Why was Muhammad Wrong?


Steve Noel
 Share

Recommended Posts

The answer to your questions of us lies in your answer to my question earlier: How do you know the Bible is the right standard by which to judge truth?  (Or, why do you believe that it is?)

Edit: I don't ask this to question your belief; I ask this to bring us to a point of mutual understanding.  (That is, you cannot understand LDS beliefs without us understanding yours, because understanding cannot be achieved in one direction.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve Noel said:

it seems that Latter-day Saints reject Muhammad's teachings/revelations about Jesus because those revelations/teachings about Jesus are in opposition to what Latter-day Saints teach/believe about Jesus. This is what I'm getting at. What standard do you use to make that judgment. Is it your personal testimony? Is it the testimony of your prophets? Is it the Scriptures? Is it a combination of these things (possibly others)? 

Several have answered this specific question with this specific answer:

We have had a testimony of the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Restored (intentional capitalization) through Joseph Smith. That testimony from the Holy Ghost is more certain than any scripture. But the fact that Mohamet's "revelations" conflict with scripture and with the testimonies of living prophets from Joseph to Thomas Monson only serves to solidify our rejection of the first Muslin as a prophet.

I do not know how to make this any more clear.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

... it seems that Latter-day Saints reject Muhammad's teachings/revelations about Jesus because those revelations/teachings about Jesus are in opposition to what Latter-day Saints teach/believe about Jesus. This is what I'm getting at. What standard do you use to make that judgment. Is it your personal testimony? Is it the testimony of your prophets? Is it the Scriptures? Is it a combination of these things (possibly others)? 

We have answered the question.  And you've gotten a completely different concept upon reading it.  And now you're repeating the question...

I'll try again.  This is not in any particular order.

First, we believe in personal revelation to guide us.  This goes for 

  • Interpretation of scripture.
  • Acceptance of any new doctrine.
  • Acceptance of a prophet.
  • General guidance in our lives.

Second, the fruits of Mormonism and the fruits of Islam are completely different.  This is the physical evidence that supports and confirms the first point. (i.e. -- We know from this evidence whether we are on the right track or not).

Third, once we have the first two (revelation confirmed by observation of the fruits of said revelation) then any new thing must also be measured against what has already been revealed.  I believe the difficulty you're having is that you tend to skip over the first two steps and just jump to step three.  This is mainly why we're asking you to explain your equivalent or parallel to these first two steps.  We really don't know what that is for you. To us, you don't seem to have them.  And thus, no foundation.

Fourth, many pointed out our differences from Islam, including how we still believe the Bible, and Jesus' divinity, and Muslims don't.  This was not a basis for determining truth.  It was a reaction to the question which implied that we are similar to Muslims.  It was not an answer to the question.  It was a defense against that implication.  We are very different.  I'd hope that point was properly emphasized.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve Noel

Note: on of the reasons you'll see LDS point out different flaws of Islam is:

A) because there are multiple large flaws to point out

B) LDS do not spend time in our services and teachings specifically calling out different groups of people (like Muslims) and listing the ways they are flawed, so there isn't a standardized answer to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 8:14 PM, LeSellers said:

It may be that I inferred those concepts, but I have seen this same question (in almost exactly the same words) many times in the past, and the person asking was almost never asking it innocently, and almost never did the question arise in his own mind.

Color me jaded, but when I see it, it always reminds me of the class that must be in many seminaries, taught from The Little Green Book of "How to Witness to Mormons".

If I'm wrong, I apologize. But it does get wearisome answering the same groundless questions again and again.

Even so, I'd still like to know why @Steve Noelasked. This is a reasonable question, irrespective of anything I read into his.

Lehi

 

On 5/2/2016 at 11:37 AM, NeuroTypical said:

btw, I have zero suspicions about you Steve.  I see you being clear and transparent about your motives, and I believe you.   You think you're right, and you're challenging us with what you consider difficult questions.  I have no problem with that.  

