LDS Non-Mormons Read This Before You Read the Book of Mormon!

[Rescued One]

Basically because she didn't know, she went to an anti Mormon site and believed everything they said.

No, I went to the LDS scripture, Doctrine and Covenants, Section 135.

D&C 135:3. Joseph Smith Has Done More for the Salvation of Men Than Anyone Other Than Jesus
This bold statement has caused some critics of the Church to say that the Saints think more of Joseph Smith than they do of the Savior. Such critics ignore the fact that the Saints look to the Prophet with reverence because of what he did for their understanding of Jesus Christ and His mission.

When one thinks about such prophets and leaders as Adam, Moses, Isaiah, Abraham, and Nephi, is it justifiable to say that Joseph Smith did more than any of these for the salvation of humanity? Likely the Prophet Joseph Smith was not greater than they were in righteousness or commitment, but only Jesus has done more for the salvation of God’s children than did the Prophet, as is evident in the following list of some of the things he did under the direction of the Lord:

He taught correct concepts about the nature of the Father and Son.

He translated and published the Book of Mormon by the power of God.

He was the means by which the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods were restored...
Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual Section 135 A Tribute to the Martyrs

lds.org

"This bold statement has caused some critics of the Church to say that the Saints think more of Joseph Smith than they do of the Savior."

This statement has no source listed. I have never heard even an ininformed critic say such a thing. It is apparently an attempt to cast suspicion on critics of the Mormon religion and false prophets.

"He taught correct concepts about the nature of the Father and Son."

This statement isn't true.

D&C 130
22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

We've provided information about the LDS gods on other threads.

There are no plates from the supposed book that Joseph Smith translated.

Book of Mormon - Wikipedia

 

[Rescued One]

Joseph Smith tells of his ancestry, family members, and their early abodes—An unusual excitement about religion prevails in western New York—He determines to seek wisdom as directed by James—The Father and the Son appear, and Joseph is called to his prophetic ministry. (Verses 1–20.)

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

Joseph Smith—History 1

John 6:46 KJV Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

John 5:37 KJV And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

Greetings, brother. I'm glad you're reading this.

 

[Rescued One]

I think Moses spoke with God face to face

But your Jesus hadn't told Moses that there was a father god.

 

[withwonderingawe]

Even if that was what it said I do not see the real issue....I am not a Mormon, but if I believed as one I would think that statement OK. As Jesus was not a mere man, it could easily be said that he does not qualify in the statement. I mean, JS did found the particular faith, without him it would possibly not exist. Just as a Muslim would feel similar for Mohammed I would think.

Maybe I should say this pamphlet was written by Ed Decker an excomunicated Mormon, not once but twice for adultery. He knew exactly what he was doing and he knew most Christians would not understand what he had done.

Jesus/Yahweh saved us without him we could not be saved no way no how. Joseph Smith could have been replaced by anyone, he was even told so if he didn't straiten up and repent.

 

[Evan Briggs]

22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us.

Yes this doesnt make sense when God is a spirit.


“But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”
‭‭John‬ ‭4:23-24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[Evan Briggs]

I think Moses spoke with God face to face

I'm sorry friend but this is not correct.

“And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭33:20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[Rescued One]

Maybe I should say this pamphlet was written by Ed Decker an excomunicated Mormon, not once but twice for adultery. He knew exactly what he was doing and he knew most Christians would not understand what he had done.

Why criticize Ed Decker? How does that make Mormonism true. And why would you read "anti-Mormon" literature?

From the New Era, 1974:
As you know by now there is no scarcity of good books to read, study, and ponder. But there is a possibility that you can be so busy pursuing an education and striving to be well-rounded in thought that you neglect the pursuit of those things that matter most in an eternal perspective of life. If you are not careful, you can be so busy reading and studying from good books that you have little time, if any, to pursue a knowledge of the saving principles of the gospel...

