they will burn off. I don't find diverstity in the essential doctrines of Christianity (in main stream Christianity) but I see liberty in the non-essentials. Any modern day prophet is subject to the already written word. That is why Paul mentions not once but twice in the same paragraph Gal 1: 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemnedWhat gospel is Paul referring to? It is a simply message that we are saved (eternal life) by grace through faith. It is a gift; it is not something we can work for, earn merit by good works or following commands or any laws. Ep 2:8.9. If we attempt to earn or work for our salvation, we will be judged by how well we have kept all the law. If we break just one command we are just as bad off as if we done it all. That is why Paul said I will hear nothing among you save Jesus Christ crucified Ro. 10: 9,10 "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"[d] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. If we could be saved or gain eternal life by our works we could glory in it and bragg. It is not possible to keep the law in our strength. If we put our faith in baptism and tithings and many other such works, we will be going about to establish a righteousness of our own. This is exactly what Paul was so opposed to. This is not a matter of private interpretaton. This is explicitly what Paul taught by revelation of Jesus Christ and cannot be change by anyone. In fact, Paul said let that person who tells you differently than this be condemned. He said it twice let them be accursed. This is what the gospel is. Baptism is a command that means nothing if we are not born again. It is a marriage to where we are hid in Christ trust in His mercy not in a ritual. Many that are baptised are going to hell because they went down dry sinners and came up wet ones. there has been no change God's grace and our faith has got to be first and foremost. It is Christ who finishes the work He started in us. The battle is the Lord's. He is the good news. We can only work out our salvation if we have received the gift by faith to work out, but it is Him working through us. The labourors labor in vain if the Lord is not building the house.

The point is that you are interpreting scriptures very much to your own liking or will. Let me give an example - Your reference to Romans 10:9-10. During the time in which Paul was talking about "confessing Christ" one would be put to death for such a confession in certain places. Performing the works of "confession" even unto death is a far cry from standing up in a friendly congregation and saying you confess Christ to their cheers. If one never does the real, true and complete works of confessing Christ – are they saved?

The truth is that salvation comes through a covenant or bilateral partnership contract with G-d not by individual unilateral efforts – that is what the scriptures are really trying to tell us. This is how scriptures can and should be interpreted. If salvation was only a divine unilateral contract, every individual would have the same salvation as every other individual regardless of their “works” or “beliefs” or whatever you want to discern as different qualifiers or methods of earning a reward in heaven or a punishment in hell. (G-d is not a respecter of persons). If works are not rewarded in any way then we cannot say that works can condemn in any way as well. If works can condemn us then it is not grace that saves us it would be the works of not doing works of condemnation. If we are saved by grace only; then works do not and cannot have any part in part in the judgment (rewards or punishments) of G-d. But we are judged clearly by our works – according to every scripture that speaks of judgment. Therefore the only conclusion I can draw is that there is something very wrong with your interpretation of scripture.

The Traveler

[aj4u]

The point is that you are interpreting scriptures very much to your own liking or will. Let me give an example - Your reference to Romans 10:9-10. During the time in which Paul was talking about "confessing Christ" one would be put to death for such a confession in certain places. Performing the works of "confession" even unto death is a far cry from standing up in a friendly congregation and saying you confess Christ to their cheers. If one never does the real, true and complete works of confessing Christ – are they saved?

The truth is that salvation comes through a covenant or bilateral partnership contract with G-d not by individual unilateral efforts – that is what the scriptures are really trying to tell us. This is how scriptures can and should be interpreted. If salvation was only a divine unilateral contract, every individual would have the same salvation as every other individual regardless of their “works” or “beliefs” or whatever you want to discern as different qualifiers or methods of earning a reward in heaven or a punishment in hell. (G-d is not a respecter of persons). If works are not rewarded in any way then we cannot say that works can condemn in any way as well. If works can condemn us then it is not grace that saves us it would be the works of not doing works of condemnation. If we are saved by grace only; then works do not and cannot have any part in part in the judgment (rewards or punishments) of G-d. But we are judged clearly by our works – according to every scripture that speaks of judgment. Therefore the only conclusion I can draw is that there is something very wrong with your interpretation of scripture.

The Traveler

I understand what you’re saying and agree to a great point, however, you do not understand what the Bible is saying. It doesn't preach a unilateral message. It is saying that you are saved by God's grace through your faith. In other words, a person can have and be full of good works in their lives and still be none of Christ's. But it is impossible that a man of faith will not have good works. God's grace is the divine enabling and the unmerited favor with God. If our trust is in the doing for God, then we are falling from God's grace and will be judge on how well we followed the commands, laws and so on. I will not be judge by my works, because I live by faith. It is written, "The just shall live by faith." Do I have good works in my life? Yes, but I don’t put trust in that to get me anywhere with God. It is not what we do for God that counts; it is what He does through us by faith that counts!