And on top of that, you're doing it kindly and civilly, without hardly a trace of passive-aggressiveness or unrighteous judgment.  That's refreshing.

Hi @Steve Noel ,
Because there are varying views as to your motives here on the forum, I figured it would be best to hear it from your personally. So Steve, what are you looking to do on this forum? I realize anyone and everyone is welcome to be here and ask questions, LDS member or not, so this is not a issue of "you shouldn't be here". I am happy to have you here, but it would be refreshing to hear your honest reason as to what you hope to accomplish.
 
Are you here to personally learn and pray to Heavenly Father to see if the church is true for yourself?
Are you here to "witness" to us in the hopes we will change our ways?
Are you simply learning about the LDS faith? If so, to what end/purpose?

You mentioned you are on at least 2 LDS forums asking the same questions in both. So I figured it would be great to hear your honest answer, so that I personally know how to take/view your posts in the future. 

Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Steve,

To be honest, I don't believe this is fair.  I understand that we don't want to get into a debate on who knows the Bible better. (Because it's clear that Mormons do :P).  But at the same time, when you ask the question the way you did in the OP, it implies that at least a part of you believes (or is ignorant of the contrary) that:

  1. In your mind there is no substantive difference between Mormons and Muslims.  
  2. We're equally wrong.
  3. We interpret Biblical writings as wrong as Muslims do.

If you did not mean to imply it, I'd ask you to clarify yourself.  Regardless, the nature of the question is such that it asks us to defend our position.  When you do so, it is only fair that we ask you to defend your side as well.  Not only that, but to ask you to explore how you know what you know or why you believe your position is superior to ours (and let's face it, when we believe as we do, we all believe our position is "more correct" than the other, and by that standard, superior) only then can you begin to understand why we feel the same about ours.

The fact is that I have no hope of any missionary work here.  I have zero expectation that you're going to be converted.  So, why would I want to have a discussion with you?  I do it because I appreciate intellectual stimulation and mutual education of each other's faith and ideas.  The question you posed is not a new one.  And therefore, does not provide much in the way of intellectual stimulation.  I'd hoped to gain more knowledge about your faith and your ideas.  That's the exchange I hoped for.  I found myself quite enlightened to find that evangelicals didn't believe humans and angels were of the same species.  Yes, there was some debate about the Biblical basis. That's to be expected.  But I appreciated being enlightened by that knowledge.  

But if this is all going to be one sided, I don't think I want to continue.

It seems I do still need to clarify myself. I have repeatedly tried to do so in this thread. If you check the OP you will see that the purpose of this thread was to inquire about how Latter-day Saints judge the truthfulness of teachings/revelations. I used Muhammad because he claimed to have direct revelations from God. In these revelations he teaches things about Jesus that Evangelicals and Latter-day Saints both say are false. I know on what basis Evangelicals reject Muhammad's revelations. We reject these revelations because they teach things about Jesus that are contrary to Scripture. The Bible is used as a ruler to measure whether a revelation/teaching is true or not. If the revelation/teaching contradicts what God has already revealed in the Bible, then it is not from God. Several have argued that it is our interpretation that is the standard by which Evangelicals  measure, not Scripture. Regardless of how well Evangelicals apply this principle, that is the goal. Measure all teachings/revelations by what God has already revealed in Scripture. If it is contrary to Scripture, then it is not from God. So Evangelicals reject Muhammad's revelations/teachings about Jesus. They cannot be from God, because they contradict what God has already revealed about Jesus.

The only purpose of this thread was to understand how Latter-day Saints determine if a revelation/teaching is from God. There is not an attempt here to compare/contrast Mormonism and Islam. This thread is not about how Mormons are as equally as wrong as Muslims. This thread is not about how Mormons and Muslims both misinterpret the Bible. The comparison/contrast I am after is between Evangelicals and Latter-day Saints with regard to determining truth. I am not asking Latter-day Saints to defend their position. I am asking you to explain it. I am not trying to prove that my position is superior or more correct than yours. I am stating the standard Evangelical position as an example of what I mean, and then asking how Latter-day Saints approach this.

