new vs old - which is better?

[searching_questioner]

You are mistaken. The Book of Mormon was never intended for the Nephite people. No Nephite other than Mormon and Moroni ever read the book. It was always intended from us, from the moment it began to be compiled.

It seems to me that apart from Book of Ether and the latter parts of the Mormon and Moroni, all of the teachings in the Book of Mormon were given to and for the Nephites, and sometimes the Lamanites. So we are led to the perhaps surprising conclusion that the teachings in the Book of Mormon were to and for the people at the time, but the Book itself is for us.

[searching_questioner]

Here is what President Benson said about the relative importance of living prophets vis-a-vis ancient and modern scriptures, taken from Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet - Liahona June 1981 - liahona

Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the Standard Works.

President Wilford Woodruff tells of an interesting incident that occurred in the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

“I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living prophets and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: ‘You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.’

“When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

God’s revelation to Adam did not instruct Noah how to build the Ark. Noah needed his own revelation. Therefore the most important prophet so far as you and I are concerned is the one living in our day and age to whom the Lord is currently revealing His will for us. Therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines. Our instructions about what we should do for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Church magazine.

[searching_questioner]

This thread has saddened me this morning

My apologies apple, I had no intention to cause sadness to you or anyone else.

[Drpepper]

Therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines. Our instructions about what we should do for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Church magazine.

Strange how the current prophets keep continually inviting us to re- read the Book of Mormon

[Vort]

It seems to me that apart from Book of Ether and the latter parts of the Mormon and Moroni, all of the teachings in the Book of Mormon were given to and for the Nephites, and sometimes the Lamanites. So we are led to the perhaps surprising conclusion that the teachings in the Book of Mormon were to and for the people at the time, but the Book itself is for us.

But that's obvious. The teachings are eternal truths, applicable to all times and all places.

[Guest]

But that's obvious. The teachings are eternal truths, applicable to all times and all places.

And this here is why I'm scratching my head while reading the OP. What's more true than truth???

More details does not mean it's more true. It just means it's more details.

So, a more correct book than the Book of Mormon? None. It's already correct. If you notice we don't have to say, "as long as it is interpreted correctly"... that's because we will always have living Prophets that will do that - interpret it correctly. And that's why we need living Prophets.

This is the last dispensation before the coming of Christ as promised. Therefore, we will not have this truth lost to us anymore. Ever. So it doesn't need a truer book to come out. More details of interpretation maybe (the Doctrine and Covenants, for example) but not a more correct book. It implies that the Book of Mormon have some incorrect parts.

So yes, living Prophets are necessary to INTERPRET the gospel truths contained in the Book of Mormon correctly as it applies to the present environment. Modernization of society does not make the Book of Mormon less inspirational, less powerful, less correct, less anything.

Edited May 1, 2013 by anatess

[sarah331]

It seems you're devaluing some of the BoM's teachings because they may not *literally* apply to you -- because you are not a Nephite, etc.

However, as we see FROM the speeches from the prophets and apostles, we can *apply* the BoM teachings to pretty much every aspect of our lives. The application, of course, will change with time and circumstance, in some ways at least (thinking of how in the April '13 conference one of the apostles mentioned being honest in our social media interactions in marriage) . The root of it and the lesson remains the same.

I think if you get caught up in the *literal* truth instead of the *spiritual* truth you will be continuously disappointed in the BoM.

[Praetorian_Brow]

We are of course assuming that the original authors of the works that Joseph translated from and wrote of, are devoid of hyperbole, free license and artistic expression. I think there is an institutional fear that if we were to recognize that the Book of Mormon does have flaws, it would cause an avalanche of unbelief and devalue all of what belief in Christ is about.

For me to say that, doesn't undermine my beliefs at all, but reinforces in my mind that souls are more important than a book. I shy away from belief for fears sake.

Tar and feather away.

