Some questions for Mormons


xanmad33
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 449
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have a feeling this will come down to your interpretation and our interpretation of Biblical scripture. You will quote a biblical verse and say it means 'X', and we will say that same verse means 'Y'.

We are very interested in the truth, and we feel we have a good handle on that. If you would like to take it one concept at a time, then let's talk. So far, the shotgun approach you have taken gets unweildy and does not allow for good dialogue. Pick a concept, any concept, and lets see what we can converse about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you care to read, here is a rebuttal for all the evidences posted,(i found this online)

The first Mormon argument against the final authority of the New Testament is the claim that some of Jesus' teachings were intentionally never recorded because of their sacred nature; these teachings are said to have been lost soon after the time of the apostles. Hugh Nibley, emeritus professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University, develops this theory in his book, Since Cumorah.3 Nibley notes that the New Testament records various occasions on which Jesus met privately with Peter, James, and John, such as at the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-9; see also Mark 9:2-13, Luke 9:28-36, 2 Peter 1:16-18).4 However, a careful reading of these texts shows that they do not support the idea of secret, unrecorded revelation. There is no hint that the three disciples received new teaching. It is not doctrine but an experience they are told to keep confidential, and this, only temporarily: "As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen from the dead" (Matthew 17:9). The fact that this incident is described in four different New Testament books, three of which were penned by non-participants (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), obviously demonstrates that Peter, James and John shared their experience with others in the early Christian community and that it did not go unrecorded.

But not only is Nibley's notion of secret, unrecorded revelation entirely speculative, it is contradicted by Christ's own explicit declaration to the contrary. When questioned under oath5 before the Sanhedrin about his disciples and doctrine, Jesus testified:

I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said (John 18:20-21).

Jesus' instructions to his disciples elsewhere are consistent with his testimony before the Sanhedrin, and show that none of his teaching was reserved for an inner circle of initiates: "what I tell you in the darkness, that speak ye in the light; and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops" (Matthew 10:27). Thus, on the basis of Jesus' own unequivocal testimony, the idea of secret, unrecorded teachings must be rejected.

Matthew 7

6 ¶ Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Matthew 13

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

These two scriptures show that there are sacred teachings that are not meant for "unbelievers" or those who are not ready to hear them.

Yes, Jesus spoke openly, but did not reveal the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven to just anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sure this discussion (as a whole) has gotten more then what I can catch up to.

Why do you believe that about the Bible?

Because there are contradictions in the bible.

And why do you believe we don't have all the books that God intended for there to be in there?

From my point of view, the Book of Mormon tells me that. From your point of view I don’t know. I would have to assume that if there was other writings of Paul, that those are just as important as any of his other writings? Even more, the bible just doesn’t have it all. What age do you baptize? How is the priesthood given? (if it is at all?) How is the Holy Ghost given? I can’t see how there would be so many churches if the bible was so clear on all these different aspects.

I guess you would have to clarify why you believe every book in the bible is all there is?

Further how do you determine what to believe, or to not believe?

By the spirit.

What would ever lead you to the belief that God "always intended to have more than the Bible" The Bible doesnt say that! It says exactly the opposite.

Again this is kind of coming from different points of view.

I believe that Ezekiel talked about this.

(Ezekiel 37:15-17.)

15 ¶ The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,

16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

Why do I believe that? Because the Book of Mormon points it out.

(2 Nephi 3:11-12.)

11 But a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins—and not to the bringing forth my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have already gone forth among them.

12 Wherefore, the fruit of thy loins shall write; and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.

The same could be said about John 10:16 and 3 Nephi 15:16-22. But I don’t think you well share that view. How can I prove that by the bible alone that is all there is? I can’t. But if allow the book of mormon to come in, then the proof is there.

The criteria in the Bible for prophets is also very strict, The Bible specifically warns of false prophets who will teach "another gospel" centered around "another Jesus," and witnessed to by "another spirit" (2 Corinthians 11:4,13-15; Galatians 1:6-9).

So, to have false prophets, that also would mean there are true prophets? Do you know of any today? Are all prophets that are on the earth now false prophets?

What could a prophet teach that is wouldn’t contradict the bible in some way?

I don’t really see where this is going. I guess for me (sense I don’t know where this form has gone) I would think it probably would be better if you starts a thread on YOUR contradictions of the book of mormon vs. the Bible? But even that is just coming back down to interpretations. Our interpretation is going to be based of other scriptures. I suggest you try to get copy of Marvelous Work and a Wonder. It is back to interpretation, but I think you would have a better view point of how we VIEW things.

I guess I would like to know were you think the book of mormon came from? Just made up? Lucky guesses? Joseph Smiths way of rewriting the bible? From Satan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is precisely why the Lord prepared another people to write a new testmant of Jesus Christ. "Out of the mouths of two or more witnesses shall every word be established". The Lord has given us further revelations necessary that are not in the Bible. As you said, "because the stuff just isn't there."

Joseph Smith began work on correcting the Bible through revelation from the Lord, but never had a chance to finish it, but what he did manage to finish shows some significant differences (Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible).

