LDS BOOK OF MORMON FALSE HISTORY 2

[Peter1000]

Interesting logic there, Peter. Let's test it.

Acts 2:38

Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The same verse in Arabic:

فَقَالَ لَهُمْ بُطْرُسُ: «تُوبُوا وَلْيَعْتَمِدْ كُلُّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْكُمْ عَلَى اسْمِ يَسُوعَ الْمَسِيحِ لِغُفْرَانِ الْخَطَايَا فَتَقْبَلُوا عَطِيَّةَ الرُّوحِ الْقُدُسِ.


Qur'an 3:45 (Sura al Imran)

إِذْ قَالَتِ الْمَلآئِكَةُ يَا مَرْيَمُ إِنَّ اللّهَ يُبَشِّرُكِ بِكَلِمَةٍ مِّنْهُ اسْمُهُ الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ وَجِيهًا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالآ ِرَةِ وَمِنَ الْمُقَرَّبِينَ

(And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (unto Allah). (Muhammad M. Pickthall translation)

You see how the bolded word is the same in both? That's the Arabic word for "messiah" (maseeh). So both the Holy Bible and the Qur'an testify to the fact that Jesus is the messiah.

Would you say then, as you've said about the relation of the Book of Mormon to the Bible, that because both the Holy Bible and the Qur'an testify to the same fact concerning Jesus, then they must have both been written by true prophets of God?

If not, then why not?

The Qur'an testifies that Jesus is the Messiah. That is true.

The Qur'an also testifies that Jesus is not the Son of God.

The Qur'an does not testify that Jesus was the God of the OT and that God has come down in the flesh to dwell with men on earth and gave his life on the cross to be a Savior for all mankind.

So if you read the entire Qur'an you come to a conclusion that Jesus was a great prophet, but that he was not the son of God and did not save mankind by giving his life on the cross for their sins.

Therefore from a logical prospective, the Qur'an is no friend of Jesus Christ, it is an anti-Christ. It is anti Bible, and therefore the Qur'an is not of God

Compare that with the BOM. From the beginning to the end, the message is: Jesus came in the flesh to teach his gospel, and to die on the cross to save all mankind.

The BOM also even uses the verbiage that God came down and took on flesh. Which means that the BOM also teaches that Jesus was the God of the OT even before he came to earth as our Savior.

The BOM from beginning to end is a friend to Jesus
Christ. In fact the BOM is a second witness that Jesus is the Christ, the God of the OT, the Son of God, and came to earth and took on flesh and saved mankind.

From people 15000 miles apart with no means of communications say the same thing as the Bible from beginning to end.

The logical conclusion is that the BOM agrees with the Bible. 1 John 4:2 and Mosiah 7:27 are companion scriptures and they are of God.

 

[Peter1000]

error on my part, sorry.

 

[dzheremi]

The Qur'an testifies that Jesus is the Messiah. That is true.

The Qur'an also testifies that Jesus is not the Son of God.

The Qur'an does not testify that Jesus was the God of the OT and that God has come down in the flesh to dwell with men on earth and gave his life on the cross to be a Savior for all mankind.

So if you read the entire Qur'an you come to a conclusion that Jesus was a great prophet, but that he was not the son of God and did not save mankind by giving his life on the cross for their sins.

Therefore from a logical prospective, the Qur'an is no friend of Jesus Christ, it is an anti-Christ. It is anti Bible, and therefore the Qur'an is not of God

Oh, I see...you mean because of its content, we should reject the Qur'an as being from God. Okay.

See, I was confused, because what you wrote was "Both must have been written by prophets of God to say those words." So I figured, well, the Bible and the Qur'an use literally the same word (in Arabic) to describe their respective Jesus figures, but as you have correctly written now, the fact that they have this similarity and are talking about 'the same guy' when using it doesn't mean that they actually express the same ideas about Him, and because the Qur'anic idea of Jesus doesn't match the Biblical idea, you actually don't have to (and shouldn't) accept the Qur'an based on the words it uses. That I agree with completely.