I am okay with your questions that cause me to explore my position. I have thought a lot about @Zil's question to me. It is a fantastic question. It has caused me to think hard. I don't know that I have a satisfactory answer at this time. It is one I need to explore deeper. I have been limited on time lately so I have not been able to respond to all the questions/comments so far. 

Edited by Steve Noel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

The only purpose of this thread was to understand how Latter-day Saints determine if a revelation/teaching is from God.

This can be answered only in comparison to some other belief system. Thus, many people have asked you to explain how you justify belief of any particular idea based on a non-revelatory Biblical interpretation. When you have answered this, we may then be able to formulate a reasonable answer to your question. Until then, we will continue saying that we believe based on divine revelation -- a position which you seem to think begs the question, but to us answers it completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, zil said:

The answer to your questions of us lies in your answer to my question earlier: How do you know the Bible is the right standard by which to judge truth?  (Or, why do you believe that it is?)

Edit: I don't ask this to question your belief; I ask this to bring us to a point of mutual understanding.

I apologize that I have not responded earlier to your question. I have been limited in my time to respond here. I don't like to give quick/thoughtless responses. This question is a great question. It has been on my mind for several days now. I don't know that I have an adequate answer at this time. The standard verse that Evangelicals use to demonstrate this approach is the example of the Jews in Berea in Acts 17. Here is the text:

Quote

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. (10-12)

Evangelicals point out that God inspired Luke to commend this attitude of the Bereans ("These were more noble..."). The Bereans did not just accept what Paul said because he was an apostle. They eagerly received what he said and then examined the Scriptures to see if what Paul was saying was true. In essence, they used the Scriptures as a ruler to measure the truthfulness of Paul's message. 

We would also point to the biblical evidence that the Bible is the Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; Matt. 22:31-32; 2 Pet. 1:20-21; etc.). So whenever a teaching/revelation is said to be from God it must be consistent with what God has already spoken in Scripture. We would also point to the way Jesus viewed and used the Scriptures. When tempted by the devil Jesus proclaimed, "It is written.." (Luke 4:1-13). Thus, Jesus quoted Scripture as the Word of God when tempted by Satan to disobey God. There are many more examples that could be given, but that is the gist of it.

Now, what your question has really caused me to reflect on is the role of the internal witness of the Spirit to the truthfulness of the Scriptures. This is an area I need to explore much more than I have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Are you here to personally learn and pray to Heavenly Father to see if the church is true for yourself?

No. I am not considering conversion.

6 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Are you here to "witness" to us in the hopes we will change our ways?

No, I have not tried to convert anyone here. Though I may at times seek to convince you all to change your minds about something.

6 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Are you simply learning about the LDS faith? If so, to what end/purpose?

Yes. I am here to learn for myself what Latter-day Saints believe. I actually came to this board at the recommendation of people at the first forum I joined to discuss Mormonism (mormondialogue.org). I was told that I would get a better understanding of mainstream Mormonism here. That forum has a lot of disgruntled current/former LDS folks. Why am I wanting to learn about LDS beliefs? That is a good question. I don't know if I have a good answer for you. For some reason Mormonism interests me. I am someone who loves to study. I am fascinated by theology, church history, biblical studies, etc. I have just completed a Bachelor's degree in Religion with a minor in Apologetics. There are two contrasting apologetic approaches to Mormonism among Evangelicals. These two regularly criticize the approach of the other. I am seeking to better understand Mormonism in order to evaluate these approaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2016 at 9:30 PM, Anddenex said:

I remember the first time a Protestant Christian sought out an answer to this question from my companion and I, and honestly, this question puzzles me now just as it did then. 1) The comparison between Joseph Smith's first vision and Muhammad's visitation is comparing an apple to an orange. 2) The Church of Jesus Christ claims to be Christian, not a different religion. Here are highlights that appear to be apparent unless someone is turning a blind eye:

1) Joseph Smith' first vision was of the Father and the Son (Jesus Christ). These weren't messenger angels from God, it was God that visited him. 