...along with reading the scriptures and conference addresses there must be a serious effort made to study and ponder the things that are read. The gospel needs to be studied as seriously as one would study any other subject.
Seek Ye Out of the Best Books - New Era Aug. 1974 - new-era

For you to understand the doctrinal and historical content and context of the scriptures and our history, you will need to study from the “best books,” as the Lord has directed (D&C 88:118). The “best books” include the scriptures, the teachings of modern prophets and apostles, and the best LDS scholarship available. Through your diligent efforts to learn by study and by faith, you will be able to help your students learn the skills and attitudes necessary to distinguish between reliable information that will lift them up and the half-truths and incorrect interpretations of doctrine, history, and practices that will bring them down.
By Study and by Faith - Ensign December 2016 - ensign

Jesus/Yahweh saved us without him we could not be saved no way no how. Joseph Smith could have been replaced by anyone, he was even told so if he didn't straiten up and repent.

President Brigham Young offered this testimonial: “Who can justly say aught against Joseph Smith? … I am bold to say that, Jesus Christ excepted, no better man ever lived or does live upon this earth” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 459).

President George Albert Smith observed: “Many have belittled Joseph Smith, but those who have will be forgotten in the remains of mother earth, and the odor of their infamy will ever be with them, but honor, majesty, and fidelity to God, exemplified by Joseph Smith and attached to his name, will never die” (cited by Harold B. Lee in Ensign, Jan. 1974, p. 126).

Joseph Smith was and is a prophet of the living God. I know that the Lord appeared to him, called him, and empowered him to reveal the Father and Son and the doctrines of salvation to a world that had been wandering for centuries in darkness. May the Lord endow each of us with the commitment and spiritual strength to live as we believe, in order that we can evidence our appreciation for God our Father, for Jesus Christ his Son, and for their preeminent witness in these last days, Joseph Smith the Prophet.
Robert L. Millet, Joseph Smith among the Prophets, Ensign June 1994
Joseph Smith among the Prophets - Ensign June 1994 - ensign

“The more sure word of prophecy means a man’s knowing that he is sealed up unto eternal life, by revelation and the spirit of prophecy, through the power of the Holy Priesthood.” (D&C 131:5.)

Read about the Second Annointing.

The initial second anointing took place on September 28, 1843, when Joseph and his wife Emma Smith received it.
Second anointing - Wikipedia

 

[Jane_Doe]

Yes this doesnt make sense when God is a spirit.‬‬

Do you believe Jesus to be God? Does He not have a body?

I'm sorry friend but this is not correct.

Actually it's directly in the Bible: Exodus 33: 11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."

 

[withwonderingawe]

Why criticize Ed Decker? How does that make Mormonism true. And why would you read "anti-Mormon" literature?

A sweet Christian friend gave it to me so I felt obligated to read it and answer her questions. The first part of it was teaching that we worship Joseph Smith and it quoted the eulogy for Joseph Smith found in D&C 135. Decker wrote;

"Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. "

instead of

"Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it."

I don't remember if it had the appropriate ...... or not but he deliberately left out the most import three words.

Any communication with the intent to deceive is a lie, Decker was lying by leaving out those three words.

 

[Evan Briggs]

Do you believe Jesus to be God? Does He not have a body?

Actually it's directly in the Bible: Exodus 33: 11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."

Thank you for bring this to my attention, but I will have to look deeper into what this scripture is actually saying.

 

[Rescued One]

A sweet Christian friend gave it to me so I felt obligated to read it and answer her questions. The first part of it was teaching that we worship Joseph Smith and it quoted the eulogy for Joseph Smith found in D&C 135. Decker wrote;

"Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. "

instead of

"Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it."

I don't remember if it had the appropriate ...... or not but he deliberately left out the most import three words.

Any communication with the intent to deceive is a lie, Decker was lying by leaving out those three words.

Why harp on Decker's sins? I never read his literature and was never interested in it. When you gripe about a few people in the world, it doesn't do anything to make Mormonism true. And Mormons aren't the only people on the planet whose religion receives scrutiny. As for leaving things out, Mormons do that a lot!

