What's so bad about the Book of Mormon?
- Thread starter Songsmith
- Start date
RestoredGospelEvidences
Active Member
You keep on throw-uping the same old issues. Trying the Joseph Gerballs Nazi disinformation propaganda tactic of repeating the lie until it sticks? We already answered the poligamy BOM issue, we already answered the seer stone issue, pointing out Biblical uses, early Christian uses, and parallel charges made by early anti-Christians that early Christains used "magical stones." Already answered many others of your repeated charges. I still haven't seen the answers to your own charges by you being willing to deal with them, when mirrored back to you in Atheistic & early to later anti-Christian writings. Should you ever make the attempt, your answers would answer your own against the BOM & Mormonism.
You also keep attempting to speak for Mormons: "The Mormon idea is "If an angel said it - you can do it no matter what the Bible says" -- and that is not what we find in the unchanging God of the actual Bible." (What's your source? Can it be shown to be official Doctrine? Or is it another gross distortion of your's to vilify Mormons?)
Can your own faith pass your own tests, ill-logic, vilification tactics, disinformation methods, distortions of beliefs, etc?
But unlike your mean spirited posts, I'm going to be fair. I'm going to expose your tactics, by exposing them mirrored back to you in the same types of tactics used against your faith, the 7th Day Adventists. Thus, this is not an anti-SDA post, but one to show what could happen if your own disinformation propaganda game was played on your own beliefs.
Tactic 1, citing ex-(members of faiths). "SDA truth is different from Biblical truth." Hmmm. This tactic uses formers, or exes, who, after leaving, turn around to "warn" the public of the dangers, etc., of their former faith. For example, what nasties have former SDA ministers, dug up? Such formers as Elder Dale Ratzlaff, Elder Sydney Cleveland, Elder Walter Rea, Dr. Desmond Ford, and many others, said to have "a wealth of knowledge regarding the fallacies of Seventh-day Adventism." D. M. Canright, an early leader in the movement in the late 19th century who apostatized.
"The mission of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is to proclaim to all peoples the everlasting gospel in the context of the Three Angels' messages of Revelation 14:6-12." Hmmm, must be guilty of Gal.1:8.
"Adventists have two "inspired" sources of truth: The Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White, which they refer to as the Spirit of Prophecy." Hmmm, guilty of own standard? "The idea then is to TEST the doctrine against the Bible to SEE IF it is valid." What would ex-SDA say about White's visions, prophecies, & extra biblical message? (Tactic 2: Use of "their own writings" against your rival. A tactic early anti-Christians used too, See The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, Origen Against Celsus).
Watch out for those evil, nasty, voo doo pooh SDAs, (Tactic 3, vilification tactic, generalize the whole group as such, list a few cases of wrong doing done by rivals to try to vilify the whole group). "At some point I think that would be a "wake up call" for bible students" (Tactic 2), to examine the false teachings of SDAs. Their deceptive methods too!
- "Ellen White was a false prophet." Hmmm, the false prophet charge, (a popular charge made by early anti-Christians against Christ, as made by early anti-Christians amongst the Jews, as cited by Celsus, 2nd cent. critic. (A. S. Garretson, Primitive Christianity And Early Criticism, (Boston: Sherman, French & Company, 1912); R. Joseph Hoffmann, (translator) Celsus On The True Doctrine, (A Discourse Against the early Christians), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).
SDAs "a cult!" (Tactic 4: Use judgmental vilification name calling brands to vilify rival, as being a cult. This brand creates a negative impression of the group, but is sometimes a natural reaction to other faiths' rituals, doctrines, beliefs, when seen from an outsiders' perspective, not having been raised in the different faiths. For example, the bloody animal sacrifices of the Jews, them smearing blood on themselves, might seem cultic to say a Buddist, or Hindu. Thus, the early Christians, LDS & JWs, have also been branded as "a cult" & vilified along side SDAs too).
SDAs' god a meany? "God destroys everyone at his second coming and the earth is desolate." (Tactic 5: Uses unofficial statements & claims to representing beliefs, but which are from an outsider's perspective, & may not be an accurate representation of belief. Tactic 6: Shocking generalizations, this one takes a concept out of its surrounding doctrinal or belief settings, but fails, on purpose, to give surrounding beliefs & explanations. Like saying: Christians drink blood, (without explaining the sacrament). Atheists use this one against Christians).
