Non-Mormon meeting with Missionaries

[SeekerofTruth]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

[estradling75]

The official church position can be summarized with the 8th Article of faith

Articles of Faith 1 

Individuals beliefs can of course vary, but it is my experience that most are in line with the official position

[bytebear]

The church's curriculum is based on a four year cycle: Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, Church history.

So, you can see that half of our study is dedicated to the Bible.

It is not uncommon at all to have lessons bounce between Bible verses, and Book of Mormon verses. The meaning of the Gospel goes across both books. If you have a copy of the Book of Mormon, you will notice the footnotes tie Bible verses (as well as other LDS writings), so you can study yourself how intertwined the two books really are.

Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these? Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Ezekiel 37:16-19

They are literally one book in my hand.

[pam]

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

This is the second post where you have somewhat mocked our belief in the Book of Mormon and the Bible. You might go farther in the conversation to ask what we believe and leave it at that instead of stating what you think we believe or do.

LDS are brought up to study both the Bible and the Book of Mormon. Children have it in their course of study. High school students study it in their morning seminary classes. All study it during Sunday School as part of the regular Church Sunday School curriculum. Meaning, the Bible and the Book of Mormon are part of the curriculum.

The Bible is very important to us. The Old Testament is about prophets and people. The New Testament teaches us of Christ and the Book of Mormon is another testament of Christ.

So before you make a blanket statement in your post quoted above, it might behoove you to have more of an understanding of what we read and what we believe in.

[Jason_J]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

Latter-day Saints hold both the Bible and the Book of Mormon as the word of God, sacred scripture. We believe that both the Bible and the Book of Mormon contain the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Frequently, much is made about the phrase "as far as is translated correctly" in regards to the Bible. I find that this phrase captures the reality of the historical situation surrounding the Bible(s) as we have it/them today. There are various versions of the Bible, some with verses added or subtracted, and even the canon of the Bible varies among churches (with Catholics traditionally holding to more books in the Old Testament than Protestants and LDS, Eastern Orthodox holding to even more than Catholics, and Coptic Orthodox holding to more than the EOs). I also find the phrase similar to what some Protestant churches state in reference to the inerrancy of the Bible-that they believe the Bible to be inerrant in the original manuscripts (which of course we do not have).

It would be highly odd for your LDS friends to have never read the Bible. The Bible is studied in our Sunday Schools, as well as in various other religious education settings, such as Seminary and Institute. Currently, we are studying the New Testament in Sunday School, and we go through all of our scriptural works every 4 years. Last year the Old Testament was studied in Sunday School.

[Faded]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

I was actually shocked and disappointed by most Protestant ministers I met when I was a missionary because they really didn't know the Bible that well, so I get where you're coming from feeling disappointed that some Latter Day Saints don't know the Bible as well as they should.

I've read the Bible through and I can't really tell you how many times because I don't know. I've also read the Book of Mormon through more times than I can count. Same is true of the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price.

Any Latter Day Saint SHOULD HAVE read the Bible at least once ever four years. As has already been explained, we're on a four year rotation: Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants. We're all supposed to be reading the assigned parts of the Bible prior to the upcoming Sunday School lesson covering those passages. Unfortunately, many don't do so because nobody's going to "give them an F" in Sunday School if they don't do the assigned reading.

There are several reasons that the Book of Mormon is going to come across as you describe: More important than the Bible.

1.) It is the single greatest key to conversion in our faith. Knowing that the Bible is true and the word of God tells you that the right broad category of religious belief is Christianity. Knowing the Book of Mormon is true and that it is the word of God tells which of the 30,000+ Christian denominations is The Church and Kingdom of God and Christ here on earth.

2.) Knowing that the Bible is true tells you God is real. Knowing that the Book of Mormon is true also tells you that God is real, but it also tells you that God has once again sent living apostles and prophets to this world and re-established His living Church.

3.) If the Book of Mormon is true, then you know that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God because of the circumstances of the Book of Mormon's discovery and translation.

4.) If Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God then this religion was built from bottom to top under the constant direction of God himself and that it is still under His personal direction.

The Book of Mormon is the most tangible item that makes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints distinct from all other Christian religions. It sets us apart and makes us different.