Ro. 10:3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. I do not want to be ingornant of Satan's devices or for Satan to get an advantage over me. Does that make sense to you?

2 Corn. 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

Edited May 26, 2009 by aj4u

[bytebear]

It seems to me you are so afraid Satan is going to deceive you, that you are blind to the idea that maybe he already has.

[rameumptom]

I don't have a problem with new truth or restored truth, but it has to pass certain criteria; for instance, if anything clashes with he Bible, that sends up a red flag for me, but if I can see that it clarifies and confirms or reinforces Bible truth i am for it 100%. No one should be able to judge someone about his or her motive. Paul was dead set against Christianity until the Lord dealt with him and he became one of the best apologists in the Bible.

Rameumptom: The LDS teachings do not agree with the Bible 100%. The thing is, the Bible does not agree with the Bible 100%, either. Many scholars have written on the disagreements within the same Bible. "Jesus, Interrupted" by Prof Bart Ehrman gives several examples. So, since you have a 100% insistence on perfection, does this now mean you will abandon the Bible, because it disagrees with itself? If not, how do you tell which parts are true and which are not?

Paul taught that there needs to always be prophets and apostles as the foundation of Christ's church, to keep it from straying (Eph 2:19, 4:11-14). Amos 3:7 states that God only speaks through prophets. Prophets have a tendency to change things that previous prophets have proclaimed. Noah gave a conduct/obedience code, which was changed by Moses, which was changed by Jesus, which was changed by Paul. Jesus commanded his disciples to only preach to the Jews, but this was changed by Peter in vision. So, if the God calls a prophet today, and that prophet is inspired to change some commandments around that we find in the Bible, is he still a true prophet following an ancient pattern, or is he suddenly a heretic?

I have spoken to Mormons on a one to one and they haven't been able to answer it my questions.

Ram: I've answered many of your questions in the past. You just seemed to always ignore those answers and reask your questions again and again. It is because of this that others have called you a troll. A sincere person would engage the whole discussion, not just toss in some controversial issues and then run to the next controversial issue, pretending you haven't been "answered."

Some questions for starters: I know some things, but then I find out that I misunderstand a lot of what Mormons believe. I am trying to learn what it is they actually believe about the Bible and why they feel it was restored. What happened to the Bible that it needed restored? I never heard of such a thing.

Rameumptom: In his book, "Jesus, Interrupted" (and many of his other ones), Prof Ehrman describes it well. He was a conservative Southern Baptist that attended Moody's Bible College. They taught him doctrinal beliefs. What they didn't teach him was "historical criticism" of the Bible, as he learned at Princeton's Divinity School. Virtually every seminary teaches a few classes on historical criticism, but for some reason, many preachers never bother teaching these truths to their congregations.

The Bible was never intended by its original authors to be a single book. The Old Testament goes like this, according to scholars: The writings of Moses actually come to us via oral traditions that disagreed with one another. The authors of Moses' books are now called "E, J, P, D, and R." Each had political reasons for writing into the books their own version of what happened. For this reason, we have two versions of the Creation (Genesis 1, 2), which do not agree on many points. Were Adam and Eve created before or after the animals? It depends on which version you follow. Evidence suggests that the book of Isaiah was written by at least 2 if not 3 authors. The Book of Daniel was probably written around the 2nd century BC (at least as we now have it). These were not compiled into a book by the Jews until after Jesus' death. The Dead Sea Scrolls show us that there were many other books considered sacred that did not make it into our current Bible. Why not? Because they lost out over the Rabbinical Jewish faith. Do you think the Rabbis were inspired in putting together the Old Testament?

Of course, even our current Bibles differ, as the Catholics consider the Apocrypha to be a part of the Bible (for more details, read, "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Friedman). And of course, which ancient manuscripts should today's Christians use in creating their modern Bible?

Regarding the New Testament, Prof Ehrman has written several books on how we got it. In "Jesus, Interrupted", he states that most Bible scholars believe that only about 8 books were actually written by the individuals claimed to have written them (7 of Paul's letters and Revelation). The others are pseudipigrapha, religious forgeries. Mark was the earliest gospel written, about 30 years after Jesus' death. Matthew and Luke are based upon Mark and another source, called "Q" (Quelle means Source in German). He describes in his books the fight that lasted for centuries over which books were true or not. He notes that the belief in the Trinity is not found in the Bible, and later scribes actually tried to add evidence of the Trinity into the Bible (see the Johannine Comma). There were several competing versions of Christianity, with one winning out in the 5th century AD. Today's New Testament reflects some of the competing views, such as: Paul's reliance on faith without works versus Jesus' and James' insistence on righteous works. The early Christians fought over concepts such as the Trinity, continuing revelation, priesthood authority, etc.