2) Gabriel, according to LDS doctrine, Gabriel appeared to Mary confessing to her of her role in being the birth mother of the Savior, Jesus Christ.  Gabriel also announced the birth of John who would be a forerunner to Jesus Christ, preparing the way of the Savior and who would ultimately baptize the Savior declaring his role.

3) A primary role prophets have before God is to bear witness of Jesus Christ, they are testators of his divinity and mission. Here is a quote from Joseph Smith, "The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it."

Lorenzo Snow, one who filled the role of prophet later, "The spirit of God descended upon me, completely enveloping my whole person, ... dispelling forever, so long as reason and memory last, all possibility of doubt or fear in relation to the fact handed down to us historically that the 'babe of Bethlehem' is truly the Son of God." (emphasis added)

David O Mckay, "Members of the Church of Christ are under obligation to make the sinless Son of Man their ideal. He is the one Perfect Being who ever walked the earth; the sublimest example of nobility; Godlike in nature; perfect in his love." (emphasis added)

4) All truth is received by the Spirit of God, as all revelation from prophets to us has been received and proclaimed (Moroni 10: 3-5, John 15: 26). As given evidence also, the Lord (Jesus Christ) praised Peter because truth of who Jesus Christ was, was delivered to him by the Father through revelation. The Father reveals truth to his children, his sons and daughters, via the spirit which testifies of Christ.

5) In light of 1-4, we receive the following admonition and warning, D&C 50:17-18, "Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

"And if it be by some other way it is not of God."

In short, the question asked already provides the answer in reference to LDS doctrine, "According to these revelations Jesus was not...the son of God..."  Ergo, Muhammad would be considered a false prophet as he did not bear witness, nor declare, the divinity of Christ...the "fundamental principles of our religion" the "obligation" of all members of the Church, and who have received witness from the testator of Christ.

Thus, the question puzzles me then, and still does.

 

As far as comparing Mormonism and Islam please read my response to Carb HERE.

Otherwise, you have adequately answered my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 0:02 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

We get sloppy in our everyday discourse, but before proceeding one should note that Mormonism technically distinguishes between "scripture" (any true thing said by any person under the influence of the Holy Spirit--under that definition, a passing remark in Sunday School--or even a number of posts to LDS.net--could fit the bill) versus "canon" (deriving, I think, from an old English word denoting a measuring stick).  The latter does indeed serve as a sort of "check and balance" against which new revelation can be evaluated--with the caveat that often, the canon is not as unambiguous or clear as many folks would like to believe it to be.  

I think it is hypothetically possible for the Bible to disprove the claims of a Mohammed, or a Joseph Smith, or a David Koresh--but unless the Holy Spirit tells me that there is merit to any of those individuals' claims, I may never bother to undertake the analysis at all (as with Mohammed or Koresh).  And when I subject Smith to that sort of analysis, what I keep finding is that the Bible doesn't really say what Smith's fiercest critics say that it says. 

And for Mormons, the flip side of accepting the primacy of the canon is that the reason the Church accepts it in the first place, is that the Holy Spirit has confirmed its reliability to us.  We don't consider either the Bible or the other books of the LDS canon to be self-proving on the basis of their own infallible logic or consistency or some sort of external evidence, the way some mainstream Christians seem to view the Bible.  We accept the canon because we find, through trial and experience, that it brings us into closer communion with God. 