But this does not mean that the Bible is undervalued in the LDS Church. While the Book of Mormon contains the record of a branch of Israel that was broken off, if we want to know everything leading up to the first page of the Book of Mormon (in 600 BC) we must turn to the Bible. If we want to know what Jesus Christ did during his mortal ministry here on earth, we must rely on the Bible (this alone skyrockets the importance of the Bible.) The Book of Mormon references the Law of Moses and teaches that it was filled with types and shadows of the life and sacrifice of Christ, but if we want to study the Law of Moses to see this for ourselves, we must rely on the Bible. If we want to read about the creation of the world, the life of Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and so forth, we must rely on the Bible. If we want to read the prophecies of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Malachi, etc -- we must rely on the Bible. If we want to read the book with more prophecies of the life of Christ than any other - Psalms - we have to turn to the Bible.

If we want to come to know God as completely as we possibly can, we rely on "every word which proceeds from the mouth of God": The Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, the words of the living prophet and apostles, etc. And in all these things, we pray to God and get to know him better first-hand.

Hope that helps. If it doesn't just ask questions, etc.

[Blackmarch]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

I view both as gods word. if i were forced to do away with one of the two i would choose the book of mormon (edit:to keep*, sorry for the potentail confusion) over the bible, but that would be agony, as it would be like having to give up my left arm out of my two arms. (im right handed). Edited April 4, 2011 by Blackmarch

[rameumptom]

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

I know dozens of Christians who believe the Bible, yet have never read it all the way through. Are they hypocrites in believing something they have not studied? No. Perhaps they are not as well read as they should be in spiritual things, but that doesn't determine whether something is or isn't true.

The Church isn't true because of its members or their opinions and thoughts on gospel issues. The Church is true because God proclaimed it so, and is willing to testify of that witness to all those who are ready and willing to study it out and then pray over it. You have a witness of the Bible, because you have sought that witness. I have a witness of the Bible as the word of God. I'm guessing I've probably read it more times than you, and probably in more languages than you have. But that does not necessarily mean anything, except that I've read it more.

Now, you can read some of my thoughts on the Bible at my blog, or also here at LDS.Net on the Old Testament (and now the New Testament) discussion forums, where I do a weekly Gospel Doctrine class lesson that goes along with LDS Sunday School class.

Scripture Study Forum - LDS Social Network Forums

I've also read and studied the Book of Mormon, probably more than most on this list. I also know it is the word and work of God.

God's word is God's word. The only difference is if in one place it is better clarified than in another. But we even get that within the Bible, where charity is mentioned occasionally, but Paul gives the definitive discourse on it.

In another instance, Paul talks about grace, but many people misinterpret it into what is known as "cheap grace." LDS teachings from the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants explain it more clearly, allowing us to understand how grace works and avoids the problems Calvin had that led him into teaching a limited atonement.

For LDS, we believe in a near universal salvation. Only those sons of perdition (those who choose to become Christ's complete and absolute enemies, such as Cain) will not receive salvation. All others will receive salvation. All else will be resurrected, and receive a glorified existence.

Now, because Calvin only believed in one heaven, he could not see how Christ's atonement could save all. His views would have made it that the poor savage who was born in Africa or South America at a time when he could not have a chance to hear the gospel, would have burned in hell forever. Even though it was God's fault for having him born in a time and place where he had no chance, he would still be found guilty and burn. Limited Atonement meant only a few out of the billions on earth would be saved.

But I believe in John 3:16. God loves the world. All of it. Not just a select few in it. Christ was sent to save all. So there is a contention on grace for Calvin. The LDS belief is that salvation is free. We just cannot choose to be Christ's enemy. We learn that there are levels of heaven (2 Cor 12:1-4). So we receive a kingdom of glory for salvation. Where works come in is that our works help us become more Christ like, and able to receive more glory and a higher kingdom of heaven. Salvation is free. The level of glory depends on what we have become through faith and obedience, so that we can stand in God's full presence comfortably.

This is why some scripture is occasionally preferred over other: because it better explains key doctrines that have confused Bible scholars for centuries. Modern revelation helps us to understand God's ways much better, while using the Bible as a foundation from which to build.

[SeekerofTruth]

This is the second post where you have somewhat mocked our belief in the Book of Mormon and the Bible. You might go farther in the conversation to ask what we believe and leave it at that instead of stating what you think we believe or do.

Hi Pam,

I meant that statement not towards all mormons but to the the mormons that have told me as such. The statement was worded pretty wrong, because I was stating it like I was talking to those I have met who have not read it. It was by no means meant towards you or any LDS on here. Hence why I asked, and why I made that statement because I wanted you to know where I was coming from. I said I "LDS that I have met, come off" as such, but that doesn't mean I believe all are like that. I do apologize for the offense out of my own ignorance though, that was certainly not my intention. I hope you forgive me.