That's also the exact same logic that goes into the Christian rejection of the Book of Mormon and Mormonism: they're talking about 'the same figure' (at least insofar as they identify Him as being so), but the Jesus of the Book of Mormon is not the Jesus of the Bible, as Mormon theology is radically different than Christian theology, so the mere fact that the Book of Mormon is a book that says whatever it does about Jesus doesn't somehow automatically mean that it comes from God. That needs to be tested. We cannot simply conflate Mormon theology and Christian theology just because Mormons say XYZ about Christ if the Christ they are talking about is not the Christ we are talking about, which we know is the case by looking at Mormon theology, so the Book of Mormon is rejected on sound theological grounds (i.e., the Mormon refusal to confess one God who is manifest in three hypostases equally sharing one essence), no differently than the Qur'an is. The Qur'an says some true things and some false things about Jesus, so we as Christians say "That is not our Christ." The Book of Mormon and the Mormon religion also say some true things and some false things about Jesus, so we as Christians say "That is not our Christ."

Thank you for agreeing with this, at least in principle. I wish that you would one day apply it to your own religion, but I suppose even this level of agreement is some amount of progress, because now you can see why we reject your religion and its book.

 

[Ironhold]

Again, you are sidestepping the real topic, apparently, you have no answer for it.

So in my post #174 I decided to focus on 'glory' as you keep stressing.
So I asked the question in that post: Why did Jesus give believers the glory that the Father gave him? (hint: read verse 22 all the way to the end).

What do you think?

Dude, I'm on your side.

I was responding to Big Daddy and trying to get him to clarify.

Did you mean to respond to him as well?

 

[fatboys]

Oh, I see...you mean because of its content, we should reject the Qur'an as being from God. Okay.

See, I was confused, because what you wrote was "Both must have been written by prophets of God to say those words." So I figured, well, the Bible and the Qur'an use literally the same word (in Arabic) to describe their respective Jesus figures, but as you have correctly written now, the fact that they have this similarity and are talking about 'the same guy' when using it doesn't mean that they actually express the same ideas about Him, and because the Qur'anic idea of Jesus doesn't match the Biblical idea, you actually don't have to (and shouldn't) accept the Qur'an based on the words it uses. That I agree with completely.

That's also the exact same logic that goes into the Christian rejection of the Book of Mormon and Mormonism: they're talking about 'the same figure' (at least insofar as they identify Him as being so), but the Jesus of the Book of Mormon is not the Jesus of the Bible, as Mormon theology is radically different than Christian theology, so the mere fact that the Book of Mormon is a book that says whatever it does about Jesus doesn't somehow automatically mean that it comes from God. That needs to be tested. We cannot simply conflate Mormon theology and Christian theology just because Mormons say XYZ about Christ if the Christ they are talking about is not the Christ we are talking about, which we know is the case by looking at Mormon theology, so the Book of Mormon is rejected on sound theological grounds (i.e., the Mormon refusal to confess one God who is manifest in three hypostases equally sharing one essence), no differently than the Qur'an is. The Qur'an says some true things and some false things about Jesus, so we as Christians say "That is not our Christ." The Book of Mormon and the Mormon religion also say some true things and some false things about Jesus, so we as Christians say "That is not our Christ."

Thank you for agreeing with this, at least in principle. I wish that you would one day apply it to your own religion, but I suppose even this level of agreement is some amount of progress, because now you can see why we reject your religion and its book.

Have you read the Book of Mormon? You tell me what difference there is in the Jesus of the bible and the Jesus of the Book of Mormon.

 

[Jane_Doe]

=

Have you read the Book of Mormon? You tell me what difference there is in the Jesus of the bible and the Jesus of the Book of Mormon.

This is an excellent question, that I would like to hear dzheremi's answer to.

 

[dzheremi]

Have you read the Book of Mormon?

Yes, I have.

You tell me what difference there is in the Jesus of the bible and the Jesus of the Book of Mormon.

The difference is to be found across Mormonism in all of its sources, not just the BOM. But in the BOM there are still contradictions:

On the theological front, Jesus calls Himself the Father and the Son in the Book of Mormon (Ether 3:14). This is foreign to the Christ of the Bible, the Jesus Who is worshiped in Christianity.

On a historical front, the Book of Mormon claims that Jesus appeared after His resurrection the people of the Book of Mormon, such as the Nephites (3 Nephi, Ch. 11). There are no such people and no such visitations testified to in the Holy Bible.

etc. etc.

On a more general front, the Mormon Jesus is bound by (and an expositor of) the Mormon theology, having a 'body of spirit' prior to His incarnation, being one of many 'spirit children' of a heavenly father and mother, and so forth. Not all of these are found in the BOM proper, as I've already written, but they are all in contradiction to Christianity.

