Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon

[showustheking]

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

[Just_A_Guy]

6 hours ago, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

The way I look at it is, if I wrote a love letter to my wife on our five-year wedding anniversary, why shouldn’t she want me to write another one on our ten-year anniversary?  There’s nothing that says there can only be one love letter, or that inherently makes the one letter of more value than the other.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[zil]

When I was in high school, my best friend and I were in the same math class one year.  My friend did not understand things the way the teacher taught.  When the teacher was done with her presentation, I would turn to my friend and re-explain it in a way my friend understood.  When that was done, we'd do the assignment.  (Fortunately, the teacher wasn't the sort to be upset by this.)

Then there's also the two witnesses principle - the Bible as one witness (or two if you want to count the Testaments separately) and the Book of Mormon as another (then you can add the D&C and Pearl of Great Price, and modern prophets).  Together, the combination of witnesses provides a clearer, richer picture - each supporting the others.

Then there's the fact that the Bible was take from the records and teachings to those who were in the middle east.  The Book of Mormon was taken from the records and teachings given to those in the Americas.  Should God disregard one of these parties and deny them his word when they wanted and lived it?  Or preserve the records of one but not the records of the other?

I don't believe God or Christ ever said, "I'm going to speak to people up until this time (or only in that place), and after that, I'm not going to speak to people any more."  The mere idea makes no sense to me.  He loves all his children... (emphasis below is mine):

Quote

Alma 24:14 And the great God has had mercy on us, and made these things known unto us that we might not perish; yea, and he has made these things known unto us beforehand, because he loveth our souls as well as he loveth our children; therefore, in his mercy he doth visit us by his angels, that the plan of salvation might be made known unto us as well as unto future generations.

[Jane_Doe]

6 hours ago, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

They're both God's words to us.  God still lives and will continue to speak to His people- not just once, but always.  His words don't end just with the Bible.

[The Folk Prophet]

7 hours ago, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost

What is that supposed to mean? "Breath of Jesus Christ"?

Not asking to be snippy. Honestly curious what you mean by this.

[Guest]

On 3/27/2018 at 2:32 AM, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

You say you're new to the faith.  I'm assuming by your wording that you've recently accepted the faith and have been baptized.  Then somewhere along the line you must have received a spiritual confirmation that the Book of Mormon was the word of God.

The same question must be asked in both directions. Mormons start with the knowledge that BOTH are the "breath of Jesus Christ".  If you don't believe that, then it's a pointless question.

[Grunt]

6 hours ago, Carborendum said:

You say you're new to the faith.  I'm assuming by your wording that you've recently accepted the faith and have been baptized.  Then somewhere along the line you must have received a spiritual confirmation that the Book of Mormon was the word of God.

The same question must be asked in both directions. Mormons start with the knowledge that BOTH are the "breath of Jesus Christ".  If you don't believe that, then it's a pointless question.

I took it as more "newly introduced to the faith".

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

I took it as more "newly introduced to the faith".

This is apparently true since she said so in another thread (which I didn't catch at the time).  But what made me believe she was recently baptized was that she said.

On 3/27/2018 at 2:32 AM, showustheking said:

why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? 

As if she were one of us already.  I was apparently mistaken.

[Grunt]

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

This is apparently true since she said so in another thread (which I didn't catch at the time).  But what made me believe she was recently baptized was that she said.

As if she were one of us already.  I was apparently mistaken.

I didn't mean to be critical.   I just always look forward to reading your answers, too.

[Klaymen]

On 3/27/2018 at 2:32 AM, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

Equal standing?

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly;

we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Klaymen said:

Equal standing?

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly;

we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

You are correct.  We were trying to be polite.

[Jane_Doe]

3 hours ago, Klaymen said:

Equal standing?

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly;

we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

God was the translator of the Book of Mormon and such was done through His power.   So if you want to think of things as 

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as man translated it correctly;

we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God as far as God translated it correctly

You could  But personally I find the "as far are God did things right" disclaimer to be a bit unnecessary- it's not like God is going to fail.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[MrShorty]

This might be an example of Grunt's "less faithful" kind of comments, but can I push back on something, Jane_Doe?