Thank you everyone for your answers, they are a great help to me. :-)

I was actually shocked and disappointed by most Protestant ministers I met when I was a missionary because they really didn't know the Bible that well, so I get where you're coming from feeling disappointed that some Latter Day Saints don't know the Bible as well as they should.

I totally understand what you mean Faded!!! I'm so glad you brought that up. I know when I do meet with missionaries (and also ANY non-LDS christian) I make it my point that they make sure to read the Bible if they are going to tell me it is important. I view with so much virtue someone who knows what they are talking about. Therefore, I love to accept correction in my thinking. (like what Pam said to me, thank you for that!)

So yea, I have my own issues among my own sects, I'm also much harder on them. With most of them I want to hit him them over the head with a Bible hoping some of the words may sink in. I haven't tried it yet though.... lol

Anyway, thank you everyone for your graciousness in answering my question. I will definitely meditate on what has been said. :-)

God bless!

*Seeker

Edited April 3, 2011 by SeekerofTruth

[jlf9999]

There is one thing that should be soundly understood. That is, the bible and the Book of Mormon are both treated with the same respect. However confusion may come from the comments that have made saying the Book of Mormon is the most accurate of the two. That doesn't mean the bible is inaccurate. The two are complimentary and to understand the bible more fully requires the Book of Mormon.

[apexviper13]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

The Bible and Book of Mormon are equal. One is no greater than the other. The Bible prophesies of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Mormon tells the origin of the Bible. I believe what people mean in regards to holding the Book of Mormon higher is the common "the Book of Mormon is the most correct book on earth" phrase.

Yes, the Book of Mormon is the most correct book on earth and with good reason. Researching how the Bible came to be will help you. I mentioned the history on another thread. The books that would be canon in the Bible were voted on by the Catholic Church. Their scribes translated the original scriptures but had to insert their own words in places they did not understand. This is why you see italicized words in the Bible. They were not in the original scriptures. The scriptures of the Bible were translated by scribes while the Golden Plates were translated by Joseph Smith, a person not knowledgeable in ancient languages, by the power of God. People speak against this because there were changes in the Book of Mormon that were made but this was not Joseph Smith's doings. 1st, when he told Martin Harris what to write down in regards to the translation he gave no punctuation meaning no periods, commas, anything. The other mistakes corrections were due to printing errors. Also, keep in mind that the chapter headings and footnotes were not provided by Joseph Smith.

[SeekerofTruth]

Researching how the Bible came to be will help you.

Oh I understand how the Bible came to be. Especially with the Old Testament and New Testament combined gives more power to it's message. The fact that this book was written by more than one person, over a long span of time, from people of different statuses and backgrounds, and yet it all gives the same message, pretty cool stuff.

I mentioned the history on another thread.

Could you post me which thread you talked about this on? Thank you :-)

The books that would be canon in the Bible were voted on by the Catholic Church. Their scribes translated the original scriptures but had to insert their own words in places they did not understand. This is why you see italicized words in the Bible. They were not in the original scriptures.

Okay, here's another area I am confused with in the LDS belief. Do LDS only believe in the authority of the King James Version of the Bible? Later translations make it clear to the reader as to which words and stories were added in later by the Catholic Church. Many seek to translate from the original Greek text of these documents as well which they do.

The scriptures of the Bible were translated by scribes while the Golden Plates were translated by Joseph Smith, a person not knowledgeable in ancient languages, by the power of God.

You would discredit the monks who were known to preserve documents and were known to be faithful and holy followers of God? If God has given us the ability to think and to know how to decipher certain texts, as did the monks/scribes, how is that not inspired by God? Because the person doesn't "claim" they were inspired? Monks spent their whole lives for the work of God, I'm not saying their holier than others, but that shows their commitment towards the Truth and their love of God. Therefore could God not use them as well to translate what was proper? Also, could the Holy Spirit not have guided the Catholic Church early on as to what to put in the Bible and what not? (I mean, the Catholic Church at this time was not the same as it becomes later on in history) Also, are we to discredit God and how He desires His Word to be put together? I mean when you read stories in the Bible, those commended for their faith and righteousness before God in the Old Testament committed some pretty bad sins. Yet God still chose to use them and to make His Name known among them.