 

[Jane_Doe]

On a historical front, the Book of Mormon claims that Jesus appeared after His resurrection the people of the Book of Mormon, such as the Nephites (3 Nephi, Ch. 11). There are no such people and no such visitations testified to in the Holy Bible.

Not a contradiction at all.

 

[dzheremi]

I am aware that you and other Mormons don't see it as contradicting the Bible. I was merely answering Fatboys' request for specifics with a few examples.

 

[fatboys]

Yes, I have.



The difference is to be found across Mormonism in all of its sources, not just the BOM. But in the BOM there are still contradictions:

On the theological front, Jesus calls Himself the Father and the Son in the Book of Mormon (Ether 3:14). This is foreign to the Christ of the Bible, the Jesus Who is worshiped in Christianity.

On a historical front, the Book of Mormon claims that Jesus appeared after His resurrection the people of the Book of Mormon, such as the Nephites (3 Nephi, Ch. 11). There are no such people and no such visitations testified to in the Holy Bible.

etc. etc.

On a more general front, the Mormon Jesus is bound by (and an expositor of) the Mormon theology, having a 'body of spirit' prior to His incarnation, being one of many 'spirit children' of a heavenly father and mother, and so forth. Not all of these are found in the BOM proper, as I've already written, but they are all in contradiction to Christianity.

We are talking about the Book of Mormon. You made the claim that it contradicts the Bible. Where is this contradiction? Don't cop out and generalize it. If you can't find the contradiction the the book is the word of God as well as the Bible. If it is the word of God then Joseph Smith was a prophet and did just as is recorded restored christs ancient church.

 

[Jane_Doe]

I am aware that you and other Mormons don't see it as contradicting the Bible. I was merely answering Fatboys' request for specifics with a few examples.

But there's not contradictions and doesn't address Fatboy's question...

 

[Peter1000]

A 10-year old child can also understand that the chapter of John 17 is talking about God's glory ONLY and not His Divinity. It is still you, and other lds, that have to twist Scripture to fit your theology based on your lack of understanding.

Again, you are sidestepping the real topic, apparently, you have no answer for it.

So in my post #174 I decided to focus on 'glory' as you keep stressing.
So I asked the question in that post: Why did Jesus give believers the glory that the Father gave him? (hint: read verse 22 all the way to the end).

What do you think?

 

[Peter1000]

Dude, I'm on your side.

I was responding to Big Daddy and trying to get him to clarify.

Did you mean to respond to him as well?

Sorry, responded to the wrong person. I am glad you are on my side. Thank you.

 

[dzheremi]

But there's not contradictions and doesn't address Fatboy's question...

Yes there are. Christ is not the Father and the Son, and Christ did not visit the Americas. Both are contradicted by the Bible (which testifies explicitly to His relationship with the Father -- not His being the Father, since He's not -- and the places where He and His apostles visited, which did not include the Americas) and the faith of the Christian Church, yet are present in Mormonism and attested to in the BOM. Those are contradictions.

This is really not up for debate, and I am not seeking such a debate nor will I submit to being part of one by the force of Mormon insistence that their religion's narrative does not contradict the Bible and the historic Christian faith. Don't ask for things that you can't actually handle receiving.

 

[fatboys]

Yes there are. Christ is not the Father and the Son, and Christ did not visit the Americas. Both are contradicted by the Bible (which testifies explicitly to His relationship with the Father -- not His being the Father, since He's not -- and the places where He and His apostles visited, which did not include the Americas) and the faith of the Christian Church, yet are present in Mormonism and attested to in the BOM. Those are contradictions.

This is really not up for debate, and I am not seeking such a debate nor will I submit to being part of one by the force of Mormon insistence that their religion's narrative does not contradict the Bible and the historic Christian faith. Don't ask for things that you can't actually handle receiving.

First off you have no idea as to whether or not Christ visited the Americas. This is your opinion and the bible teaches tha he was going to go to his other sheep of the house of Israel. Second you have had a long discussion with Peter about this very topic of the godhead. Either you haven't read the Book of Mormon or you have read selected parts. In your understanding of the trinity I thought Christ was the Father as well as the son.

 

[NYCGuy]

. If you can't find the contradiction the the book is the word of God as well as the Bible. If it is the word of God then Joseph Smith was a prophet and did just as is recorded restored christs ancient church.