A few months ago (I'm too lazy to go find it right now, but internet search engines should be able to find it, if one felt the need), James McDonald ("Walk in the Word" Christian radio program) said something on his radio show (a series he did defending the Bible) that struck me. He said (necessarily paraphrasing) "The Holy Spirit chose every single word in the Bible." Perhaps it is too much influence from less than conservative Biblical commentators, but I find myself unconvinced that God chose every single word in the Bible. I see more of a God speaks to people/persons and then those people/persons make some kind of record (or someone who later felt that their statements/experiences were worthy of making a more permanent record of). That record not only tries to capture the essence of the divine communication, but also gets filtered through the people's/person's culture and preconceptions to eventually give us something that we believe helps us understand God and our relationship to Him.

Your addition to the 8th AoF reminded me of this, so I will ask -- do we believe that God chose every single word Joseph Smith wrote in the [English] Book of Mormon? Is there room in "Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God" to see some human influences (Joseph Smith and his 19th century culture) in the Book of Mormon that may not be exactly divinely inserted into the scripture?

In a past discussion where I brought up the question of slavery in the Bible, that was a common defense -- the Bible includes cultural and human influences that maybe don't perfectly reflect God's divine truth and will. Is there something in the "as far as it is translated correctly" phrase that allows for human elements to be part of scripture? That maybe allows that there can be human elements inserted into the Book of Mormon (and other latter-day scripture)?

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

In a past discussion where I brought up the question of slavery in the Bible, that was a common defense -- the Bible includes cultural and human influences that maybe don't perfectly reflect God's divine truth and will. Is there something in the "as far as it is translated correctly" phrase that allows for human elements to be part of scripture? That maybe allows that there can be human elements inserted into the Book of Mormon (and other latter-day scripture)?

The understanding I've had for a long time about the word "translated" is not necessarily about translating from one language to another (although there is a good deal of that too).  It is mainly the more generic concept of "interpretation".  We all know that the written word can be interpreted many different ways.

Quote

...for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.

At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs, that is, ask of God...

This was really the major part of the meaning behind what the 8th AoF is referring to.

Yes, there were some parts that have been lost and now restored.  And there were some real translation errors.  But the bulk of it is that the interpretation is incorrect.

[zil]

25 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

Is there room in "Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God" to see some human influences (Joseph Smith and his 19th century culture) in the Book of Mormon that may not be exactly divinely inserted into the scripture? 

Whether there is room or not, two things are certainly true:

1) The number of humans involved in bringing us the Book of Mormon is far, far fewer than the number of humans involved in bringing us the Bible.  It stands to reason, therefore, that the negative influence of those humans is greater with the Bible than with the Book of Mormon.

2) God himself (unless you want to count those verses in the Book of Mormon as human) states that "plain and precious" truths have been removed from the Bible.  (And there's a clear difference between "human influence" and deliberate corruption / removal of bits the human didn't especially like.

FWIW, I think it's pretty clear that we see the personality and focus of individual authors / abridgers in the Book of Mormon.  And I tend to agree that when a revelation comes through a mortal, unless God himself dictates the very words to be used, it will of necessity reflect the human's ability to translate the revelation into mortal language.

[Jane_Doe]

40 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

This might be an example of Grunt's "less faithful" kind of comments, but can I push back on something, Jane_Doe?

A few months ago (I'm too lazy to go find it right now, but internet search engines should be able to find it, if one felt the need), James McDonald ("Walk in the Word" Christian radio program) said something on his radio show (a series he did defending the Bible) that struck me. He said (necessarily paraphrasing) "The Holy Spirit chose every single word in the Bible." Perhaps it is too much influence from less than conservative Biblical commentators, but I find myself unconvinced that God chose every single word in the Bible. I see more of a God speaks to people/persons and then those people/persons make some kind of record (or someone who later felt that their statements/experiences were worthy of making a more permanent record of). That record not only tries to capture the essence of the divine communication, but also gets filtered through the people's/person's culture and preconceptions to eventually give us something that we believe helps us understand God and our relationship to Him.

Your addition to the 8th AoF reminded me of this, so I will ask -- do we believe that God chose every single word Joseph Smith wrote in the [English] Book of Mormon? Is there room in "Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God" to see some human influences (Joseph Smith and his 19th century culture) in the Book of Mormon that may not be exactly divinely inserted into the scripture?

In a past discussion where I brought up the question of slavery in the Bible, that was a common defense -- the Bible includes cultural and human influences that maybe don't perfectly reflect God's divine truth and will. Is there something in the "as far as it is translated correctly" phrase that allows for human elements to be part of scripture? That maybe allows that there can be human elements inserted into the Book of Mormon (and other latter-day scripture)?