Thanks for this. Is this distinction between "scripture" and "canon" taught as doctrine or just a popular belief?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 1:02 AM, SpiritDragon said:

Hi Steve,

I think to some extent you'll come to discover that there isn't an universal "mormon view" on how false prophets are determined. This is perhaps because our time spent worshiping is dedicated to learning about that which is uplifting and helps us to more closely emulate our Saviour Jesus Christ. Thus I've never heard and never expect to hear an official Mormon teaching specifically targeting what is wrong with another's belief system, that being said there are teachings on how to determine that which is true and to avoid deception.

Now then I'll first answer with why I personally reject the prophet of Islam starting with a scripture I've seen used recently (I believe in the Angels Thread) 

Revelation 19:10

10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

To start with to declare that Christ is not deified seems to automatically disqualify him as others have mentioned.

Further the teachings of Islam simply don't reconcile with Biblical teachings. I know many assert that the same can be said of Mormonism, but I have to confess I don't understand that position - having been a student of the scriptures I cannot find any Mormon teaching that is contrary to Biblical teaching. In fact I find it more in line with Biblical teaching than any other religion's teaching I have ever studied... back to the OP now.

In the Doctrine and Covenants section 9 verse 8 one reads,

But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

This also goes along with and must pass the test of "by their fruits, ye shall know them." The fruits of the spirit are "love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance" and would logically be (at least) expected to be among the fruits of true prophet. Now I'm not saying that the founder of Islam taught it to be so (I'm not extremely well versed with his teachings), but I find the idea of violently seeking to oppress and dominate the world with the "religion of peace" just doesn't live up to the fruits by which a true prophet is known.

So let me explain these two points in the context of how I use the above teaching to help me discern between truth and error. First I study it out in my mind and compare the teachings to those found in sources (such as the Bible) that I have come to believe to be true. If the idea that I am studying is contrary to what I believe to be true than I don't tend to concern myself with it further. If however I find no reason to reject it through study than I take that finding to God in prayer for further insight. If the item in question leaves me feeling the spirit as I've come to recognize it, then I believe it to be true and feel the need to act on it accordingly. If I feel no particular feeling when praying on it I also tend to put it on the shelf and figure that it is either not true or not important for me at that time.

 

So in the case of Mohammed, I haven't felt the need to even pray about it because of the apparent contradictions to revealed truth.

 

I hope this helps you understand how some Latter-day Saints work things out.

Very good. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

Is this distinction between "scripture" and "canon" taught as doctrine or just a popular belief?

No, it's doctrine.

Doctrine and Covenants 68:4

Quote

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.

Not everything that is scripture is canon, but the canon is, by definition, scripture.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 10:57 AM, NeuroTypical said:

Well, he's not here.  I don't know what he would do or not do, and neither do you.  For all you know, he wouldn't give me the time of day, and would instead have his men slay me as a heretic or something.

Can I ask you a similar question?

1. All teachings and experiences must be judged by scripture.
2. No, not any of the thousands of other holy books out there, not the Kesh Temple Hymn, or the Hindu Rigveda, or the Zoroastrian Avesta, or the Quran.  Torah yes, Tanakh no.  Some books yes, apocrypha no.  Out of all the scriptures, all the holy works, from all human civilization, you are talking about none of them except the Lutherian Canon that one particular group of folks figured was scripture back in the 1500's-ish, and the idea stuck.
3. That hand-picked set of books, which testify of a particular kind of a particular God - that's the scripture you're talking about.

So, ok.  Everything must be judged by scripture.  What makes your scripture right and others' scripture wrong?

I mean, when I ask myself that question, I know the answer.  I gave it above.  Just wondering about your answer.  You say "evangelicals insist".  So, what makes evangelical insistence take precedence over other insistence?  

"Jesus is God and Mohammed was wrong, because a particular group of humans with which I associate, insist that a certain group of books are right."

I know you don't like relying on the 'arm of flesh' any more than I do here...

Obviously Muhammad is not here. It was a hypothetical. Not sure where you're getting your information about the formation of the biblical canon, but this caricature is not accurate. If you're interested in what Evangelicals believe about this, then here is an article on The Canon of Scripture by a respected Evangelical scholar. I am not sure why you chose to mock a straw-man here, but I am not interested in this kind of interaction. 