People speak against this because there were changes in the Book of Mormon that were made but this was not Joseph Smith's doings. 1st, when he told Martin Harris what to write down in regards to the translation he gave no punctuation meaning no periods, commas, anything. The other mistakes corrections were due to printing errors. Also, keep in mind that the chapter headings and footnotes were not provided by Joseph Smith.

Here I am confused now, because how is this not the same as an LDS view on the Bible? The writers didn't make changes to the Bible, later on the claim is that the changes were made. Like the Book of Mormon?

I've read some LDS history and how the Book of Mormon was put together and some "changes" maybe made to make it better understood, but when I read that I am confused as to how that is any different than what non-LDS claim when it comes to the Bible.

Thanks for your patience in handling my questions. I am not that well learned in church history as I would like, but hopefully that will change over time. ;-) anyone (whether LDS or non-LDS) may correct me, actually please correct me if I have a false understanding of history.

[prisonchaplain]

My own rather rushed reading of the Book of Mormon led me to find little that signficantly contradicted the Bible. In some ways, it does read like the Old Testament. In fact there are portions that are lengthy quotations from OT prophets (notes even suggest where to look for comparison). So, if Joseph Smith really received his revelations from God, then one would have to believe his rendoring of the book into English is the most accurate, since his work would have been inspired by God directly, whereas Bible translations do not make this claim.

My own sense, and members could tell you better than I, is that the major LDS distinctive teachings do not come primarily from the BoM. It is in other revelations that such things as the Heavenly Father having a physical body, and there being three kingdoms in heaven, are taught.

[rameumptom]

PC, Where the Book of Mormon is a key doctrinal book is 1) the life and atonement of Jesus Christ, and 2) the teachings and doctrines needed to return to the presence of God (also expounded upon in the temple rites).

Seeker, while portions of the Bible do tell the same message, there are chunks that disagree with itself. As we now have it, the books of Moses were written by political/religious factions that often disagreed, and were then later combined by a redactor. Some pushed and promoted Moses and the nomadic worship at altars in the wilderness, while others pushed Aaron and the ritualistic worship of the temple. Many scholars believe that at least portions of the book of Deuteronomy were written by temple priests, who wanted to utterly destroy any Jehovah worship outside the temple. At the same time, they changed the temple ordinance, removing the Creation, angels, the tree of life, and the ability for man to return to the presence/face of God.

Their teachings are contradicted by Jesus' teachings and the teachings of Moses at Sinai, which show that man can stand in God's presence face to face, see angels, and have all things relinked to the Garden/Temple/New Jerusalem and the Tree of Life (as we see in Revelation).

These conflicts were readily apparent in Jesus' day. The Sadduccees and Pharisees read the Law and the Prophets as they were reconstructed. But Jesus read them in proper context, and sought to bring people back into God's presence through him.

Still, with all the tinkering that went on, it is amazing that so much truth came through to us in our day.

[prisonchaplain]

The idea that the Books of Moses are not really "of Moses" is mostly discounted by Christian and Jewish scholars. Surely small portions were edited, but Moses is still considered the author: JEDP theory - Discussion and Encyclopedia Article. Who is JEDP theory? What is JEDP theory? Where is JEDP theory? Definition of JEDP theory. Meaning of JEDP theory.

As for alleged outright contradictions in the Bible, suffice to say that discussions about these have gone on for centuries. There are good answers for such seeming difficulties. Of course, these responses are quickly accepted by believers, and those who are skeptics tend to accuse us of forcing harmonization.

Liberal interpretations of the biblical documents, their authorship and dating, etc. may sometimes seem to be the friend of LDS theology, but ultimately they will prove a hostile witness at best.

[Gatekeeper]

Hi there! I'm new to that board so I hope you bear with me especially since I'm not an LDS.

I have met with a few missionaries this past year and when I ask them where they hold the Bible in comparison with the Book of Mormon they came across that both are correct and both are the Word of God.

My question for you is, is this true? Is this a universal LDS belief, or are there personal beliefs to the difference?

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible. I am confused in how you can believe in something you have never even read or took the time to understand.

Maybe these missionaries are trying to pull my leg because they know I read the Bible. I don't know. lol I was just curious to know your opinions since there are more of you here than I could probably ever meet in person. :-)

Thanks!

Welcome to the board, Seeker of Truth! I'm new here as well. Your question is a good one. One reliable source of information would be a Church publication referred to as "Ensign." You can access this magazine at the official LDS website, the public library, or your missionaries can provide you a copy.