Also, when Nephi's family departed from Jerusalem, they took with them brass plates that contained the history of the Jews from the time of Adam down to their present time (reign of Zedekiah) including the five books of Moses, the prophets and their lineage. Nephi particularly understood and taught from Isaiah and even included many of Isaiah's chapters in his own volume. Consider and compare 2 Nephi chapter 27 with Isaiah chapter 29, which prophesy of of the apostacy, the coming of the Book of Mormon, the three witnesses, and the restored gospel (a marvelous work and a wonder). Isaiah knew all about this and wrote about it. Had the clergymen, scribes, editors, etc of the early churches kept this portion of Isaiah's words, that would have posed a threat to the early church, but instead altered or removed scriptures as they saw fit.

Nephi also saw our day and understood the scriptures that he had brought with his family and relished the words of Isaiah so much that he copied many of Isaiah's chapters for our benefit. The bottom line is either our church is the restored church of Christ, built upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, with Christ Himself as the cornerstone and revelation being the rock of His church or as President Hinckley said at one time, "...or we are a fraud". But we stand by our convictions, revelations and testimonies for it is only through revelation that we can know the truth of things, know the fullness of the gospel and continue to receive revelation through our prophet concerning His church in our time. It cannot be any simpler than this.

I am not a scholar or a learned theologian, but I can share my witness to you.

The only challenge I can offer you in all sincerity is to ponder this in your heart and as Moroni exhorts us in chapter 10 verses 3-5, pray to your Father in Heaven with real intent and if you truly are ready and willing to live according to your answer, He will manifest the truth to you by the power of the Holy Ghost. But you must have a sincere heart, real intent and faith that He will reveal His truths to you.

The "stuff" I was referring to, are all the new doctrines in the Mormon books of faith that are no where to be found in the Bible, including stark contradictions on issues as serious and plain as who God was.

all these things you speak of are from your books of faith, my question before I can believe the Book of Mormon or any other book of Mormon faith is, the reliability of those books vs. the reliability of the BIble.

said better than I: "Reputable scholars, both Christian and non-Christian, can attest to the accuracy of the Bible’s historical accounts, language translation, and interpretation throughout time. As the most influential written document of all time, the many manuscripts we have that make up the Bible have undergone superb scrutiny from it’s very beginning. The Bible has been studied for thousands of years. It is historically accurate, supported by science in many, many regards, superbly translated into many different languages without losing meaning, and the few uncertainties that result from the loss of many of the original manuscripts (mind you, we still have the copies….the copies that underwent such intense scrutiny) have proven to be insignificant in light of the Bible’s real message.

The ONLY thing that is disputed by reputable scholars is whether or not it is the divinely inspired Word of God. And that is because such belief requires faith."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok lets pretend for a minute I believe the Book of Mormon, If I truly believe the Book of Mormon, doctrinally, how do I accept the Doctrine and Covenants or Pearl of Great Price ?These books teach different concepts that often contradict the BOM.

And in regard to the Bible, does translation always lessen scripture's value or change its teaching?

What about the Book of Mormon? How many translations have been made of it? Is it less reliable in French or German?

Does the church put a disclaimer on the Book of Mormon in other languages for translational errors as they do with the Bible? If not, why not?

If professional LDS translators can reliably take the English Book of Mormon into French, why can't professional translators take the Greek New Testament into English?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been told that LDS people believe God is continually giving new revelation to their prophet. How do you guard against false teachings?

If your prophet gave a revelation that differed from church teachings in the past, how do you determine which to follow?

Christians hold their ministers accountable to the Bible. (See Galatians 1:7-12 and 1 John 4:1) The early Christians compared Paul's teachings with the Old Testament in Acts 17:11-12. What is the standard for Mormons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Book of Mormon is true, that means that Joseph Smith was visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ and was called to restore Christ's church upon the earth, the authority to act in God's name, the Priesthood to baptize and perform other ordinances and so on. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith was not a fraud. If Joseph Smith was not a fraud, then the revelations that he received and recorded in the D&C, etc are true and the The LDS church is the Lord's living church on the earth today, led by a prophet who speaks directly with the Lord. These facts all work in harmony together. Scriptures are subject to interpretation. That is why we have a prophet. We are not led by scholars. We are led by a living prophet who speaks with God, just as Isaiah did, and as Moses, and Noah, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even within our church there are those who are lowly and also learned who sometimes interpret scriptures differently. It is then that we can rely on what our correlated lesson manuals, which have been approved by our prophet and general authorities to keep us in harmony with the Lord's teachings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I've heard the ones you are about to refer to. You won't be the first to. They have been addressed before. I think I've shared all that I can. As I said, we are either the true church or a fraud. On opposite sides of the fence you may feel secure with your scholars. I will follow my prophet. Have a nice day. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im secure in the Word of God not my scholars, but I do believe God gave us the ability to think and reason for A reason ;)

here are a few flase prophesys I found with a quick search, and let me guess....your church had explained away all these things too?

Saints to gather to Independence, Mo. and build Temple (D&C 84)

No longer teach the gathering and temple never built.

Zion (Independence, Mo.) can not fall (D&C 97:19)

Mormons driven out.

Civil War Prophecy (D&C 87)

England and other nations did not join in.

United Order (D&C 104)

V.1 Commanded as everlasting order; V.48 & 53 dissolved and reorganized

Riches of Salem to pay church debt (D&C 111)

No riches found, debts not paid.

Apostle Patten to go on mission in Spring 1839 (D&C 114)

He was shot in Oct. of 1838. Wouldn't God have known he was going to die before the next spring?

New gathering place and temple in Far West (D&C 115)

LDS driven out, never built the temple.

Build a temple in Nauvoo and house for Smiths (D&C 124)

Temple and house not completed

Christ to return in 1890-1891 period (D&C 130:14-15)

Christ did not return.

US Government must redress wrongs or be destroyed (History of the Church, vol.5, p.394, vol.6, p.116 and Millennial Star, vol.22, p.455.)

It doesn't and is not destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, these have been picked apart by someone else on this forum. You won't be the last to bring them here. Nothing I can say or anyone else can convince you. It's not my job nor our job to convince you. And yes, I'm a lot smarter than you give me credit for not to think for myself, but it is not beyond me to humble myself before the Lord and seek His council directly even when our prophet speaks to us on His behalf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know that your prophet is not leading you astray?

You need to gain your own personal testimony of the prophet through study and prayer and living by faith in their teachings.

Are there any specific teachings of our prophets that cause you concern, that you feel would be leading you astray?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people all over the world have come up with different beliefs about God. Obviously sincerity and prayer are not enough to guard against false claims. That is why God has given us the Bible, so that we will have a standard measurement for truth claims.

While Christians value prayer and seek direction from God, that is not the Biblical method of testing a prophet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok lets pretend for a minute I believe the Book of Mormon, If I truly believe the Book of Mormon, doctrinally, how do I accept the Doctrine and Covenants or Pearl of Great Price ?These books teach different concepts that often contradict the BOM.

Can you give an example. I know of no teachings in the D&C, or PofGP, that contradict anything in the BofM.

And in regard to the Bible, does translation always lessen scripture's value or change its teaching?

Here is my take on this.

After the deaths of the original Apostles and before the Nicene creed, there were many different beliefs about the gospel and its doctrine. After the creed was established, there were many who were left on the outside looking in. These were either forced to give up their established beliefs, or were persecuted.

When it came time to gather religious texts, there was a natural tendency to make the texts fit with the creed. Some things were taken out, and others had the meanings changed. All this was done so that the biblical writings would fit the belief that was established.

What about the Book of Mormon? How many translations have been made of it? Is it less reliable in French or German?

Does the church put a disclaimer on the Book of Mormon in other languages for translational errors as they do with the Bible? If not, why not?

If professional LDS translators can reliably take the English Book of Mormon into French, why can't professional translators take the Greek New Testament into English?

You make some very good points here and worth taking a look at.

In the case with the Book of Mormon, translating it from english to any other language, there was no taking things out to make it fit doctrines. Great care was taken to make sure the language it was translated into kept the same meanings that were conveyed in english.

Hopefully others will chip in here, because I am not that familiar with the how the BofM was translated to other languages, but that's how I see it.

The Book of Mormon states that it is the "most correct book". This does not say "only correct book", or "100% correct book". This is because men wrote it and men translated it. Yes, it was translated with the power of G_d, but anytime man is put into the process, errors can creep in. In the case of the Book of Mormon, errors were kept to a minimum because of the influence of G_d in the translation process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Book of Mormon is true, that means that Joseph Smith was visited by God the Father and Jesus Christ and was called to restore Christ's church upon the earth, the authority to act in God's name, the Priesthood to baptize and perform other ordinances and so on. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith was not a fraud. If Joseph Smith was not a fraud, then the revelations that he received and recorded in the D&C, etc are true and the The LDS church is the Lord's living church on the earth today, led by a prophet who speaks directly with the Lord. These facts all work in harmony together. Scriptures are subject to interpretation. That is why we have a prophet. We are not led by scholars. We are led by a living prophet who speaks with God, just as Isaiah did, and as Moses, and Noah, etc.

It is also interesting to note that while that is a very logical and true pattern of knowledge. It should also be noted that we have to have each part along the pattern revealed by the Holy Ghost, for ourselves, if we are to know that the Doctrine and Covenants are true and so on. Otherwise we could have a missing link in the chain that will cause our apostasy if we get attacked at that absent link with sufficient pressure from the adversary. I do completely agree with you, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people all over the world have come up with different beliefs about God. Obviously sincerity and prayer are not enough to guard against false claims. That is why God has given us the Bible, so that we will have a standard measurement for truth claims.

While Christians value prayer and seek direction from God, that is not the Biblical method of testing a prophet.

Then you simply don't understand the full context of the Bible. You don't understand Isaiah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here are a few flase prophesys I found with a quick search

Why do you search the internet for false prophecies instead of just reading the scriptures for yourself?

Do any of these supposed failed prophecies really cause you personal concern in your study of the gospel? Have you actually researched each of these yourself? What have you found so far in your own research? There are answers to these questions if you take the time to look for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share