This is funniest thing I've read in a long time.

Is this the logic that Mormonism relies upon?

 

[fatboys]

This is funniest thing I've read in a long time.

Is this the logic that Mormonism relies upon?

It could be funny but doesn't make it less true. Just because you think it is not the word of God doesn't mean that it is not. Millions of people don't think the bible is not the word of God. Does that make them right? The Book of Mormon teaches the gospel that is found in the bible. In fact there are teachings about doctrines that are taught more clear and beautiful in the Book of Mormon such as the resurrection and justice and mercy. Yet because you believe it is false you have limited the blessings you can receive because you think it is false. It's like throwing the baby out with th bath water. Your afraid to read it because then you will begin to doubt your stand that it is false. If you don't want to believe that God restored his church I understand why you don't. Now that is funny.

 

[Peter1000]

Oh, I see...you mean because of its content, we should reject the Qur'an as being from God. Okay.

You seem to be in a sarcastic mood here. So I would just ask: what other way would we reject it, because its whole content turns out to be anti-Christ????

"Both must have been written by prophets of God to say those words."

What post did I say both the Qur'an and the BOM were written by prophets of God to say those words.
Not in post 181 that responds to this topic?

as Mormon theology is radically different than Christian theology, so the mere fact that the Book of Mormon is a book that says whatever it does about Jesus doesn't somehow automatically mean that it comes from God.

Your trying hard to move the goalpost, from what the BOM says vs what the Qur'an says about Jesus Christ (which is the topic). You want to enlarge your search now to include all LDS thougnt, not just the topic BOM.

You are doing that because I am right about the BOM. It agrees with the bible. From beginning to the end it focuses on one message, and that is Jesus Christ, God of the OT took on flesh and came to earth to preach the gospel and be sacrificed for the sins of all mankind.

Yes, it even says that Jesus came to the Americas and visited part of the House of Israel here, so that these people who were 15,000 miles from their brothers in Jerusalem would know for a surety that Jesus had come to earth and done all that their prophets had prophecied of since 600bc.

Today there is evidence that Jesus did come to people in the Americas after his resurrection, but it is not enough evidence for you to believe. But one day there will be enough evidence that even the hardest heart will have to say, enough is enough, I believe and will join the church in droves.

Will you join the Mormon church when the outward evidence is so overwhelming that Jesus came to the Americas just after his resurrection in Jerusalem? Evidence so powerful that you cannot deny it any longer?

 

[Peter1000]

This is funniest thing I've read in a long time.

Is this the logic that Mormonism relies upon?

Stop and think for just a minute and it will no longer be funny to you.

If the BOM is a true scripture, God breathed, then 2 major concepts come from this statement.

1) Jesus is the Christ, the God of the OT, come to earth in the flesh to teach his gospel and to die on the cross for the sins of all mankind. This is the centerpiece of the BOM, namely that Jesus is the Christ.

2) A secondary concept is: the person that brought forth the BOM did so with the power and authority of Jesus Christ. That person can legitimately be considered a modern day prophet, working in conjuction with Jesus Christ to restore the true church of Jesus Christ to the earth along with new scripture that agrees with the bible about Jesus and confirms the prophetic nature of the the man that brought it forth. That man was JS.

So laugh all you want. I just have 1 question: When the day arrives that there is undeniable evidence that Jesus did visit the people of the House of Israel in the Americas after his resurrection in Jerusalem, will you join the Mormon church? The BOM is the only book that proclaims this message, so if it turns out that Jesus did come to the Americas, will you then say, OK, I believe the BOM is true and join the Mormon church??

 

[Peter1000]

Yes there are. Christ is not the Father and the Son, and Christ did not visit the Americas. Both are contradicted by the Bible (which testifies explicitly to His relationship with the Father -- not His being the Father, since He's not -- and the places where He and His apostles visited, which did not include the Americas) and the faith of the Christian Church, yet are present in Mormonism and attested to in the BOM. Those are contradictions.

This is really not up for debate, and I am not seeking such a debate nor will I submit to being part of one by the force of Mormon insistence that their religion's narrative does not contradict the Bible and the historic Christian faith. Don't ask for things that you can't actually handle receiving.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

This is the iconic scripture that gives us some of the names of Jesus. One of those names is the Everlasting Father. So the bible and the BOM agree, Jesus is called the Father also at times.