In my own conversion to the LDS Church, I had no problem believing the Book of Mormon as latter-day revelation along with an equal interest in the Old and New Testaments. And no. The missionaries are not pulling your leg, lol! Hang with them, pray earnestly, and all truth will come to light soon. God bless!

[Jamie123]

The Book of Mormon is the most tangible item that makes the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints distinct from all other Christian religions. It sets us apart and makes us different.

I'm not sure I agree. Many other churches believe in the Book of Mormon, and consider Joseph Smith to be their first prophet. Believing the Book of Mormon to be true only tells you that the truth lies somewhere in the broad LDS movement.

And it's no use saying: "Yes, but these other so-called 'Mormon' churches are apostate". The Mormon view (as I understand it) is that all other churches are apostate. You might just as well say: "What sets us apart is that we're right and everyone else is wrong." Possibly true of course, but any other church could make exactly the same claim. It provides no tangible evidence to the nonbeliever.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Jamie123

[thebeliever]

Because a number of times other LDS have come off to me that the Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible and the LDS that I know who say they believe in both and both are equal have never even read the Bible.

Thanks!

I read the Bible and Book of Mormon everyday. I love them both. The Book of Mormon is upheld higher than the Bible because it is new revelation and more correct than the Bible. The Bible has passed through so many hands and people have changed it over time so it's nice to have the Book of Mormon to know what hasn't changed.

[bytebear]

My own sense, and members could tell you better than I, is that the major LDS distinctive teachings do not come primarily from the BoM. It is in other revelations that such things as the Heavenly Father having a physical body, and there being three kingdoms in heaven, are taught.

That's correct. We get those teachings from the Bible (Luke 24:39 and 1 Corinthians 15:41 respectively).

[bytebear]

I'm not sure I agree. Many other churches believe in the Book of Mormon, and consider Joseph Smith to be their first prophet. Believing the Book of Mormon to be true only tells you that the truth lies somewhere in the broad LDS movement.

And it's no use saying: "Yes, but these other so-called 'Mormon' churches are apostate". The Mormon view (as I understand it) is that all other churches are apostate. You might just as well say: "What sets us apart is that we're right and everyone else is wrong." Possibly true of course, but any other church could make exactly the same claim. It provides no tangible evidence to the nonbeliever.

No other branch of Mormonism has fulfilled prophecy, being the stone cut without hands that filled the whole earth. No other branch has made the desert blossom as the rose. No other branch has fulfilled Smith's prophecy that the gospel will be preached to every nation, kindred, tongue and people. No other branch has fulfilled the prophecy that the earth will be fill with temples. The Book of Mormon gives a testimony of the restored Gospel, but the LDS Church and the people in it fulfill prophecy.

Edited April 7, 2011 by bytebear

[jlf9999]

The idea that the Books of Moses are not really "of Moses" is mostly discounted by Christian and Jewish scholars. Surely small portions were edited, but Moses is still considered the author: JEDP theory - Discussion and Encyclopedia Article. Who is JEDP theory? What is JEDP theory? Where is JEDP theory? Definition of JEDP theory. Meaning of JEDP theory.

As for alleged outright contradictions in the Bible, suffice to say that discussions about these have gone on for centuries. There are good answers for such seeming difficulties. Of course, these responses are quickly accepted by believers, and those who are skeptics tend to accuse us of forcing harmonization.

Liberal interpretations of the biblical documents, their authorship and dating, etc. may sometimes seem to be the friend of LDS theology, but ultimately they will prove a hostile witness at best.

Chaplain

If one believes Joseph Smith is a fraud then nothing he presents as revelation could stand either. That point was made by a Baptist friend of mine. However some LDS apologists (PHd types with advanced degrees in such things) tell us there are many Old Testament, Jewish and early Christian writings that tend to support what Joseph says. It is an interesting study. Few Mormons, I am afraid, are well enough versed in the subject to speak to it with clarity.

[prisonchaplain]

That's correct. We get those teachings from the Bible (Luke 24:39 and 1 Corinthians 15:41 respectively).

First I'll give you your due: Then, I'll point out the obvious...those passages surely provide subtle comfort to LDS who are already convinced of the multiple kingdoms of heaven, and of the Father's physical body...but surely they are not where the Church came up with these two very distinctive LDS doctrines.