[Vort]

I think there is an institutional fear that if we were to recognize that the Book of Mormon does have flaws, it would cause an avalanche of unbelief and devalue all of what belief in Christ is about.

I don't know what you mean. The book itself admits its own flaws. There is no secret about that.

Perhaps you are referring to those who want to devalue this or that teaching in the book, claiming that it's just one of those aforementioned flaws. This is indeed apostasy.

[Dravin]

We are of course assuming that the original authors of the works that Joseph translated from and wrote of, are devoid of hyperbole, free license and artistic expression.

Are 'we'? Can you please point out the arguments or assertions you feel are operating under that assumption? I've seen assertions for the correctness of the Book of Mormon versus some other hypothetical work, but such assertions need not operate under the assumption you are claiming is being used. They could mind you, but I don't see the necessity. One can assert the superiority of the correctness of the Book of Mormon without assuming it is free of all hyperbole, license, and artistic expression. One can also throw in weakness of written language, as it is a concern explicitly brought up by Moroni.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Dravin

[searching_questioner]

EDIT:

Most of the BOM is wars, because we are going to have similar wars today.

Most of the BOM is about those who deny Christ, because we too today deny Christ.

Most of the BOM is about Secret Combinations, because we too have the same problem

The BOM is about two civilizations that were destoryed, we too will be destroyed in like manner and only "a few" of the followers of Christ will survive it, many will die (even the faithful).

Yes, we have had, are having, and will have, all of these things. And who better to guide, teach and prepare us for all of this, than God's living oracles today? It is taught that the Book of Mormon is for us, here, today, and that those who compiled it saw our day and that what they saw guided their selection of material. I have no disagreement with that. But I also believe that those prophets and apostles who live in and experience for themselves, our day, are in a much better position to teach us about it than those who simply saw our day from afar. Living in a particular period gives a much greater ability to understand and teach about that period than simply having seen that period without experiencing it. I'm not suggesting that the Book of Mormon has no value - I'm suggesting, as did President Benson, that modern-day, current revelation and apostolic teaching, or any compilation of such teachings, is of greater value to us than the complied revelations and prophetic teachings of prophets long dead.

Edited May 2, 2013 by estradling75

[searching_questioner]

“I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.)

Who of us would dare to say that compilations of modern day prophetic and apostolic revelations and teachings such as:

*Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,

*Doctrines of Salvation

*Gospel Doctrine: Selections from the Sermons and Writings to Joseph F Smith

*Teachings of Spencer W Kimball

*Teachings of Lorenzo Snow

*Teachings of Gordon B Hinckley

*Discourses of Wilford Woodruff

are in any way less correct than the Book of Mormon? If they are in no way less correct, then they are at least as equally correct as the Book of Mormon, which suggests that the Book of Mormon might no longer be the most correct book on Earth..

I note that none of these books existed at the time Joseph Smith made his remark about the accuracy of the Book of Mormon.

Additionally, Joseph Smith also said that “there is no error in the revelations which I have taught.” As they contain no errors, perhaps his teachings are also at least as correct as the Book of Mormon.

I'm not suggesting that modernization has made the Book of Mormon any less inspirational, any less powerful or any less useful. I'm suggesting that modern day prophetic and apostolic teachings might be equally, or more inspirational and powerful. If this were the case, it would not immediately lead to the conclusion that we should dump and replace the Book of Mormon with latter-day revelations, or an "either-or" scenario. However, it could lead to a re-prioritising of current gospel study priorities along the lines recommended by Elder Benson - "therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines."

Edited May 2, 2013 by estradling75
fixing broken tags

[skalenfehl]

What could be more powerful, more instructional, more inspirational than words from Christ as recorded in the Book of Mormon?

I cannot agree more with this. Furthermore, the entire BoM was specifically written, compiled and abridged especially for us in these latter days (Trynottotalktoomuchtrynottotalktoomuchtry...). There are common themes interlaced and interwoven with layers of meaning.