Edited by Steve Noel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2016 at 0:06 PM, Jane_Doe said:

I'm going to start my answer by dispelling a couple of common myths about LDS views (I'm not saying that you believe these myths @Steve Noel, but I'm just making sure the bases are covered).

Myth #1: LDS do not use the scriptures as a ruler of truthfulness.  This is SO far from the truth!  LDS study and refer to the scriptures near constantly in their religious life.  Every hurdle life throughs at use is judged how to handle it with scripture, and how to be comforted/find strength to endure the hurdles from the pages of scripture.  New teachings and knowledge are judged via scripture and the Spirit.  (Note: when I say "scripture" I mean the actual God-breathed scriptures, not men's flawed thoughts on what they think scripture says- less we all become Pharisees).

Myth #2: Because LDS believe in continuing revelation, they will just believe any "revelation" regardless of how ridiculous it is.  Again SO far from the truth!  Yes, it is true that LDS do believe in continuing revelation: that's how God has always worked and He does not change.  But we are also heed the scripture's warnings about false prophets- warnings found abundantly in the Bible and other LDS scriptures.  New teachings are not whimsically accepted, but go through a rigorous process of judging against scripture and via consulting directly with God.  This process happens on the church level, but also on the level of each individual- when they first come into the church (yes, we are aware that the Joseph Smith story can seem out there) and for each experienced member as they learn new things (I myself have gone through this process intensively this week in my private studies).  

Now on to Muhammad: he claims revelation, but that does not mean LDS or any other person should blindly accept them just because he says so.  From the LDS perspective, Muhammad's teaching are clearly against the Truth based on his rejection of Christ's Sonship alone.  This Sonship is clearly and unmistakably established in scripture and via the witness of the spirit.  So yes, Muhammad is rejected.

 

Please forgive us for our suspicion Steve.  We... honestly it is so easy to become biased and suspicious of non-LDS folks on-line-- at points it seems that the trolls outnumber the honest 10 to 1.  

Thanks for this. The LDS view on this may not be all that different from the Evangelical view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

Thanks for this. Is this distinction between "scripture" and "canon" taught as doctrine or just a popular belief?

As LeSellers noted, the definition of "scripture" derives from D&C 68:4.  Re "canon"--you probably already know that the LDS edition of the KJV Bible has a "Bible Dictionary" appended to it.  It has an entry on "canon" (online here) that I think you'd enjoy from a historical context, though it probably doesn't do a very good job of explaining how canon relates to new revelations.  But I am heavily influenced by, e.g., Isaiah 8:20; and then-LDS Apostle Ezra Taft Benson gave an interesting talk in the 1960s in which he identifies the "standard works" (Mormonspeak for "canon"), LDS church leaders, and inspiration from the Holy Ghost as three keys to avoid deception.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

As LeSellers noted, the definition of "scripture" derives from D&C 68:4.  Re "canon"--you probably already know that the LDS edition of the KJV Bible has a "Bible Dictionary" appended to it.  It has an entry on "canon" (online here) that I think you'd enjoy from a historical context, though it probably doesn't do a very good job of explaining how canon relates to new revelations.  But I am heavily influenced by, e.g., Isaiah 8:20; and then-LDS Apostle gave an interesting talk in the 1960s in which he identifies the "standard works" (Mormonspeak for "canon"), LDS church leaders, and inspiration from the Holy Ghost as three keys to avoid deception.

Excellent. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, Steve, in your studies of Mormonism you may enjoy this toy.  It basically lets you look up any verse in the LDS canon (including the Bible), and see exactly when and where those specific verses were cited--

  • in a compilation of Joseph Smith's sermons entitled Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith
  • in the Journal of Discourses, reports of selected Mormon sermons from the 1850s to the 1880s; and
  • in LDS General Conference sermons from 1942 onwards.

