-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Who has read the Book of Mormon?
- Thread starter LegacyJB
- Start date
I suggest going back and rereading those prophecies in context. You're wrong on your interpretation of each of those. For the first part of your comment, a false interpretation of God is found in the creeds. How they were formed is a joke. I'll leave your comment at this: if the Book of Mormon is true so is everything. If it's true then Jesus Christ's Church has been restored to the earth. If it is not true then there is no church of Jesus Christ and this church would simply be the same as all others.
Upvote
0
Prophets are servants of God, just as any other gifting or office is, they exist to serve others. The view Mormon's have of their own prophets is in stark contrast to what a Biblical prophet is, they believe their prophets to be pre-eminent, they have done the same as the Catholics view the Pope, God's voice for all today:
“The Certain Sounds,” Church News, October 9, 1983, p. 24; “No man holds divine authority equal to or above the president of the Church. In his position he is pre-eminent!
“Let us understand fully the clear identity of the president of the Church. He is the mouthpiece of God on earth for us today.”
This is not the Biblical account of our relationship with God today, we have direct access to God, the curtain was torn, and God can and does speak to believers today in one way or another. Our relationship is alive and active with Him!
“The Certain Sounds,” Church News, October 9, 1983, p. 24; “No man holds divine authority equal to or above the president of the Church. In his position he is pre-eminent!
“Let us understand fully the clear identity of the president of the Church. He is the mouthpiece of God on earth for us today.”
This is not the Biblical account of our relationship with God today, we have direct access to God, the curtain was torn, and God can and does speak to believers today in one way or another. Our relationship is alive and active with Him!
Upvote
0
I just had to do that at least once.
Anyway, what these prophets and apostles said were great and true. You're accusing the Book of Mormon of being not true because there are some things it doesn't mention. God gives certain revelations to certain prophets. I don't dismiss Moses being a prophet because he didn't build an ark. I don't dismiss Isaiah as a prophet because he doesn't say anything about Elijah coming in the last days to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers and vice versa. The prophets in the Book of Mormon, who lived from 600 BC - 421 AD, with the exception of the people in Ether, received what the Holy Ghost gave from the Father. As Nephi says, he only wrote things that would be valuable to the spirits of men (mankind). Then again he also saw everything that's in Revelation. Why God didn't have the prophets to write all of those things down we'll never know. The Lord says His ways are not our ways and His thoughts aren't our thoughts.
As far as the JST goes, that's definitely in harmony with what Daniel says. The sanctuary of strength can be seen as Jerusalem since the entire city was considered a sanctuary, the holy land. Was Jerusalem not destroyed?
Im trying real hard to understand your reasoning on why Joseph Smiths version is different.
I feel this is important information that has yet to fully manifest. The anti-christ will be the abomination which the whole world will worship as god. They will put him on the "throne" so to speak, which is the place for the creator of the universe.
You have one verse that says the abomination will stand in the holy place, where the other says the reader will stand in the holy place.
Two completely different things.
Isaiah has a lot to say.
Isaiah 13:13
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.
Isaiah 34:4
And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.
Isaiah40:22
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Isaiah 51:6
Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.
Do you see the type of information being conveyed here? We are actually given a mental view of creation.
And the cool part is scientific theory ( I dont put much faith in man) actually agrees with this.
In physical cosmology, the Big Crunch is one possible scenario for the ultimate fate of the universe, in which the metric expansion of space eventually reverses and the universe recollapses, ultimately ending as a black hole singularity or causing a reformation of the universe starting with another big bang.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch
This kind of information is in abundance and it is all throughout the bible.
Can you relate any information similar ti Isaiah from the BoM that might help me in my understanding of Gods creation?
By the way, can you find a very profound reference in this verse?
Isaiah40:22
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Upvote
0
The Jews also had direct access to God yet they had prophets. Was there no need for Abraham, Isaiah, Ezekiel, or any of the others? There were some righteous Jews who prayed as well.
How can one claim a relationship with God if the same person doesn't believe He will continue to use prophets? Isn't God the same yesterday, today, and forever? If He doesn't use prophets then He is not.
My relationship with God is live and active yet I acknowledge the need for a prophet. Amos taught the Lord will do nothing except he reveals it to prophets first.
Upvote
0
For a great understanding of God's creations, specifically the fall, go to 2 Nephi chapter 2. It speaks a bit on principles of the creation. The principle is how we came to be on the earth. Again, these sort of things being in the Book of Mormon or not isn't important. As far as your source goes, I rarely trust a website I can go in and change myself.
Upvote
0
Ripheus27
Holeless fox
- Dec 23, 2012
- 1,707
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
I read through Alma and 3 Nephi a lot, and intermittently through other sections as well as the D&C and the Pearl of Great Price, and J. Talmidge's(sp.?) work, sang hymns with the LDS church in my area, read official magazines, and on and on and on. Did the Holy Spirit ever tell me, "Yes, this is the one true Church?" Definitely not. Did It tell me, "This is a true part of the true Church?" That, I feel, is close if not quite correct.
Upvote
0
Moodshadow
Veteran
Okay, you got me. Obviously I misquoted when I used the word "perfect," as you noted, when it should have been "correct." But come on, Joseph Smith said it was "most correct," the [superfluous] superlative pretty much indicating that he himself considered it perfect. If, as Smith claimed, the Book of Mormon was translated by pure revelation straight from God Almighty (with the aid of the seer stones, of course), then it would have in fact been correct, perfect - call it what you like - God doesn't make mistakes. And for whatever it's worth, in most English thesauri, "correct" and "perfect" are listed as synonyms.