But! To entertain the OP's querry...IF we were to compile such a work, in my own flawed opinion, the bulk of it would come through Joseph Smith with probably more than half of all the rest of the contributors combined.

Just my two cents. :)

Edited May 2, 2013 by skalenfehl

[sarah331]

I'm not suggesting that modernization has made the Book of Mormon any less inspirational, any less powerful or any less useful. I'm suggesting that modern day prophetic and apostolic teachings might be equally, or more inspirational and powerful. If this were the case, it would not immediately lead to the conclusion that we should dump and replace the Book of Mormon with latter-day revelations, or an "either-or" scenario. However, it could lead to a re-prioritising of current gospel study priorities along the lines recommended by Elder Benson - "therefore the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines."

Hmmmm I think you're mistaken in correlating this with the BoM. It seems more like a comparison of Doctrine and Covenants...?

Which, and please correct me if I'm wrong, they do addend with revelation as it comes. Think Proclamation of the Family and the 2nd addendum regarding priesthood for black members.

Edited May 2, 2013 by sarah331

[mikbone]

Hmmmm I think you're mistaken in correlating this with the BoM. It seems more like a comparison of Doctrine and Covenants...?

Which, and please correct me if I'm wrong, they do addend with revelation as it comes. Think Proclamation of the Family and the 2nd addendum regarding priesthood for black members.

I think you have misquoted me. You have done something wrong with the quote feature

You were actually quoting searching questioner not mikbone

WOOPS, THE QUOTE FEATURE IS TOTALLY BUGGED

Edited May 2, 2013 by estradling75

[sarah331]

Ack, you're right, I'm sorry. I was trying to only quote the section s/he mentioned that was relevant.

Apologies.

[mikbone]

Ack, you're right, I'm sorry. I was trying to only quote the section s/he mentioned that was relevant.

Apologies.

test

[Guest]

test

Hi mikbone... either your post or searching_questioner's have a QUOTE that did not get ended with the proper /QUOTE tags.

[estradling75]

WOOPS, THE QUOTE FEATURE IS TOTALLY BUGGED

No its not... searching_questioner deleted the close quote tag and that has trickled through to all other quotes.

Basically you have two opening quote tags and only one close so the tool closes the nearest one.

Its working just like it should ... But no amount of automation can handle all the crap people can throw down

[Vort]

Who of us would dare to say that compilations of modern day prophetic and apostolic revelations and teachings such as:

*Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith,

*Doctrines of Salvation

*Gospel Doctrine: Selections from the Sermons and Writings to Joseph F Smith

*Teachings of Spencer W Kimball

*Teachings of Lorenzo Snow

*Teachings of Gordon B Hinckley

*Discourses of Wilford Woodruff

are in any way less correct than the Book of Mormon?

I would.

[mikbone]

No its not... searching_questioner deleted the close quote tag and that has trickled through to all other quotes.

Basically you have two opening quote tags and only one close so the tool closes the nearest one.

Its working just like it should ... But no amount of automation can handle all the crap people can throw down

Thank you.

[Guest]

Yes, we have had, are having, and will have, all of these things. And who better to guide, teach and prepare us for all of this, than God's living oracles today? It is taught that the Book of Mormon is for us, here, today, and that those who compiled it saw our day and that what they saw guided their selection of material. I have no disagreement with that. But I also believe that those prophets and apostles who live in and experience for themselves, our day, are in a much better position to teach us about it than those who simply saw our day from afar. Living in a particular period gives a much greater ability to understand and teach about that period than simply having seen that period without experiencing it. I'm not suggesting that the Book of Mormon has no value - I'm suggesting, as did President Benson, that modern-day, current revelation and apostolic teaching, or any compilation of such teachings, is of greater value to us than the complied revelations and prophetic teachings of prophets long dead.

Searching... I think the issue we have here is the understanding of what "most correct" means.