Have fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve Noel said:

There are two contrasting apologetic approaches to Mormonism among Evangelicals. These two regularly criticize the approach of the other. I am seeking to better understand Mormonism in order to evaluate these approaches.

Thank you for your answers thus far Steve.

Can I ask what your definition of "apologetic approaches to Mormonism" means?

What purpose is gained by understanding these varying approaches more, how does this serve you better? What is the end purpose of learning how to apply apologetic approaches to Mormonism?

Thanks again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

I apologize that I have not responded earlier to your question. I have been limited in my time to respond here. I don't like to give quick/thoughtless responses. This question is a great question. It has been on my mind for several days now. I don't know that I have an adequate answer at this time. The standard verse that Evangelicals use to demonstrate this approach is the example of the Jews in Berea in Acts 17. Here is the text:

Evangelicals point out that God inspired Luke to commend this attitude of the Bereans ("These were more noble..."). The Bereans did not just accept what Paul said because he was an apostle. They eagerly received what he said and then examined the Scriptures to see if what Paul was saying was true. In essence, they used the Scriptures as a ruler to measure the truthfulness of Paul's message. 

We would also point to the biblical evidence that the Bible is the Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17; Matt. 22:31-32; 2 Pet. 1:20-21; etc.). So whenever a teaching/revelation is said to be from God it must be consistent with what God has already spoken in Scripture. We would also point to the way Jesus viewed and used the Scriptures. When tempted by the devil Jesus proclaimed, "It is written.." (Luke 4:1-13). Thus, Jesus quoted Scripture as the Word of God when tempted by Satan to disobey God. There are many more examples that could be given, but that is the gist of it.

Now, what your question has really caused me to reflect on is the role of the internal witness of the Spirit to the truthfulness of the Scriptures. This is an area I need to explore much more than I have. 

Don't worry about when you have time to respond - I understand life sometimes gets in the way of fun. :)

The Jews in Berea is a good reference - for the record, LDS church leaders do not ask us to take them on faith - they ask us to study what they say (for most, this would include comparing to scripture), ponder it, and pray to gain a witness from God (via the Holy Ghost) if what they teach is true.  The LDS church is very big on each individual learning truth for themselves, and NOT following blindly.

That Nibley article I linked earlier talks about Christ (and angels) quoting scripture.  I know you may not have time soon to read it, but I would encourage it, just to see a very smart man outline the relationship between scripture, prophets, and revelation through the Holy Ghost - which are the three things, as I stated earlier, by which Mormons judge truth.

I think it's important for you to know why you believe the Bible to be the standard by which to measure things.  I still maintain that the answer to that question is also the answer to your question of us.  Without some sort of hard proof (of the worldly kind) that the Bible is the right standard, one must find another reason to believe it is - because belief without a foundation won't last hard trials.  So the crucial question is, why do you believe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

The only purpose of this thread was to understand how Latter-day Saints determine if a revelation/teaching is from God. There is not an attempt here to compare/contrast Mormonism and Islam. This thread is not about how Mormons are as equally as wrong as Muslims. This thread is not about how Mormons and Muslims both misinterpret the Bible. The comparison/contrast I am after is between Evangelicals and Latter-day Saints with regard to determining truth. I am not asking Latter-day Saints to defend their position. I am asking you to explain it. I am not trying to prove that my position is superior or more correct than yours. I am stating the standard Evangelical position as an example of what I mean, and then asking how Latter-day Saints approach this.

I understand you being busy.  So don't sweat that.  But regarding your explanation above: If that was your intent, then the OP was the wrong question to ask.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I understand you being busy.  So don't sweat that.  But regarding your explanation above: If that was your intent, then the OP was the wrong question to ask.