[prisonchaplain]

Chaplain

If one believes Joseph Smith is a fraud then nothing he presents as revelation could stand either. That point was made by a Baptist friend of mine. However some LDS apologists (PHd types with advanced degrees in such things) tell us there are many Old Testament, Jewish and early Christian writings that tend to support what Joseph says. It is an interesting study. Few Mormons, I am afraid, are well enough versed in the subject to speak to it with clarity.

Thank you for bringing this matter to light. I am versed enough to know vaguely what you are referring, but not enough to engage in those conversations with great competence. Suffice to say I suspect that many of those writings and scholars that seem to favor some LDS perspectives are of a more liberal theological nature. Questions about the Bible's accuracy, dating, and authorship are subject areas where this seems to be especially so.

Since, overall LDS theology is more conservative, I'd simply repeat that appealing to liberal academic scholarship can be a two-edged sword. Likewise, I suspect that some Gnostic teaching does find resonance in LDS beliefs. Secret (or sacred) knowledge is the very definition of gnosis (knowledge).

It's not that these sources cannot be used effectively, but rather that caution should be used. It's rather like calling a hostile witness in court.

[jlf9999]

Chaplain

An interesting metaphor. There is something I feel certain you are familiar with that can be an aid to learning. For those folks who do the best they can to live a holy life according to the best of their understanding, I suggest employing the Holy Spirit as a helper can be fruitful. Once that line of communication is opened up a lot can happen quickly. My experience is that when I am on track, I can learn and understand so much better than when I am not. If I have had an argument or felt unkindly towards someone then the light goes out. But if I have been anxiously engaged in the work then all that changes.

I bring that up because when we have been anxiously engaged, just reading non-canonized works, and scripture, can provide special insights. It is more than just reading J. G. Davies or someone else. It is as though the text opens up a passageway beyond what the words say. It is like the doorkeeper allowing you to look inside the locked library to see all the stacks where the good stuff is just waiting for those who are prepared to read it.

Edited April 7, 2011 by jlf9999

[Guest SisterofJared]

Actually PC the doctrine of the degrees of glory was given to Joseph as he was translating the Bible. We do not only use the King James Version, but often clarify it with the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph was translating the Bible to clarify and correct a few scriptures that had been incorrectly translated in the King James Edition. In doing so, he had received several little bits of information that made in clear to him that the afterlife did not just consist of two places, heaven and hell. After reading about the resurrection of the just and the unjust in John 5:29, he prayed for clarification, and the revelation was given to him clearing up the issue. This revelation is found in the Doctrine & Covenants, section 76. In my experience, I have noticed that the scriptures in Cor 15 are easily understood by those who know this doctrine, and those who do not do not understand those scriptures at all. So if we latter day saints derive any "comfort" from them, the comfort is in understanding them. After all, all scripture that is understood is a source of comfort to us.

To the OP, I can only state that I have been in this church my entire life, and have been taught Bible stories from my childhood. I studied the Bible 2 yers to every 1 year of the Book of Mormon in my Sunday School classes, and in my early morning seminary classes it was the same.

We do not use all the alternate Bibles because they are subject to error. What a word seems to mean to someone might mean something totally different to someone else. I remember once studying with a wonderful Jehovah's Witness woman. She wanted me to understand that the word spirit meant breath. So she would read from her bible, and darn, in the context of the scripture she was reading, it sounded just like it must mean breath. But when I pulled out the King James Version, everywhere her bible said "spirit" the KJV said "breath." Gee, no wonder she was convinced that your spirit was only your breath!! So when someone sets down and translates the Bible yet again... how do we know he has got the correct meaning? Has his wording changed a simple pure teaching from God? We use the KJV because it is the least translated and therefore more pure. Where some find the language of the KJV to be difficult, we find it to be beautiful. We love the proper language of Thee, Thou, Thy, and Thine, and we use this language when addressing our Father in prayer. So King James Version works well for us, with a little assist now and then from the Joseph Smith Translation. We love the Bible. We honor the faith of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, of Joseph, of Paul, and of many others. We consider many to be prophets, and we believe in prophets. We read them, we study them, we strive to learn from them. Our sermons are full of their stories, their examples and their teachings. Anyone who tells you the Bible is less important does not truly understand our church. We believe that "in the mouths of two or more witnesses" every word is established. The Bible is a testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon is a testament of Jesus Christ. They each bear witness of one truth: That Jesus is the Christ, that He lives, and by Him and only through Him, we are saved and united with our Father in Heaven.

Edited April 7, 2011 by SisterofJared