Just to clarify that claim of the BOM being the "most correct" book.... it holds that claim because all the other scriptures (OT, NT, apocryphas, etc.) have been translated incorrectly as well as parts added/removed that Christian Churches have deviated from correct and complete doctrine as taught by Jesus Christ. This is part of the Great Apostasy.

Joseph Smith's translation of the BOM makes it the most correct book because it contains all that we need for our salvation in its proper translation and its proper interpretation.

In addition to the BOM, the LDS Church and its prophets including Joseph Smith wrote letters/articles/proclamations/talks/etc. to establish doctrines for the Church to follow. These doctrines may be added on by virtue of Revelation (article of faith 9).

Okay, so why is it that the BOM is the "most correct" book? Because - it contains all that we need for our salvation.

So, what if President Monson writes all that we need for our salvation in a new book containing modern history? Why would it not be the "most correct" book?

Because, the BOM already contains ALL that we need for our salvation. Anything else written would only be "generational applications" of what we need for our salvation and would NOT be "additional things that we would need for our salvation" or "corrections on what the BOM says is what we need for our salvation".

So, anything that our prophets will write about our salvation may come to equally contain ALL that we need for our salvation but it couldn't be MORE of what we need for our salvation.

Hope that makes sense to you.

This is a very important distinction to make. Because this could completely change how you read the BOM. If you're reading the BOM as a "history book" then you are missing the point. The point of the BOM is that it contains all the principles of the gospel. The way it is presented is through the history of the Nephites and Lamanites (as opposed to the history of the Jews of the OT/NT) but the history is of lesser importance than the PRINCIPLES being presented. And the point of the book is SALVATION through the Atonement of Christ. Not what Jesus Christ looks like, or if we evolved from monkeys, or what type of bread to use in sacrament, how many temples need to be built, what steps to take to avoid pornography, what color skin to qualify for priesthood, or what laws to pass to stop gay marriage, etc. etc.

Edited May 2, 2013 by anatess

[mikbone]

People tend to forget that the Book of Mormon is very different than any other book on earth.

The entire contents were written by prophets.

The choice portions of an entire nations prophetic writings for a 1000 year span (2 nations and 2400 years if we count the Jaredites) were selected and edited by the two final prophets (Mormon & Moroni)

The Lord himself then edited the entire book via the translation thru Joseph Smith.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/utils/ajaxhelper/?CISOROOT=dialogue&CISOPTR=16483&action=2&DMSCALE=30&DMWIDTH=285&DMHEIGHT=447&DMX=0&DMY=0&DMTEXT=&DMROTATE=0

Edited May 2, 2013 by mikbone

[Dravin]

I would.

And I'm inclined to think the authors of those works would agree with you. Btw, even applying some of the same thought processes as questioning_searcher we should be able to conclusively rule out any book extant since the most recent assertion of the Book of Mormon's status as the most correct book. For instance, President Ezra Taft Benson stated that the Book of Mormon was the most correct book in April of 1984, therefore any book extant at or prior to that moment is disqualified. If we allow repetition of Joseph Smith's testimony of the Book of Mormon being the most correct book by Apostles to qualify we can easily move it up to April 2012 (possibly even more recent).

If you want a mind twist try to reason out what happens if one of the proposed most correct books contains the assertion that the Book of Mormon is the most correct book. The only way to wiggle out of it is by leaning on most, meaning your proposed most correct book is incorrect in it's assertion of the Book of Mormon as the most correct book.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Dravin

[ElectofGod]

And I'm inclined to think the authors of those works would agree with you. Btw, even applying some of the same thought processes as questioning_searcher we should be able to conclusively rule out any book extant since the most recent assertion of the Book of Mormon's status as the most correct book. For instance, President Ezra Taft Benson stated that the Book of Mormon was the most correct book in April of 1984, therefore any book extant at or prior to that moment is disqualified.

Unless his statement wasn't correct. But Than in a circular pattern Benson is not the most correct "book" being written. The Book of Mormon is the most correct book.

Unless Joseph... :)