Ahhh... it wasn't and it was.... The reason I say this is because I asked the exact same question when I was researching Mormons and it led me to a greater understanding of my existing testimony of that time in addition to understanding Mormons.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

Ahhh... it wasn't and it was.... The reason I say this is because I asked the exact same question when I was researching Mormons and it led me to a greater understanding of my existing testimony of that time in addition to understanding Mormons.

Huh?

He said that his intent was to find out how we determine divine truth.  But instead he asked a question about Muslims.  How was that the right question to LEAD with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are asking "How do you learn true doctrine or how do you know what's true and what's not?"

Some things that help are:

  • Scriptures (2 Tim 3:15-16)  I wonder if the answers in this thread make it seem like we undervalue "it is written".  We absolutely use the scriptural canon as a basis to measure things.  This is very very important.
  • Prayer (James 1:5) "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God."
  • Leaders called of God like apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, etc. (Ephesians 4:11-14)  These are given to us so we can come to "the knowledge of the Son of God."
  • Righteousness (John 7:17) "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine". See also 2 Peter 1:4-9 which teaches if you acquire divine attributes such as diligence, faith, temperance, charity, etc. they "make you ... neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.".

That's not a complete list.  Offhand I also think of fasting with prayer, meditation, and pondering.

But the underlying key to ALL of these is
revelation.  The Spirit of Truth is the one that helps us know and recognize truth.  We can ONLY know the things of God through the Spirit; "the things of God knoweth no man, but [by] the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:11 with "by" added to clarify its meaning. See also 12-14 which support this; verse 12 teaches we have received the Spirit of God that we might know the things of God.)  I'm sure you're familiar with others such as "the Spirit of truth ... will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13)

Another thing to mention is that anything that denies Jesus Christ as the divine Son of God and Savior and the only way to salvation can be rejected.  We know this because of scripture, the Book of Mormon as well as the Bible.

Some related teachings from the Book of Mormon include:

Moroni 10:5-6:
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.

Moroni 7:16-17:
16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.
17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

Ether 4:11
11 But he that believeth these things which I have spoken, him will I visit with the manifestations of my Spirit, and he shall know and bear record. For because of my Spirit he shall know that these things are true; for it persuadeth men to do good.

Alma 5:46-48:
46 Behold, I say unto you they are made known unto me by the Holy Spirit of God. Behold, I have fasted and prayed many days that I might know these things of myself. And now I do know of myself that they are true; for the Lord God hath made them manifest unto me by his Holy Spirit; and this is the spirit of revelation which is in me.
47 And moreover, I say unto you that it has thus been revealed unto me, that the words which have been spoken by our fathers are true, even so according to the spirit of prophecy which is in me, which is also by the manifestation of the Spirit of God.
48 I say unto you, that I know of myself that whatsoever I shall say unto you, concerning that which is to come, is true; and I say unto you, that I know that Jesus Christ shall come, yea, the Son, the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace, and mercy, and truth. And behold, it is he that cometh to take away the sins of the world, yea, the sins of every man who steadfastly believeth on his name.

Here Alma explains that its through the Spirit that he knows truth, including the truthfulness of the scriptures ("words which have been spoken by our fathers").

This leads to something you brought up earlier in the thread that I'm not sure got answered: person X believes one thing and you believe another and you both claim your knowledge is from God.   Q: How do I know which is right?  A: 
Use the things I mentioned above and rely on God to guide you.  I maybe could have put humility and willingness to follow in that list too, although those are somewhat implied with prayer.  If you humbly trust in God and you seek to learn truth from Him, He'll lead you there.

And, if Person X really does believe something that is not true he will have to answer for himself.  But I am certain that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and the Savior.  And, I am also certain that the Bible and Book of Mormon are true.  Like Alma, "I have fasted and prayed many days that I might know these things of myself.  And ... the Lord God hath made them manifest unto me by his Holy Spirit."  To Latter-day Saints, knowledge of divine truth must be received from God through His Spirit.

Edited by Rhoades
removed quotes
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