Several books that are found in some of the earliest Bible lists are no longer in the Bible, including the Book of Enoch (quoted 39 times in the New Testament - see Jude for an example), the Odes of Solomon, the Gospel of Peter, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Here I've given you a quick history of the Bible. I suggest you read more about it online, such as at wikipedia or the websites of Biblical scholars (Margaret Barker, Professor Bart D. Ehrman - James A. Gray Distinguished Professor, and April D. DeConick for starters). These will open your eyes to the things your pastor hasn't told you about the Bible.

I have a book of Mormon, and I have read some of it. I was told to pray sincerely about whether it be true or not, but for me to pray and ask God whether these things be so is a tall order for me because I wouldn't know how to do it sincerely, sincerely speaking. For example, I am already a born-again Christian. Why would I want to trade the eternal security or life I already have for a religion that says I cannot know if I have it right now. It would be like a Muslim telling me to pray and ask God if Muhammad is His prophet or the Koran is God's accurate word for today, but I would have to do it sincerely. If I could do it sincerely, than I am sure I will get a sign that Muhammad is god's prophet, but which god? Do you understand where I am coming from? Could you pray a prayer like that sincerely?

Rameumptom: Pray must be sincere and with real intent. You have to be open minded that perhaps God does have more instruction for you. Second, you must be willing to do whatever God asks of you. Third, you have to believe that God will answer you with the wisdom you lack (James 1:5-6). God reveals to all mankind the level of truth and light they are willing to receive (Alma 29:8). Therefore, if you are missing any of these requirements, there is no reason for God to give you more truth, as you are already settled on the truths you have, mixed with human philosophy.

I cannot be ignorant of the Devil's devices he can appear as an angel of light and impersonate Jesus and or God without any problems to fool the human mind with all kinds of feelings and signs. We are dealing with supernatural forces. Do you realize or believe that too? Paul even warns that we should beware and consider accursed any that bring another gospel than that which we have heard already. Gal 1: 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned! Are you telling me to ignore Paul's words of wisdom because of the testimony of a 14 year old boy? I am sincere, and I think these questions are valid and constructive and need to be answered in order for me to make an informed decision that concerns my eternal soul! I wish you the best, but I would like these answered. PS. Do you believe the KJV is translated correctly? If not, do you know where there might be translation errors in that version? Take you time and answer them one at a time, but I have other questions, but this is a good place to start. Thanks, Aj4u

Rameumptom: Are you saying that you believe Satan has greater power than God? Satan can deceive, yes. How do you know he isn't already deceiving you with what you already believe? How is it that you have a testimony of Christ and the Bible? Are you certain that the Devil didn't deceive you, to prevent you from becoming Jewish or Muslim?

The earliest version of Galatians is dated about 200 AD, almost 150 years after Paul's death. Yes, Satan can come as an angel of light. But do you choose your beliefs based upon fear of Satan, or faith in Christ? If angels can deceive, how do we know Paul wasn't deceived by Satan dressed up like Jesus? Simply because he tells us of his conversion in Galatians 1, right after warning about angels with other gospels? We believe because of faith in Christ. The Holy Spirit has its method of working that is not easily matched by Satan. In the same letter to the Galatians (ch 5), Paul wrote: " 22 But the afruit of the bSpirit is clove, djoy, epeace, flongsuffering, ggentleness, goodness, hfaith, 23 aMeekness, btemperance: against such there is no law."

Love, joy and peace are feelings that the Spirit brings. If we study, ponder and pray about a doctrine, and the Spirit sends us such feelings, then we can be assured it is of God. It increases our faith and hope in Christ.

Also note that right after the quote in Galatians 1 that you give, Paul tells us: "

10 For do I now apersuade men, or God? or do I seek to bplease men? for if I yet cpleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

11 But I acertify you, brethren, that the gospel which was bpreached of me is not after man.

12 For I neither received it aof man, neither was I taught it, but bby the crevelation of Jesus Christ."

He received it by revelation. Even then, he counseled with the apostles, who guided him in his mission to the Gentiles, because they were God's chosen leaders. He gave the warning he did about "another gospel" because some were going around teaching false things: Jesus had already come for his 2nd Coming, there was no physical resurrection, etc. I highly doubt Paul was warning the followers to ignore revelations that Peter or other prophets and apostles received, especially given that Paul followed such counsel himself.

Yes, there are translation errors in the KJV. One easy one is the Johannine Comma found therein, which I explain above with a link. No scholar disagrees that it is an add on that occurred centuries after the death of the apostles.

(edit) Don't forget, that the first Christians did not have the Bible. No one had the Bible until about the 4th or 5th century AD, and then because it was expensive to hand print, only a few had it. Even later, most Christians did not learn from the Bible, but from the creeds. Most Christians can quote the Apostles' Creed or the Nicene Creed, but have never read the entire Bible themselves. So, how do they really know what it is they are reading, except they are taking their pastor's interpretation of things?

Now, I have answered your questions and concerns. If you respond sincerely to my answers, I'll continue working with you on your questions. If you ignore this one (as with previous posts), then I will also consider you a troll.

Edited May 26, 2009 by rameumptom