I don't think it's "less faithful" at all to acknowledge that mouthpieces are humans too (and hence less than 100% perfect even at the best of times).  Also, words do come at certain times/places/cultures, and understanding that principle and that context is actually important for understanding the words.  

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

This might be an example of Grunt's "less faithful" kind of comments, but can I push back on something, Jane_Doe?

A few months ago (I'm too lazy to go find it right now, but internet search engines should be able to find it, if one felt the need), James McDonald ("Walk in the Word" Christian radio program) said something on his radio show (a series he did defending the Bible) that struck me. He said (necessarily paraphrasing) "The Holy Spirit chose every single word in the Bible." Perhaps it is too much influence from less than conservative Biblical commentators, but I find myself unconvinced that God chose every single word in the Bible. I see more of a God speaks to people/persons and then those people/persons make some kind of record (or someone who later felt that their statements/experiences were worthy of making a more permanent record of). That record not only tries to capture the essence of the divine communication, but also gets filtered through the people's/person's culture and preconceptions to eventually give us something that we believe helps us understand God and our relationship to Him.

Your addition to the 8th AoF reminded me of this, so I will ask -- do we believe that God chose every single word Joseph Smith wrote in the [English] Book of Mormon? Is there room in "Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God" to see some human influences (Joseph Smith and his 19th century culture) in the Book of Mormon that may not be exactly divinely inserted into the scripture?

In a past discussion where I brought up the question of slavery in the Bible, that was a common defense -- the Bible includes cultural and human influences that maybe don't perfectly reflect God's divine truth and will. Is there something in the "as far as it is translated correctly" phrase that allows for human elements to be part of scripture? That maybe allows that there can be human elements inserted into the Book of Mormon (and other latter-day scripture)?

I can agree with this . . . to a point.  It’s been a while since I dug into the details of Book of Mormon textual studies; but my recollection is that current (faithful LDS) scholarly consensus is that much of the BoM text seems to have been given to Smith more-or-less verbatim; but that where the BoM cited to Biblical prophets Smith often simply inserted the relevant text from the Bible itself.  

If we are taking about which books in the LDS canon are closest to being textually “god-breathed” I would rank the Book of Mormon first, the Pearl of Great Price (Moses and Abraham) as second, parts of the D&C third, and most of the D&C and nearly all of the Bible in a tie for last place. But I wouldn’t put any of those books on the sort of inerrant, absolute-literal-voice-of-God pedestal that many Protestants seem to (erroneously, in my view) construct for the Bible.  

Edited December 5, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[SpiritDragon]

On 3/27/2018 at 1:32 AM, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

I would suppose that accepting the Book of Mormon on a level playing field with the Bible has everything to do with accepting it as the word of God or at least records of people with God's teachings. Why would we need the four gospels in the New Testament and not just one? Multiple witnesses are nice. The Book of Mormon does this as well.

While the Book of Mormon certainly strengthens biblical teachings and helps to clarify certain points, it still does not create a situation where an appeal to scripture will clear up all confusion. What it does do better than anything else is offer a tangible evidence of the restored gospel that a person can read, apply, and learn the truth of. When one has a spiritual witness of the Book of Mormon they have fertile soil to grow a testimony of the prophet who translated it, the God who gave him the power to do so, and the church they established to bring about about the salvation of God's children. The bible alone can't do that.

 

[SpiritDragon]

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/29?lang=eng

This chapter of scripture also explains some of the Lord's reasoning. 

Some key notes of interest:

• To show consistency of teachings to His people in all nations
• Prove unto many that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever
• Another witness of God's divinity

[DennisTate]

On 3/27/2018 at 4:32 AM, showustheking said:

If the Holy Bible was the breath of Jesus Christ first and foremost, why do we accept the Book of Mormon of equal standing? I'm just a little bit confused on why the Book of Mormon is needed when the Holy Bible is God's message to us. I'm new to the faith and still exploring a lot of questions.

I am not a Latter day Saint yet but I must say that my own understanding of the Bible has been transformed by my readings of near death experience accounts since 1990 and what I have read of the visionary experiences of Prophet Joseph Smith do fit amazingly well with NDE accounts that I regard as the most probable fulfillment of this promise that I have found so far.  Hint....  Do a search for the name "Sharon Milliman near death experience" if you would like to know WHY.... I... a non-Latter day Saint... take the visions of Prophet Joseph Smith so seriously!  Oh.. she has done an interview with Dr. Oz that may air in February. 

John 16:25

These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.