SDAs part of the occultic Illuminati? Their symbol, the eye in a triangle, makes them part of a secret society! Watch out! (Tactic 7: Vilify, mis-represent, misinterpret symbols, try to make connections between symbols used, (even if they have good meanings), & those groups who also use the same, or similiar symbols for evil. This is a popular tactics that some have used to vilify many religions. This tactics would make St. John, America, the Boy Scouts, & others who use the eagle as a symbol, all Nazis! All trinity believers would be masons, or part of the Illuminati too, because they all use the eye in a triangle symbol. The trinity would be linked to inappropriate content, or Play Boy, because both use the rabbit as a symbol).
Yes, if someone wanted to do what Bob (SDA), has done against the Mormons here on this Christian message board, one could vilify SDA, just as easily as other faiths could be vilified too.
The point here again is to not be anti-SDA, but to point out how Bob's continual shots at the Mormons, are in fact an attack on his own faith & others here, if & when his tests are mirrored back to him & used against SDA & others' faiths. An approach that only further causes ill-feelings, misunderstandings, hate & prejudices to come upon us all, when Atheists, communist Atheists use these types of exchanges to vilify the USA & all faiths. (See: John Stormers, None Dare Call It Treason, 25 Years Later).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Dec 20, 2009
- 28,368
- 7,745
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian Seeker
- Marital Status
- Married
I appreciate your scholarism, it's kind of funny that I posted as I did, I'm more into the spiritual source of revelation, the Holy Spirit. In general, I posted this under the impression that one person in the entire forum would take it as honest feedback.
I think one thing missing from your argument is that the book of Mormon was fabricated so late in the timeline, I Have about as much problem associating it as "biblical literature" as I do associating modern christian denominations with the historic faith. as my faith says, I'm a christian seeker. hope you have a good day, thanks for the information.
Upvote
0
RestoredGospelEvidences
Active Member
I think I've dealt with the argument that falsely charges that "the book of Mormon was fabricated so late in the timeline." In different posts, I've already been answering different issues that different ones have raised against the Book of Mormon & Mormonism, pointing out the parallels between early anti-Christian - Atheistic writings, & the tactics used to vilify the LDS-Mormons, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Posts: #1, Also, I would invite you to see the posts on The Book of Mormon Challenge. Part 2. One of the challenges us bible believers are hit with is a similiar claim, that the bible was a fabrication, borrowed from pagan mystery religions, & similiar pre-bible mythologies. How would you answer those charges? Ignore them? Wouldn't your answer answer your own charges, which words, if you should ever write, then be words one could use to answer this issue already answered?
T. W. Doane, Bible Myths.
John P. Lundy, Monumental Christianity.
A. S. Garretson, Primitive Christianity & Early Criticism.
DT BOM Evidences rough drafts.
Upvote
0
- Dec 20, 2009
- 28,368
- 7,745
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian Seeker
- Marital Status
- Married
I appreciate your apologietics stuff for your religion and stuff but if you look at the top of the web browser, perhaps the question was the wrong question.
When I look at texts, all I care about is the supernatural power in the application, this is why I regard, the book of Mormon separate from the bible and the quran (which also has an alternate account of the old testament and Jesus) as separate from the bible. Perhaps looking at this from a purely scholastic level is your paygrade, and you do it very well. However, my concern is more related to keeping things separate so they don't tear one another apart in the manifestation.
thanks for your words.
Upvote
0
RestoredGospelEvidences
Active Member
Looking at The Book of Mormon from a scholastic level is only just one level, the more rewarding look is the spiritual quest for truth. Scholarship only serves to back up ones' faith, like scholarly works done on Bible evidences. Sometimes, Biblical evidences & Book of Mormon evidences cross over & compliment each other, like the Lachish Letters, for example. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons, LDS), have asked the readers of the Book of Mormon to make it a prayerful, pondering study. To even ask God, in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ if the book is true, or not. Some of the last testimonials that end the Book of Mormon are by Moroni, an ancient American prophet: "And when ye shall recieve these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost." (BOM, Moroni 10:4). The prophet Nephi, also testified: "And now, my beloved brethren, and also Jew, and all ye ends of the earth, hearken unto these words and believe in Christ; and if ye believe not in these words believe in Christ. And if ye shall believe in Christ ye will believe in these words, for they are the words of Christ, and he hath given them unto me; and they teach all men that they should do good. And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye-- for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things, notwithstanding my weakness." (BOM, 2 Nephi 33:10-11).
It's like what LDS apostle, Huge B. Brown, (Profile of a Prophet), said, from a lawyer's point of view giving evidences. How that after all these evidences, give him an "intellectual conviction," it was also "by the power of the Holy Ghost" he also knew the Book of Mormon to be true, & Joseph Smith to be a true prophet. True prophets now, are like the old & new Testament prophets, they aren't perfect, they admit they make mistakes, they also have to repent too. But, despite their imperfections, like David's, we have God giving through them, the scriptures that help inspire us to do good & believe in the Messiah-Christ. The Book of Mormon represents another long line of prophets in a different part of the world, the ancient Americas. Its intentions is not to replace the Bible, but to back it up as a second separate area of the world's witness of Christ's visits & dealings with other people far away from the Old & New Testament lands. But even early to later Christians also testified that Christ went to other nations too. He did this so that he wouldn't be found neglectful of other far away peoples & lands. Plus, so that "people could be saved wherever they were," says early Christian father, Clement of Alexandria, (2nd-3rd cent., Ante-Nicene Fathers, 2:490-92). Christ's world wide treks, these early Christian doctrines, eventually faded off into legends about Santa Claus' annual Christmas rounds. So while many modern Christians still do the Christmas mythologies during Christmas time, as also do Mormons, we all can take a look at Christ's world trek in the BOM 3rd Nephi. If some might argue it's a myth, then they shouldn't have a problem with it, if they also take part in Christmas lore, traditions & customs. If it's not a myth, as Mormons testify that it isn't a made up story, but that it's true. If it's not a myth or is not a made up story from Joseph Smith's imagination, but is true, but is still not to be believed by non-Mormons, then at least Christians should be willing to believe their own early Christian apologists. Or at least take a look at their own early Christian roots, & the early Christians amongst the early church Fathers, who testified that Christ went to all nations. If Christians don't even accept their answers, then they'll have to answer the early anti-Christians charge as to why Christ neglected other nations! But also, why Satan & his followers seem to have been able to go everywhere about the world to set up counterfeit paganistic religions, but Christ & his apostles weren't able too, (even though that goes against early Christian traditions that say Christ & his apostles did go throughout the world). So, who has the greater powers? I'm asking this, because I've often heard Christians say that Christ couldn't have gone to the ancient Americas because there's "no evidence" of Christianity having been spread there, the religions were too barbaric-paganistic & satanic. Well, that would mean two things: 1. Satan did set up counterfeit religions in the ancient to later Americas, (which the BOM warned would happen, after the people started to reject Christ & hunt down believers in Christ, (over 200 years after Christ's visit, BOM, 4th Nephi & Mormon, Moroni 9:4-20). While, 2: Christ neglected the Americas & all other parts of the world. This is why I ask who has the greater powers? Christ, to do good? Or the Devil & his angels, to do evil all over the world, anciently & modernly?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Dec 20, 2009
- 28,368
- 7,745
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian Seeker
- Marital Status
- Married
Did you know that they found evidence of a network of trade with the vikings near the great lakes? I'm sure if Nephi and his crew were there earlier evidence will pop up evenutally, until then it's a faith thing.
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,314
- 10,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
I guess we will have to wait and ask Solomon Spaulding since he came up with the Nephi ideas first.
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,314
- 10,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68226173, member: 235244"]oops! -- I quoted the Book of Mormon on this thread...
In Mal 3 God said "I do not change".
In Heb 13 Christ "is the SAME yesterday today and forever".
in Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (Apostles), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
The idea then is to TEST the doctrine against the Bible to SEE IF it is valid.
Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by Paul -- were SO"
The BoM statement I quoted defining "abomination" and "wickedness" is then said to be "commanded by God for the saints to do" according to modern day Mormonism. And so now it returns back to being the "Abomination' that is no longer commanded...so then just "Abomination".
That according to Gal 1 ... Heb 13... Malachi 3... would not be the "God of the Bible" doing that.
The Mormon idea is "If an angel said it - you can do it no matter what the Bible says" -- and that is not what we find in the unchanging God of the actual Bible.
(Then of course there is the fanatic idea of using a seer stone to find treasure in the ground that was apparently popular with a few folks in the early 1800's... only to find out from the LDS church that Smith's early fanaticism on that subject where he got his own seer stone - turned out to be useful as that stone evolved the power to show 'english words' to Smith when placed over the ever-hidden-plates! At some point I think that would be a "wake up call" for bible students)[/QUOTE]
so then... "Sola scriptura" matters as a test of doctrine.
There are many "sola scriptura" debates on CF --- none of them by Nazi's as I think we would all agree.
There was no answer other than attempts to get us not to quote that part of the BoM.
There is not one single example of the "seer stone" in the Bible or any place else other than the pre-BoM practices among certain folks "looking for treasure in the ground" - a somewhat fanatical movement pre-BoM pre-Mormon church with each of those involved having their own "seer stone".
It is odd that it is this looking-for-treasure seer-stone that Smith still kept with him - that turned into the 'show you english words' stone.
Nothing at all like that in the Bible or even among the pre-BoM superstitions in America.
Smith claimed the "seer stone" don't know of any Christians doing that beyond Smith -- in terms of a "stone that will show you english words".
Of course we have the internet site "Bablefish" today that does show you english words and is used to translate from languages you don't know - to English. Are we counting that in the group "seer stone that will show you english words?"
members on this board keep making those claims when asked about Jacob 1 and 2 and trying to find a way around some of the statements there ... statements that many Christians would also agree with today.
But if you are saying that Gal 1:6-9 is the standard you are happy to use - then I think we are on the same page.
Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (Apostles), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
You seem to be saying this is a point of agreement and not difference. So that is fine with me.
in Christ,
Bob
In Mal 3 God said "I do not change".
In Heb 13 Christ "is the SAME yesterday today and forever".
in Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (Apostles), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
The idea then is to TEST the doctrine against the Bible to SEE IF it is valid.
Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by Paul -- were SO"
The BoM statement I quoted defining "abomination" and "wickedness" is then said to be "commanded by God for the saints to do" according to modern day Mormonism. And so now it returns back to being the "Abomination' that is no longer commanded...so then just "Abomination".
That according to Gal 1 ... Heb 13... Malachi 3... would not be the "God of the Bible" doing that.
The Mormon idea is "If an angel said it - you can do it no matter what the Bible says" -- and that is not what we find in the unchanging God of the actual Bible.
(Then of course there is the fanatic idea of using a seer stone to find treasure in the ground that was apparently popular with a few folks in the early 1800's... only to find out from the LDS church that Smith's early fanaticism on that subject where he got his own seer stone - turned out to be useful as that stone evolved the power to show 'english words' to Smith when placed over the ever-hidden-plates! At some point I think that would be a "wake up call" for bible students)[/QUOTE]
so then... "Sola scriptura" matters as a test of doctrine.
There are many "sola scriptura" debates on CF --- none of them by Nazi's as I think we would all agree.
There was no answer other than attempts to get us not to quote that part of the BoM.
There is not one single example of the "seer stone" in the Bible or any place else other than the pre-BoM practices among certain folks "looking for treasure in the ground" - a somewhat fanatical movement pre-BoM pre-Mormon church with each of those involved having their own "seer stone".
It is odd that it is this looking-for-treasure seer-stone that Smith still kept with him - that turned into the 'show you english words' stone.
Nothing at all like that in the Bible or even among the pre-BoM superstitions in America.
Smith claimed the "seer stone" don't know of any Christians doing that beyond Smith -- in terms of a "stone that will show you english words".
Of course we have the internet site "Bablefish" today that does show you english words and is used to translate from languages you don't know - to English. Are we counting that in the group "seer stone that will show you english words?"
members on this board keep making those claims when asked about Jacob 1 and 2 and trying to find a way around some of the statements there ... statements that many Christians would also agree with today.
But if you are saying that Gal 1:6-9 is the standard you are happy to use - then I think we are on the same page.
Gal 1:6-9
6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (Apostles), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
You seem to be saying this is a point of agreement and not difference. So that is fine with me.
in Christ,
Bob
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,314
- 10,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
I don't resort to any of those methods - as my posts clearly demonstrate
I don't post any mean spirited comments -- as my posts clearly demonstrate.
There is not one single instance of me using propaganda or disinformation -- as my posts clearly demonstrate.
I don't use former-Mormon or ex-Mormon or anti-Mormon web site links/posts/quotes as my posts clearly demonstrate.
1. I applaud you for using the actual mission statement of the Seventh-day Adventist church. That is not something that can only be had from an anti-SDA web site.. so... well done sir!
2. If you claim that Rev 14:6-12 THREE angels' message is opposed to Gal 1:6-9 in some way please start a thread and we can devote attention to that point. There are very few things I would enjoy doing more than that.
1. I never complain that the Mormon church claims that the 1Cor 12 gift of prophecy is legit and should be respected when a genuine example of it occurs.
2. The point above is very interesting because it gets to the Bible point of what the purpose of a real prophetic gift is, how it is tested, and how it is to be treated. I would enjoy that conversation a great deal.
3. I have no doubt at all that non-SDAs would not agree with some statements or teaching God showed Ellen White. I have never disputed that. My point has always been "give me the Bible AND the Words IN the Bible - even if those words talk about the doctrine of gift of prophecy".
Here is a challenge for you - try to find even one example of me doing such a thing.
Do you ever see me refer to the Mormon church as a cult??
Do you have a post like that from me?
That is another topic I would thoroughly enjoy as its own thread. The idea that Rev 19 is wrong or that it presents God in a negative light since he destroys all the wicked in that chapter - would be a fun discussion to have.
I have not appealed to non-official statements about the Mormons.
So then not a good tactic - but I thought the point was to accuse me of doing something like that - I have not done such a thing.
The symbol we have is 3 angels. And as far as I know on this board - I never mention the symbol that Mormon's use.
Here again I think you are off on a tangent - I never talk about symbols for Mormons.
That is the flaw in your post - you list these items as if you had also listed me doing it -- when you have not.
Step 1 - take something I have actually done in real life to make your case.
-- just coming up with a list of bad things to do -- is not the same thing as proving that I ever did any of it.
Details matter.
Seventh-day Adventists did not get to the point of being what Christianity Today calls "the fifth-largest Christian communion worldwide" by using the tactics you list as being "bad" in your post - as I am sure we would both agree
=====================================
In 2014, for the 10th year in a row, more than 1 million people became Adventists, hitting a record 18.1 million members. Adventism is now the fifth-largest Christian communion worldwide, after Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, and the Assemblies of God.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct...ts-can-ben-carson-church-stay-separatist.html
===================================== end quote
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited:
Upvote
0
And you'll be able to quote Spaulding on this, right?
Oh yeah, all you have is hearsay evidence.
Upvote
0
TheBarrd
Teller of tales, writer of poems, singer of songs
Before He was a Man, Jesus was God.
He was never a Man before He was God.
The idea that God the Father was ever a man from some other planet is not Christian.
I thought this had been established long ago.
I'm actually surprised this thread is still here.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,314
- 10,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Are you saying the Bible said that ?
Or that the BoM says it?
Or are you saying that from an atheist POV having Christ as or God the Father as a man before coming to this earth - as part of the story - does not matter?
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,314
- 10,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Did you miss the part where the Mormons claim they found Spaulding's book?
This is what "they say" about it.
Here is another Mormon article discussing their rejection of Spaulding's found document.
http://www.fairmormon.org/perspecti...gist-solomon-spaulding-and-the-book-of-mormon
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
TheBarrd
Teller of tales, writer of poems, singer of songs
It's a major deal to Christians. God existed before there was a universe, or men, or any planets for men to be born on.
That is a basic tenet of Christianity. There is no tap-dancing around it.
The Mormon idea that God was a man born on another planet who was raised to His godhood by the god of that planet, who was once a man on yet another planet, who was raised to his godhood by the god of that planet, who was once a man on still another planet who was raised to godhood by the god of that planet, who was once a man...and this keeps repeating over and over again...and bear in mind, each new "god" must have a wife, so that they can produce "spirit children" which they will send to be born as men (and women, of course) on their personal planets in the hope that they may be raised to be gods in their own right...well, it gets pretty complicated pretty quickly.
This is not a Christian belief, in any way, shape, or form.
In short, Mormons are not Christians.
I honestly thought this thread had been closed. When I noticed it, I just had to pop in and see for myself.
I should have kept my opinions to myself...anyone who is a Mormon has probably already heard them.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
