Then Everything Else is Also True


uniderth
 Share

Recommended Posts

This thread is to discuss the idea that if one element of the restoration such as the Book of Mormon is true, then it follows that everything else is also true.

In response to Tyler90AZ I state that:

I have to politely disagree with this. There are, in fact, many ways that everything else can be false even if the Book of Mormon is true. The truthfulness of each principle must stand independent and also must be determined independently. Discussion of this topic could be continued further but it would probably be best done in a separate thread.

I'll post some more of my thought later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it's not so much the Book of Mormon alone, but a lot of things combined, like doctrine that fits the Bible better than other Christian beliefs - Degrees of gory, faith/works, premortal existence, spirit prison/paradise, even the old anti-Mormon standby that Jesus and Satan are brothers (the LDS version, not the anti-Mormon rhetoric).

I also often hear that because there are so many different branches of Mormonism, who's to say the LDS Church is the right one? Maybe it's the Bickertonites? But then I think of scriptural prophecy. A stone cut with no hands, but will fill the Earth, that the gospel will be preached to all nations, that the desert will blossom as the rose, and only one church fulfills those prophecies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In rhetorical logic (mathematics for example) this is in essence what is known as transitivity. Some think of this relationship as a "house of cards" or others may call it the domino effect. The point is, concerning the Book of Mormon, that it plays a critical as well as rhetorically logical role - in that if the Book of Mormon is revelation from G-d then many other rhetorical logic points that are transitively connected must also be true of false pending on the validity to the claim that the Book of Mormon is revelation from G-d.

I would agree that such statement (if true) does not prove that the Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints is the very revealed kingdom of G-d but it does eliminate all religious "kingdoms"or organization as well as individuals claiming G-d as their Supreme Suzerain of their "kingdom". By the very law of kingdoms to reject what the Supreme Suzerain has declared by his will; is the act of treason and sudision towards the King (Supreme Suzerain) and the kingdom.

The claim that the Book of Mormon is revelation from G-d himself is either a claim of truth or a claim of sudision and treason - if there is another possibility - somebody please so indicate and provide plausible logic why you think so.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Book of Mormon is truly from God it follows that its translator (and not author), Joseph Smith, Jr., was truly a prophet of God.

The BoM being from God, its contents can be trusted as being the word of God, just like the Bible.

Joseph Smith being a prophet of God, his subsequent revelations can likewise be trusted.

So far so good. But that is not always enough. Various events in the history of the Latter Day Saint movement make it so that there have several faith societies who accepted both the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith as having a divine mandate.

In my opinion, it really helps to ask oneself the question and to seek the Lord for answers as to whether the current prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is called and authorized of God.

Also, individual facts found in the Book of Mormon or the teachings of Joseph Smith need to be verified through experimentation and personal revelation. These are complicated literary matters, and what you think you read or hear is not always the truth that God intended for you., nor the thought intended to be understood by the author or speaker.

In this respect, the chain of reasoning used by previous missionaries doesn't really work well. I find it kind of unhealthy. But it does provide one piece of acknowledgement that is critical to understand about the difference made by receiving a testimony of the Book of Mormon and the Prophet Joseph Smith:

If these things are true, a widespread apostasy has and still is occurring. The ecumenical creeds of the migration period are an abomination, an incorrect appendix to the gospel preached by Jesus Christ and his disciples in the ancient Christian church.

Also, if these things are true, a restoration is taking place, beginning with Joseph Smith. The Book of Mormon is the first piece of tangible evidence for this restoration. It is the word of God, and it gives access to so many plain and precious truths of the gospel once lost, changed or misunderstood. The restoration of the gospel entails a priesthood and the re-establishment of the true church of God. That church exists today. It is the church of Christ, and it accepts and acknowledges both the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith. Also, Joseph Smith organized it.

So, if they are true, it is worth finding that organization and participating in the restoration. The chain of reasoning works at least that far. You can't really put those things to the side. But it doesn't excuse you from learning principle by principle, line by line, step by step, here a little and there a little.

Neither approach excludes the other. Some things do follow as one thing is reasoned, but the problem is just taking it so far as to say "I know the Book of Mormon is true, therefore I have a perfectly sound testimony about the Law of Chastity". No. Get your testimony of the Law of Chastity separately. In that way the Church is a university.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything else= What Joseph Smith Jr revealed

I am not arguing that everything after Joseph Smith Jr. must also be true. Despite the fact that many quotes by Joseph Smith Jr. indicate that this is the correct church. If I find those I will post them in this thread.

If you will stay with the majority of the Twelve Apostles, and the records of the Church, you will never be led astray.

Joseph Smith, Jr.

If The Book of Mormon is true then Joseph Smith Jr. is a Prophet of God.

The Book of Mormon was not found by a random guy. That is the only argument that could really hold any weight. Although it is easily refuted by the fact that The Book of Mormon claims great authority. The God that is depicted in The Book of Mormon would not let a random guy discover The Book of Mormon and start a religion.

That then establishes the fact that God(representatives included) must have revealed The Book of Mormon unto who he chose. We can easily figure, undeniably, who he revealed it too. The way we figure it out is who revealed The Book of Mormon to the world. That would be JS. The below scripture indicates Joseph Smith Jr. revealed The Book of Mormon to the world and it is a historical fact.

34 He said there was a abook deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants;

JS History 1

Now that we have established that The Book of Mormon was revealed to JS by God, lets prove he is a Prophet of God. We can do this by knowing that the God depicted in The Book of Mormon is righteous Which would then mean, he would not reveal it to somebody who would lie. If he would not reveal it to somebody who would lie then JS can be counted as credible. That would then make his declarations that he is a Prophet credible.

Another way we can establish that JS is a Prophet of God is by The Book of Mormon. In The Book of Mormon it repeatedly talks about how prophets led the people of God. If that is the case it follows that God would always have prophets lead. Having a quorum of the twelve is in both the Bible and Book of Mormon. That wold mean God has always wanted prophets to lead. That proves that God would only call a Prophet to lead his people.

If he is a Prophet of God that would also mean his revelations are true. Part of a Prophets duty is receiving revelations for the people of God. That would mean the revelations came from God. Which means the revelations JS brought forth are true. Notice I did not say his individual actions, but the revelations he brought forth.

Now you may say, "well only some of his revelations are true or none, yet he is still a prophet." All we have to do is work backwards to see that it is all true or none of it is true. If the revelations are not true that would mean he is not a Prophet of God. The moment he starts giving false revelations he is not a prophet. If he is not a Prophet then the claim by The Book of Mormon and him, that a Prophet should receive the book is false. That would then mean The Book of Mormon is not true. In addition, if he came out with false revelations then he lies which means the whole claim that The Book of Mormon is true falls apart.

I don't think the missionaries were told to stop teaching "it logically follows" because it is not true. Rather, because, many people like to cherry pick the gospel. Teaching "logically follows," would then isolate many people who would join the church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share