One more thing: There is no way that I can be justifiably accused of any attempt to persuade you to lose your faith. That you and I have polar opposite opinions concerning Joseph Smith and Mormonism does not mean that I cannot and do not have respect for you as a person and acknowledge your right to believe as you see fit. I still love my LDS friends and will always cherish their friendship and would never attempt to undermine their faith. If one of them asked me questions concerning why I left the church, I would not hold back an iota, but unless/until then, we simply agree to disagree and love each other anyway.
Upvote
0
Ran77
Senior Contributor
When Joseph Smith stated "most correct" maybe he meant "most correct." Have you considered that?
Why do our critics find it necessary to change the meaning of what our leaders have said? As I have said before on this forum, if the LDS doctrines have to be changed in order to find fault with them, then the faults do not really exist. They are a fabrication. And I find that the vast majority of the fault finding against us is based on alterations of our beliefs.
Upvote
0
My post in no way indicated my disbelief in prophets today, the problem is though - those prophets (and notice I say prophets - more than one at a time) have no need to sit upon a 'throne' and speak as if this is the only way God can speak to His people.
God is not going to give us new commandments, new ordinances.
The Lord can do anything He wants. I know for a fact He has done things in my life, performed miracles, etc and there was not a prophet in sight. It is foolish to believe God is limited except he speak through some guy first, that's just ridiculous! He created the entire world, He doesn't need a prophet to speak for Him if he so chooses to speak directly to individuals - which He does do!
My relationship is not contingent upon He using a prophet - that's just silly.
Upvote
0
Sophrosyne
Let Your Light Shine.. Matt 5:16
Could it be rather... that you get told that you are a part of the true Church? This doesn't necessarily mean that the church you go to is true but your faith in God puts you in the true church.
Upvote
0
BigDaddy4
It's a new season...
- Sep 4, 2008
- 7,452
- 1,989
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Now you are just lying or don't really know what has been written. In 1831, in Smith's own handwriting, Jesus visited him. In 1835, in his own handwriting, it was angels. Both different than the official version of God and Jesus. And odd that an 1842 letter written by Joseph Smith that was published in the Times and Seasons mentioned 2 personages, but did not identify them as God and Jesus. Kind of a big fact to leave out, don't you think??
But yeah, he couldn't really remember which fabrication was which.
And other key people close to Joseph probably couldn't remember such minor details. People like William Smith (Joesph's brother), Oliver Cowdry, and Orson Pratt. Details like God and Jesus or angels or personages, how old Smith was, what year it was, a dark/evil figure or not, all Christian sects were wrong or just the Methodists, etc.
Upvote
0
BigDaddy4
It's a new season...
- Sep 4, 2008
- 7,452
- 1,989
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
When Joseph Smith stated "most correct" maybe he meant "most correct." Have you considered that?
Why do our critics find it necessary to change the meaning of what our leaders have said? As I have said before on this forum, if the LDS doctrines have to be changed in order to find fault with them, then the faults do not really exist. They are a fabrication. And I find that the vast majority of the fault finding against us is based on alterations of our beliefs.
Most correct book = 3000+ errors
Less than most correct book = how many errors???
Upvote
0
Ripheus27
Holeless fox
- Dec 23, 2012
- 1,707
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
We could also have Christ the man be Himself a prophet in the true Church (whatever that is), so that "God's nature did not change" and "His will must always be revealed first by a prophet," or w/e the OP cited (if in another thread).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Moodshadow
Veteran
When Joseph Smith stated "most correct" maybe he meant "most correct." Have you considered that?
Why do our critics find it necessary to change the meaning of what our leaders have said? As I have said before on this forum, if the LDS doctrines have to be changed in order to find fault with them, then the faults do not really exist. They are a fabrication. And I find that the vast majority of the fault finding against us is based on alterations of our beliefs.
And have you considered that even God must have disagreed with Mr. Smith's words, "most correct," since his successor prophets, seers, and revelators have apparently received by revelation the instruction to make numerous changes in the text of the Book of Mormon over the years?
And please, would you be so kind as to point out exactly where I endeavored "to change the meaning of what...church leaders have said?" I did admit my error when I said "perfect" when it should have been "correct," and I apologized for that unintentional mistake. But that was in no way any attempt to change any meaning - and, as I pointed out above, the two words are synonymous anyway. We will await your response, and thank you.
Upvote
0
Ran77
Senior Contributor
Well, let's draw a direct comparison. If we use the same criteria that critics of the Book of Mormon uses the Bible should register several million errors. By comparison that is definately the most correct book. Do you discard the Bible because there have been multiple punctuation errors introduced by the printers? Do you discard the Bible because there are thousands and thousands of discrepencies between the early versions of the manuscripts?
I'm going to hazard a guess that you don't. I find it curious that critics of the Book of Mormon hold it to a higher standard than they do the Bible. Why?
:o
Last edited:
Upvote
0
RevelationTestament
Our God is a consuming fire.
Actually, they point the finger at every word change in the Book of Mormon. But fail to recognize the millions of different word changes in the Bible. Every version is different - the KJV, the NKJV, the NIV, the list goes on an on.... hopefully everyone gets the idea.
Upvote
0
Ran77
Senior Contributor
Yep. That's what I'm talking about.
The thing I find interesting is that the more the critics attempt to discredit the LDS Church the more I find how little the other denominations have to offer me. It's that adage that when you point a finger at someone you have four pointing right back at yourself.
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 29,123
- 6,150
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The big difference is that the so-called "changes" in the KJV and other versions is based on translation of the original Greek and Hebrew supported by increased knowledge, such as Qumran and DSS and other manuscript finds. Please show us any original language texts for the BOM or any other early LDS writing and current scholarship which support the changes? Anyone can access the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and verify translations for themselves. Can LDS members say the same?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
