Blackmarch Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) This is really two questions in one thread, but I feel they belong together. Could you maintain your faith in Mormon doctrines using only the Holy Bible? Also, what exactly in the Holy Bible is considered to be incorrectly translated?like the part where it says God hardened pharoah's heart, or causing evil to occur. Theres a few instances where God does a few very ungodlike things and it turns out to be not God directly causing it. But it's not a lot. Or do you mean all the different ways you can take a translation and end up with multiple versions based off the same text?However is it possible to maintain faith in the bible? absolutely. why? because what is important is the ability to teach godlike concepts to an individual so that a person can be receptive to the spirit which brings us to christ who is the ultimate teacher (and who ultimately brings us to God)- and the bible does this very well. In this context it wouldn't matter if the bible was a fable or was 100% historically accurate.And quite frankly I'd say that my being part of the LDS has been in by a large amount due to the bible. Edited January 25, 2012 by Blackmarch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew0059 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 TimP:I don't know if you'll ever read this. However, I would cite your mind to the councils that codified the canon of the Bible- the Rabbinical council at Jamnia in the first century, and the Nicene Council in the fourth. It's clear to any good scholar- or avid reader of the Bible- that the canon is woefully incomplete, if we are to assume that the canon is meant to include every book every prophet has ever written. I'm not a scholar, but 1 Enoch stands out as a strong example of a non-canonical book that is quoted as authoritative in the Bible (epistle of Jude). The Book of the Generations of Adam is another example- mentioned in Genesis, but never contained in the Bible. Furthermore, many other writings from Old Testament prophets and kings are mentioned in the OT itself, but lost to us (such as the chronicles of the kings of Israel and Judah, the writings of Iddo the Seer and Shemaiah the prophet, et al).The canon's not complete, my friend. The mistranslations of the KJV have supposedly been corrected with the newer English Bibles- but what's missing is the spirit of God guiding translators to understand the intent, not just the written words, of the prophets. It is quite easy to twist meaning when translating- often this is done unintentionally. Different faith groups disagree about the scriptures- the Jews, the religious descendants of ancient Israel, adamantly deny that the messianic prophecies of the Psalms and Isaiah point to Jesus Christ, yet Christians firmly believe that.God bless. I don't think you're here for real discussion, but to try and 'prove' us wrong- however, I would hope that you think more about what's been said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volgadon Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 However, I would cite your mind to the councils that codified the canon of the Bible- the Rabbinical council at Jamnia in the first century,It actually didn't codify the Bible canon, but ruled on the status of 2 disputed books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estradling75 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 And that is enough rule breaking in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts