Why More?

[Follower]

I noticed you did not respond to my point... Do you actually believe that God cannot add to his word?

I believe God has the ability to add to His Word whenever He wants.

The Book of Mormon does not contradict The Bible, unless you believe the anti-mormon literature you used to formulate your opinion...Have you ever actually studied The Book of Mormon? I read the Bible every day, and I find that they fit rather nicely together...It might contradict your interpretation of The Bible or Book of Mormon, and that's a different thing all together...As to the plagerism idea, you probably have not read much Mormon scholarship on that subject have you? Do you realize how many comparitive studies have been done on this subject? Are you familiar with the conclusions on both sides of this argument, or just the anti-mormon view?

No, I have not had time to study every belief system under heaven. This should not disqualify me, or anyone else for that matter, from challenging the basic claims of a belief system that I believe to be in contradiction to the Bible. You've likely heard the old story (whether true or not, I don't know) about those who are able to detect counterfeit money. They do not spend all of their time studying the counterfeit, but rather they spend their time studying the original so that they can spot the counterfeit when it comes along.

Now I do have a sincere question for you...Why do you personally, believe that The Holy Bible is the word of God? I am not challenging that it is...I just want to know how you personally came to believe it is his word...?

Because it says so.

[Follower]

Follower what reason do you feel it is?

D. None of the above.

[Follower]

I’m wondering if you are aware of how much the New Testament "plagiarizes" from the Old Testament and many apocryphal sources.

Can you give any specifics?

I’m also wondering if you have any form of a grasp on what the definition of “plagiarism” is. I suggest you look it up.

You should be careful. I got reprimanded for not engaging in congenial discussion.

The portions within the Book of Mormon that “plagiarize” the Bible give a source for the words. Attribution is given to the Author, G-d.

But Scripture has more than one author, unless you contend that all the books of the Bible were directly written by the finger of God. However, this idea would contradict at least some books of the New Testament (Romans 16:22, 1 Corinthians 16:21, 2 Corinthians 13:10, Galatians 6:11) Since Scripture has more than one author, wouldn't it have been prudent to cite both of them? In the Bible, most quotations say, "As it is written..." or "This is what was uttered by the prophet Joel"...or "For David says concerning Him" etc. However, when you compare Moroni 10 with 1 Corinthians 12:1-11, the writer makes no reference to Paul as the author. There are many other quotes like this from the Mormon Scriptures with no reference given.

Then again, maybe Christ was plagiarizing the book of Tobit, Enoch, Isaiah, Psalms, Job, etc.

Why are there chunks plagiarized and hijacked from the Torah within the New Testament?

Do you have any references for these assertions?

What opinions would these be? How have we not been “honest” about our opinions regarding “the Bible”? Are you aware that the majority of Joseph’s sermons came from the Bible (he hardly ever taught from the Book of Mormon)? Are you aware that as LDS, we work on a four year Sunday School study schedule, and two of those years are devoted to the Bible? Are you aware that the Bible is amongst the canonized "standard works" of the LDS?

I would hate to think you are bearing false witness here.

False witness? Are you aware of what Revelation 21 says? "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

Do you think this is speaking of adding to or taking away from the book of Revelation only, or of the whole Bible?

[mnn727]

I’m wondering if you are aware of how much the New Testament "plagiarizes" from the Old Testament and many apocryphal sources.

Can you give any specifics?

So we are supposed to give specifics, but you don't have to? that's not how it works, you were asked a couple of times so far to provide evidence of where the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible, so far you have ignored that question and even admited you've not studied the Book of Mormon.

Do you think this is speaking of adding to or taking away from the book of Revelation only, or of the whole Bible?

Since the Bible was not compiled yet, nor were all its books even written at the time John wrote this, it could have only been speaking of itself, the Book of Revelation. Duet 4:2 says the same thing, shall we throw out everything past it?

[avatar4321]

False witness? Are you aware of what Revelation 21 says? "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

Do you think this is speaking of adding to or taking away from the book of Revelation only, or of the whole Bible?

There really isnt anything to think about. John is speaking about the Book of revelation. There was no Bible when he wrote the line. He wrote his Gospel and Epistles afterwards, so if it was about the Bible, then he condemned himself to hell for adding to it. In order to take the "refering to the whole Bible" argument seriously one has to be completely ignorant of historical details on how the Bible was compiled, context, who did the compiling.

Even if we assume that the "whole Bible" interpretation is adopted and accepted as absolute truth, nothing in the verse prevents God from adding to the Bible. Just man.

If anything this proscription in Revelation testifies of the Apostasy. Why put this in unless John has reason to believe that there were people who would change his words? He had already seen the other writings of the Apostles tampered with and wanted to make sure nothing was tampered with in his book.

Have you read the Book of Mormon? What part do you like the most? What does it teach that you dont like?

Have you read any of the Doctrine and Covenants? Same questions as above.

[Follower]

So we are supposed to give specifics, but you don't have to? that's not how it works, you were asked a couple of times so far to provide evidence of where the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible, so far you have ignored that question and even admited you've not studied the Book of Mormon.

Who asked me to provide evidence that the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible? Which post # did they ask this?

[Steele]

[...]

Why is there a need for a second witness?

[...]

Because that's the pattern the Lord has set to establish His word -- read the following verses for further clarification:

Deut. 17:6

Deut. 19:15

Matt. 18:16

2 Cor. 13:1

1 Tim. 5:19

Rev. 11:3

[snipe123]

Who asked me to provide evidence that the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible? Which post # did they ask this?

I did.

[snipe123]

Because that's the pattern the Lord has set to establish His word -- read the following verses for further clarification:

Deut. 17:6

Deut. 19:15

Matt. 18:16

2 Cor. 13:1

1 Tim. 5:19

Rev. 11:3

A second witness also exposes heretical teachings and interpretations of The Bible...It also provides a second witness to those who do not accept the Bible as Holy Writ, i.e. Non-christians...It says, here is a second nation full of prophets who saw the risen Lord and testified to his divinity...

[snipe123]

There really isnt anything to think about. John is speaking about the Book of revelation. There was no Bible when he wrote the line. He wrote his Gospel and Epistles afterwards, so if it was about the Bible, then he condemned himself to hell for adding to it. In order to take the "refering to the whole Bible" argument seriously one has to be completely ignorant of historical details on how the Bible was compiled, context, who did the compiling.

Even if we assume that the "whole Bible" interpretation is adopted and accepted as absolute truth, nothing in the verse prevents God from adding to the Bible. Just man.

If anything this proscription in Revelation testifies of the Apostasy. Why put this in unless John has reason to believe that there were people who would change his words? He had already seen the other writings of the Apostles tampered with and wanted to make sure nothing was tampered with in his book.

Have you read the Book of Mormon? What part do you like the most? What does it teach that you dont like?

Have you read any of the Doctrine and Covenants? Same questions as above.

I would also add that Revelation 22:18-19 is a punishment against men who produce counterfit scripture...Which was common after the death of the apostles by the way...it is also a warning of divine punishment to men who take away from it...So here is an interesting thing...Why would God prescribe a punishment for a crime that is impossible to commit? If it was not possible for men to remove "plain and precious things" from the Bible (as Mormons believe has happened) then why does God prescribe a punishment for an impossible crime...If is was not possible for wicked men to remove something from his word, God would say something like: "It is not possible to add or take away from the words or prophecies of this book..."

So the question is: How do you determine that scripture is divine or not divine? It is not by asking if it contradicts or agrees with the Bible, since that is subject to your own interpretation, prejudices, preconceived ideas, and fallacies... You study it and ask God if it is his word, plain and simple...the Bible is not true simply because it is The Bible...Its true because the Holy Spirit of God has enlarged your soul when you have read it and you have a witness of The Spirit that it is true...The same experience can be had when reading The Book of Mormon...

[snipe123]

I believe God has the ability to add to His Word whenever He wants.

If that's what you believe, then why do you reject a book that claims to be his word on the basis that you have heard that it contradicts the Bible or because you think that Mormonism contradicts The Bible...Again, as I read The Bible, I find that it agrees quite nicely with The Book of Mormon...of course I may interpret The Bible differently than you do...A book claiming to be Gods word, does require a bit more attention...Read it, and see for yourself...

No, I have not had time to study every belief system under heaven. This should not disqualify me, or anyone else for that matter, from challenging the basic claims of a belief system that I believe to be in contradiction to the Bible. You've likely heard the old story (whether true or not, I don't know) about those who are able to detect counterfeit money. They do not spend all of their time studying the counterfeit, but rather they spend their time studying the original so that they can spot the counterfeit when it comes along.

I did not ask you about a belief system...I asked you about the book that you say contradicts The Bible...How can you make that claim when you have never read it? Oh, because an anti-mormon book made that assertion or a preacher did? Do you think they are not subject to their own prejudices and fallacies? Is their intellect so superior that you are willing to take their word for it? Do you believe God answers prayers? Have you received answers to prayers? If you have, then you know what it is like to be inspired by The Holy Spirit...Why not trust the Holy Spirit as your guide for how you interpret scripture, and how you determine whether or not a book is divine or not?

Because it says so.

This is a very dissapointing answer...I asked you a sincere question...I want to know why you believe The Bible is The word of God...YOur answer is rather flipant and dismissive...You believe The Bible is Gods word because the Bible says so...This is faulty reasoning...This is akin to lifting oneself by ones own boot straps...If you believe it for that reason only, then you should have no problem accepting The Book of Mormon because it "says so." Or you certainly can't criticize me if I say it. Why hold Mormons to a higher standard than you give yourself?

I was hoping perhaps you would share your testimony here...What is your purpose on this forum? Are you here just to tear down someone elses religion, to share some of your own, or just to look smart in an argument? I think if you really think about why you believe the Bible, you can have a better answer than this...I might add another question to this: Why do you believe that Jesus is your personal Savior? Why do you believe he died for you?

I believe he died for me because I have had a witness of The Spirit...I have felt the guilt for my sins washed away by his blood...I have felt my soul enlarged when I ponder and live by his teachings...they are delicious to me...There are some other more personal conversion experiences I had with the savior while pondering Luke 2 on CHristmas Eve that I will keep to myself, but suffice it to say, I believe he was born all those centuries ago, and I believe he died for my sins, and that he wis risen on the third day etc...

I also believe The Book of Mormon to be the word of God for the same reasons I believe the Bible, and those reasons mirror pretty closely the reasons I believe Jesus is my savior...Because The Holy Spirit says so...:)

[Doctor Steuss]

[...]

What do we need to know? Are you questioning the power of Christ, who is able to "save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through Him? (Hebrews 7:25) Are these words in the book of Hebrews not true anymore?

It doesn't appear to me that I am the one limiting and questioning His power.

[snipe123]

I do not believe that I said the Bible is all that we need, for there are many other things that humans need to survive.

I said that "the books of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation are sufficient to teach us all we need to know concerning 'life and godliness'."

This idea comes from 2 Peter 1:3 and 2 Timothy 3:16. If you look at the 2 Peter passage, he uses the past tense, saying to his readers, "His [Christ's] divine power HAS GIVEN to us all things that pertain to life and godliness." So my question is, if we've already been given all that we need, what new knowledge empowering God's people for life and godliness has been given to us through the Mormon church that isn't mentioned in the Bible?

So that's the wrong question: A better question would be: If Christ gave us "all things" as Peter says, then why did Peter feel it necessary to write a letter"...to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ..."(2 Peter 1:1) He was writing to believers who had obtained "all things" through Christ, so why did he need to write them a letter and why do we bother reading it? The answer is given by Peter himself after exorting them to all forms of godliness and faithfulness when he says:

8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the aeverlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

12 Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.

He was not telling his readers that all the Bible from Genesis to Revelation are sufficient to teach us what we need to know concerning "life and Godliness" since some of those books did not exist yet, nor were they officially canonized until centuries after he wrote this letter... He was however exhorting them to further dilligence and reminding them of how their election is to be made sure..."if ye do these things ye shall never fail..."

In short, he was doing what prophets and apostles do, which is testify to things that are true, exhort men to greater virtue and chastize them for vice(among other things)...Look at the letters of Paul...He does all of these things and he customizes those letters to his readers...He does not say to the Corinthians..."For instruction, please see the letter I wrote to the Galtians..." He wrote to each city or congregation and upbraided them or praised them depending on their faithfulness...He taught some one thing, and to some he taught other things depending on the need of the Saints in that city...

The scripture you site 2Timothy 3:16 is one of my absolute favorites...but here is a little more: 2 Timothy 3:15-17

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

This verse is very curious...Timothy is informed that the scriptures as he presently had them (i.e, not the same as we have them, since he obviously did not have this letter(2Timothy) since he was a child, which we now regard as scripture...he is just now reading it!) "...are able to make thee wise unto salvation..." So why do we read 2 Timothy and regard it as scripture, if the scriptures Timothy had since he was a child were able to make him wise unto salvation through faith on the Lord?

Verse 16 does not say "All scripture HAS been given...

Rather, it says "All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable FOR..." In other words This scripture is telling us the purpose of scripture, not saying it has all been given...he is saying all scripture is profitable for...and then lists all of the things that it does for us...

You will note that many of the apostolic books of the Bible are condemning heresy and they attempt to preserve the pure teachings of the Gospel...This is what men with GOds authority do...They expound, exhort, teach, preach, and testify...and their words become scripture...Many "plain and precious" truths were lost through the centuries...much of it was lost not just because men corrupted the letter of the text, but they also corrupted it by interpretation...So we need additional scripture, and the guidance and instruction of prophets to restore the true interpretation of things (to restore order and orthodox christian teachings)as well as the guidance of The Holy Spirit as we study their words...past and present...

EDITED FOR TYPOs...though I probably missed some...haha

[Steele]

Excellent -- very well said, Isaac.

Two kinds of people in this world -- leaders and uh, well, <acronym title='Touché!'>followers</acronym>......

[avatar4321]

No, I have not had time to study every belief system under heaven. This should not disqualify me, or anyone else for that matter, from challenging the basic claims of a belief system that I believe to be in contradiction to the Bible. You've likely heard the old story (whether true or not, I don't know) about those who are able to detect counterfeit money. They do not spend all of their time studying the counterfeit, but rather they spend their time studying the original so that they can spot the counterfeit when it comes along.

And how do you expect to spot the counterfeit if you never look at it? While its true that you more easily recognize counterfeits by knowing the original well, it still requires you to look at the supposed counterfeit before you can tell the difference.

All you've really dont is shown us you know what a dollar bill looks like and youll see 100 dollar bills as counterfeit. Its all money.

[Doctor Steuss]

Can you give any specifics?

Just from the apocryphal Book of Enoch we have:

Enoch 64: 4 (compare to Matthew 3: 17)

Enoch 6: 9 (compare to Matthew 5: 5)

Enoch 50: 2,4,5 (compare to Luke 21: 28, Matthew 22: 30 and Matthew 13: 43)

Enoch 96: 6,7,25 (compare to James 5: 1 and Luke 6: 24)

Enoch 96: 6,7,25 (compare to Luke 12)

Enoch 105: 26 (compare to Matthew 19: 28)

Enoch 62: 11 (compare to Romans 2: 11)

Enoch 38: 2 (compare to Matthew 26: 24)

Enoch 19: 2 (compare to 1 Corinthians 10: 20)

Enoch 22: 10,12 (compare to Luke 16: 26)

Enoch 39: 3,4,7 (compare to 2 Corinthians 12 and Revelation 19: 1)

Enoch 46: 2 (compare to Colossians 2: 3)

Enoch 9: 3,4 (compare to Revelation 17: 14; 19: 16 and 4: 11. Also Hebrews 4: 13)

Enoch 24: 11,10 (compare to Revelation 22: 2, Revelation 2: 7 and Revelation 22: 14)

Enoch 85: 2 (compare to Revelation 9: 1)

Enoch 60: 13 (compare to 2 Thessalonians 1)

Enoch 10: 15,16 (compare to Jude 6, 2 Peter 2: 4, and Revelation 20: 1-3)

Enoch 21: 56 (compare to Revelation 30: 1-3)

Enoch 79 (compare to Matt 24: 7, 21,22,29,30)

Enoch 47: 3 (compare to Revelation 20: 11-13, 15)

Enoch 40: 1 (compare to Revelation 5: 11)

Enoch 45: 3 (compare to Matthew 25: 31, 32)

Enoch 45: 4 (compare to Revelation 7: 15 and 2 Peter 3: 13)

Enoch 92: 17 (compare to Revelation 22: 1)

Enoch 61: 4-9 (compare to 2 Thessalonians 1: 9, 1 Thessalonians 5: 3, 2 Thessalonians 2: 8, and Matthew 25: 31)

Enoch 66: 5-8 (compare to Matthew 13: 42, Matthew 25: 41 and Revelation 20: 10)

Enoch 104 (compare to 1 Timothy 4: 12)

Enoch 48: 1-7 (John 4: 14 and Revelation 21: 6)

Enoch 48 (Galatians 1: 4, 1 John 2: 15)

The above are taken from the introduction of The Book of Enoch the Prophet: Translated by Richard Laurence, LL.D. Archbishop of Cashel, (London; Kegan, Paul, Trench&Co., 1883). Also one scholar has noted that:

"The influence of 1 Enoch on the New Testament has been greater than that of all the other apocryphal and pseudepigraphical books taken together." (Charles, R.H., The Book of Enoch (London: Oxford U. Press, 1913), p. xcv)

There are even Old Testament authors that “plagiarize” each other. For example compare Isaiah 2:2-4 with Micah 4:1-3. Also Obadiah 1:1-4 and Jeremiah 49:14-16. There are a few more from Obadiah 1 and Jeremiah 49, but I’m too lazy to flesh all of them out right now. And from the New Testament we have the epistle of Jude and 2 Peter (I believe it’s chapter 2). Somebody was copying someone (or perhaps both of them were copying a Q source).

Then from the OT to the NT, we have such things as the angel in Revelation 2:27 “plagiarizing” the words of Psalm 2:9. John seemed to be the ultimate “plagiarist.” From the Interpreter’s Bible (12:358) there’s this nice insight into John: “John was thoroughly acquainted with the Old Testament, and quoted or alludes to it throughout his book. It has been estimated that 278 verses out of a total of 404 contain references of one kind or another to the Old Testament.... yet in no case does he specifically mention a book of the Jewish scripture...” Also, compare the “hypothetical” involving the widow in Luke 20 (also in Mark 12… maybe Mark was “plagiarizing” Luke) with the Book of Tobit.

Even the “Golden Rule” existed within other religions (such as Zoroastrianism) long before Christ said it (perhaps He was “plagiarizing.”)

You should be careful. I got reprimanded for not engaging in congenial discussion.

You are right. It was unChristian of me to respond with the same form of vitriol that you used. My apologies.

But Scripture has more than one author, unless you contend that all the books of the Bible were directly written by the finger of God.

I hold no such position, and thank goodness you aren’t one of those “G-d-breathed” fanatics. It appears we may have found at least a little common ground. However, I do believe that the source is the same for all scripture (would you not agree?). The authors are receiving their inspiration from the same source (whether it be tradition or G-d) and as such one shouldn’t be surprised if common themes and verbiage appear within various texts that claim to be derived from the same source (i.e. Christ and/or G-d the Father and/or the Holy Spirit).

However, this idea would contradict at least some books of the New Testament (Romans 16:22, 1 Corinthians 16:21, 2 Corinthians 13:10, Galatians 6:11)

How so? Paul is signing his own epistles. I’m not sure how you can equate a given author assigning authorship to himself in an ecclesiastical epistle with scriptural books quoting each other (especially when current Biblical scholarship contests the authorship attribution of some books [such as there being more than one “Isaiah” that wrote the book of Isaiah]) with attribution.

Since Scripture has more than one author, wouldn't it have been prudent to cite both of them? In the Bible, most quotations say, "As it is written..." or "This is what was uttered by the prophet Joel"...or "For David says concerning Him" etc.

And there are such instances in the Book of Mormon where similar verbiage is used to designate the writings of a given scriptural author. And there are also instances where the Bible doesn’t give attribution. It seems to me you are trying to apply a double-standard.

However, when you compare Moroni 10 with 1 Corinthians 12:1-11, the writer makes no reference to Paul as the author.

So, would you have no qualm if Moroni attributed his words to Paul? Seems to me that would be a huge red flag. This is probably one of those instances where a critic who isn’t actually out to learn but instead coming under the guise of a sincere questioner who actually just wants to debate. If I show there are differences, you will probably claim that it is “changing the Bible” or “contradicting the Bible.” If there are similarities, then of course it is “plagiarism.

Here are the passages from Corinthians that you claim are “plagiarized” in Moroni without attribution to Paul:

1 NOW concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.

6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

I have gone over the Chapter in Moroni to find this blatant “plagiarism” that you think deserves attribution to Paul. There are a few passages (not exactly what you implied/conveyed by stating verses 1-11 of Corinthians and the entire chapter of Moroni; but maybe that was an oversight on your part) that could possibly be deemed as plagiarism. However the majority of those with striking resemblance have subtleties that give it almost a Midrashic quality. Here is a verse by verse analysis (which I’m sure you’ve already done yourself, but for the benefit of others I hope you’ll bear with me).

First, we have verse 1 in the Corinthians passages. The following verse is the closest thing to “plagiarism” within the Moroni chapter that I can find (perhaps you have a different verse in mind?).

19 And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that he is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand, only according to the unbelief of the children of men.

Hardly damning, and only strenuously plagiaristic.

Next; verse 2 of the Corinthians passages. There is no use of the words “Gentiles,” “carried,” “dumb,” “idols,” nor “led” within the Moroni chapter. There is usage of “away” (such as in verses 1, 19, 24, 26), but the context is completely different than that of the Corinthian passage. So, this verse is definitely not plagiarized.

In comparing verse 3 to Moroni, I find no usage of “understand,” “no man,” “calleth,” “Jesus” (although it does use “Christ”), “accursed” (I even did a search for “curse” and got nothing within the Moroni text), and nothing saying that “Christ” is the Lord. There is a verse (27) that uses “speaking,” but it says “…even as one speaking out of the dust”. There are also two verses that use “Spirit of God” (8 and 9); however, if you take a moment to read them (which I’m sure you’ve already done), you will see that they are in no way plagiarizing (especially when you consider that it is a phrase from the Old Testament [samuel 19:20 for example]). In verses 6 & 7 (below) there is a theme that someone can know that Christ “is” by the power of the Holy Ghost which is vaguely similar to what Paul is saying in the Corinthian book, but hopefully by comparing the two again, you can determine if your previous analysis of plagiarism for verse 3 of the Corinthian chapter was correct:

6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.

7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.

So far, we have three verses (which from your post are claimed to be plagiarized without attribution) that don’t appear to have been plagiarized. Maybe you have some verses though from your research that shows these are actually plagiarized in the Moroni chapter(?) I guess we can move onto verse 4 now.

In the Moroni text we find the following passage:

8 And again, I exhort you, my brethren, that ye deny not the gifts of God, for they are many; and they come from the same God. And there are different ways that these gifts are administered; but it is the same God who worketh all in all; and they are given by the manifestations of the Spirit of God unto men, to profit them.

So far, this is probably the closest thing to “plagiarism” that I’ve found (perhaps you meant to say verses 4-12 in lieu of 1-12…). There are subtle differences between the themes though. The Greek word diairesis denotes a division or distinction. We find no such parallel about the “gifts” in the Moroni passage. Instead, Moroni seems to only delineate the gifts by saying that there are different ways that they are “administered.” The gifts seem to have no division other than the way they are “administered” (unlike Paul’s usage of diairesis). Also, Paul tells us that the gifts are coming from the same “Spirit,” yet Moroni attributes them not to the “Spirit,” but to G-d Himself. So, although on the surface it appeared we might have a tenuous (at best) case for plagiarism; in reality we have yet another verse that wasn’t plagiarized.

Maybe we will find our damning plagiarism without attribution in verse 5. Now, this one seems pretty damning; at least on the surface. In Moroni 8, we have “…different ways that these gifts are administered; but it is the same G-d who worketh all in all…”, and then in Corinthians we have “And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.” The only problem being that “ways that these gifts are administered” is not the same as “differences of administrations.” “Administrations” (Greek: diakonia) are offices within the church (such as deacons). Although “administered” and “administrations” would appear to be synonymous to the biased axe-grinding mind, they are in actuality not completely synonymous.

In verse 6 we find that there are “diversities of operations.” In the Moroni text there is only one use of “divers” (not even “diversities”) and it is speaking about the kinds of tongues. We do however have a similar phrase between Corinthians and Moroni. In verse 8 of Moroni we find “but it is the same God who worketh all in all.” Perhaps this is indeed a case. Then again, maybe the phraseology isn’t so unbelievably uncommon that Paul could be the only source. I’m sure we can agree that the concept of the “same G-d” isn’t exactly something Paul came up with on his own. As for the phrase “all in all,” it is a common idiom (Paul unfortunately doesn’t have a trademark on it). We do have an interesting variant though (why would our scoundrel of a “plagiarist” take the time to change the one word?). Could it be that someone ingrained with a high Christology and pre Deuteronomist Israelite tradition still thought of G-d in anthropomorphic terms in lieu of the more nebulous Greek philosophy that Pauline theology somewhat began to introduce? Of course not, the only correct answer must damn Mormonism and lift up the Bible to its place of idolatrous worship. But, I will grant that the latter half of verse six could be deemed plagiarism.

Verse 7. If we look to Moroni verse 8 (again) we will find the potential parallel. In it we read:

”…and they are given by the manifestations of the Spirit of God unto men, to profit them.”

Verse 7 of Corinthians reads:

”But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.”

So, we have “manifestation of the Spirit” which are given (to every man in Paul’s writing, but just “unto men” in Moroni’s) “to profit.” Although the subtleties (and the subject matter) are not necessarily unique to Pauline theology, and the themes and tradition most likely share a common source, I will grant this one as well.

Now to verse 8 of the Corinthian passages. We find a commonality with verses 9 and 10 of the Moroni passage:

9 For behold, to one is given by the Spirit of God, that he may teach the word of wisdom;

10 And to another, that he may teach the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

The Corinthian passage reads thus:

8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

Once again we have similar themes with subtleties which alter the overall context and expand upon it (much like a Midrash). We could strenuously deem this one as “plagiarism” as well. Despite the subtleties and expansion of thoughts (which technically absolve this of the claim to “plagiarism”) I will grant this one as well. However, is it possible that such a theme and concept was existent within Jewish theology (much like the intro to Proverbs or that of Elihu found in Job 34)?

In verse 9 of the Corinthian passage we find a parallel passage in Moroni (verse 11). The concepts of healing and faith are not unique to Paul, but I will grant this one as well.

In verse 10 we find another Midrash type of scripture within Moroni (verses 12-16). Once again it is taking the concepts and expounding upon them. The author of the Moroni text evidently has a different source than Paul or has a deeper understanding than Paul. However, I will grant this one.

Verse 11 of Corinthians has a parallel in verse 17 of the Moroni passages. I would say that this is probably the greatest example where the two texts agree. However, once again there are slight differences. But, I will also grant this one.

So, we actually (despite your claims that Moroni 10 so closely resembled Corinthians 1-12 that Paul should have been attributed as the author) have only a handful of verses with subtle differences that actually expound upon the text.

Now, I’m sure that the subtle differences between the texts and the (now diminished) plagiarism that you somehow came up with in your personal research and study of Corinthians and the Book of Mormon will likely cause you to decry that the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible or some such tripe. In the end though, I don’t see any worse “plagiarism” between the Book of Mormon and Bible passages you mentioned than I do between Enoch and the verses I cited in the introduction to this post. You are more than welcome to continue to employ your double standard though.

There are many other quotes like this from the Mormon Scriptures with no reference given.

And there are many within the Bible. Once again it appears you aren’t out to learn but instead apply your double standards in order to debate and demean.

Do you have any references for these assertions?

Besides the laundry list I already provided (such as Christ directly quoting Enoch 94:8 in Luke 6:24 without attribution)?

False witness? Are you aware of what Revelation 21 says? "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

Do you think this is speaking of adding to or taking away from the book of Revelation only, or of the whole Bible?

Well, given that the Gospel of John, 1 and 2 Timothy, 1 2 and 3 John, and 2 Peter were most likely written after the Apocalypse of John was written, I’d hope for the sake of all of those Christians lugging those books in their Bibles that it only applies to the Book of Revelation.

Are you aware of what Deuteronomy 4:2 says? “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.”

Do you think this is speaking of adding or taking away from the book of Deuteronomy only, or the whole Bible? I would hope that you don’t have a double standard that you utilize as a polemic against those who have additional holy writ.

[snipe123]

Great post Doc as expected...I did have a question...I was recently talking about the midrashic atributes of scripture with a good friend of mine who introduced me this topic, and I am eager to study more about it...Any references you can point me to, to understand this subject more fully?

[Doctor Steuss]

Great post Doc as expected...I did have a question...I was recently talking about the midrashic atributes of scripture with a good friend of mine who introduced me this topic, and I am eager to study more about it...Any references you can point me to, to understand this subject more fully?

Two of the online ones that I dig can be found here and here (this one is actually an online book). There was an article in Dialogue (sorry don't have the source and I'm too lazy to find it) that proposed that the Book of Moses was actually a kind of Midrash. In a lot of ways, I'd venture to say that much of Nephi's commentary on Isaiah is essentially a Midrash (although technically he was probably being guided by "the spirit" in his exegesis in lieu of applying middot). If you go to this article and scroll down a bit it kind of explains middot.

[snipe123]

Two of the online ones that I dig can be found here and here (this one is actually an online book). There was an article in Dialogue (sorry don't have the source and I'm too lazy to find it) that proposed that the Book of Moses was actually a kind of Midrash. In a lot of ways, I'd venture to say that much of Nephi's commentary on Isaiah is essentially a Midrash (although technically he was probably being guided by "the spirit" in his exegesis in lieu of applying middot). If you go to this article and scroll down a bit it kind of explains middot.

Funny you should mention Nephi/Isaiah since that is what we were talking about...:) Thanks for the links!

[Doctor Steuss]

Funny you should mention Nephi/Isaiah since that is what we were talking about...:) Thanks for the links!

I just found this (I haven't read it though), maybe it will give some insights...: 2 Nephi 26 and 27 as Midrash

[deblldo]

ok i am new here but even i can see that follower does not wish to join the church of jesus christ and the latter day saints. and has no interest (and would even go so far as to say thinks you guys are wrong) as far as the book of mormon goes.

now im guessing follower is a christian (correct me if im wrong) but i personally believe its not very christian like to come on a forum and argue with people about their faith.

i too was ignorant to any thing else that any other "church" had to say however i learned that with God anything is possible.

im happy that you are so grounded in your faith there are many that are not, but somtimes it can also make you blinkered to what else God wants you to know.

i guess what i am saying is that we welcome you here and if you dont believe everything you read here that is your opnion, and we have ours.

we are all going to stand strong in our faith i just dont see what coming on here and saying what we believe is wrong is going to accomplish? does it bring glory to God to argue amongst ourselves? does it make us better christians?

i think somtimes we lose sight of whats important , we start to judge or attack others simply because we dont understand or dont not wish to. It is ultimatley God that will judge so lets leave it to Him.

[mnn727]

Follwer said:>>However, when you compare Moroni 10 with 1 Corinthians 12:1-11, the writer makes no reference to Paul as the author.

Reply>> How could Paul be the author when there was no contact between the Nephites and the Jews of the middle east? Moroni was repeating what Christ told him as was Paul, or do you expect Gods message to change depending on who he is talking to??

You could just as easily claim that they were BOTH plagerizing God

[mnn727]

I would also add that Revelation 22:18-19 is a punishment against men who produce counterfit scripture...Which was common after the death of the apostles by the way...it is also a warning of divine punishment to men who take away from it...So here is an interesting thing...Why would God prescribe a punishment for a crime that is impossible to commit? If it was not possible for men to remove "plain and precious things" from the Bible (as Mormons believe has happened) then why does God prescribe a punishment for an impossible crime...If is was not possible for wicked men to remove something from his word, God would say something like: "It is not possible to add or take away from the words or prophecies of this book..."

This is GOOD!!!, VERY GOOD!

[snipe123]

This is GOOD!!!, VERY GOOD!

Thanks M. Writing a paper on the subject just for the heck of it actually...

[MorningStar]

This is GOOD!!!, VERY GOOD!

I agree! I often wondered if that was the reason for those words in Revelation - that people were actually attempting to change or add to scripture at the time. It makes you wonder how many of them succeeded.