 

[Rescued One]

Exodus 33:11. The Lord spake unto Moses face to face — Or, mouth to mouth, as in Numbers 12:8. Not that God hath a face or mouth, or that Moses could behold it; which is denied, Exodus 33:20; but the sense is, he spoke with him freely, familiarly, and immediately, and not as he did to other prophets, in dreams, or visions, or by an angel. As a man speaketh unto his friend —Which intimates not only that God revealed himself to Moses with greater clearness than to any other of the prophets, but also with greater expressions of particular kindness than to any other. He spake not as a prince to a subject, but as a man to his friend, whom he loves, and with whom he takes sweet counsel.
Exodus 33 Benson Commentary

 

[fatboys]

Why harp on Decker's sins? I never read his literature and was never interested in it. When you gripe about a few people in the world, it doesn't do anything to make Mormonism true. And Mormons aren't the only people on the planet whose religion receives scrutiny. As for leaving things out, Mormons do that a lot!

Because that is not the only lie he ever told about mormons. He is a liar and is a deceiver.

 

[Rescued One]

Because that is not the only lie he ever told about mormons. He is a liar and is a deceiver.

I've known many liars and deceivers. The whole world lieth in wickedness.

 

[Rescued One]

Any communication with the intent to deceive is a lie.

Well, as I said, I don't read his literature. Does he still publish it?

And I agree that withholding information can be deceitful. How often people have left things out when I've asked questions.

 

[dzheremi]

The 'correct(ed)' version -- keeping "save Jesus only" -- still isn't correct, as it places Smith above the Apostles and Disciples who wrote the Holy Bible and evangelized the whole world with the true, living, salvific gospel of the risen Lord Jesus Christ. Talk about 'teaching properly'; you can't get more proper than having learned from Jesus Christ Himself! It is obvious that this is exactly what the Mormons believe happened in the case of their religion's founder, via his supposed visions, but of course from a Christian perspective there is no reason to assume that this is in fact the case just because Smith and his followers claim that it is true, and if we study the scriptures, the history of the Church and its fathers, and everything we can down to the present day, we will find many, many reasons to disagree with what Smith brought into the world.

So...no. That's still not right, though it's obvious why they would want to claim so anyway, for the purpose of aggrandizing the man and building up their community's own supposed prophetic character and history. Again, the Christian must simply maintain that this is all delusion on their part, no matter how sincerely maintained. It is no different than any other new/post-Christian religious movement which claims for itself some sort of prophecy and hence legitimacy which it does not in fact have when measured against the only religion in which all Truth is found (Christianity).

 

[Jane_Doe]

The 'correct(ed)' version -- keeping "save Jesus only" -- still isn't correct, as it places Smith above the Apostles and Disciples who wrote the Holy Bible and evangelized the whole world with the true, living, salvific gospel of the risen Lord Jesus Christ. Talk about 'teaching properly'; you can't get more proper than having learned from Jesus Christ Himself!

LDS perceptive: ALL prophets learn from Christ. That's nothing isolated to just the original 12 apostles. All individual members are also tutored and testified through the Spirit of God. That is the proper for all disciples of Christ to learn. Hand-me-down theology is inherently flawed due to it's dependence on the arm of the flesh.

 

[dzheremi]

LDS perceptive: ALL prophets learn from Christ. That's nothing isolated to just the original 12 apostles. All individual members are also tutored and testified through the Spirit of God. That is the proper for all disciples of Christ to learn. Hand-me-down theology is inherently flawed due to it's dependence on the arm of the flesh.

Here's why I am suspicious of this kind of thinking:

There are other Mormons on this website who in other threads make a big deal out of some sort of division between this group of early Christians and another of a later era, thinking that if they can pin one or another to differing theologies it will substantiate the Mormon religion's 'Great Apostasy' theory, whereby Mormonism is shown to be the continuation of the earliest, most pure Christianity there ever was.

When it is pointed out (as it was in the linked thread) that this is not actually how things work, the reason they tell me that this does not matter is because I have not quoted early enough sources. (Which is weird when the entire point of the discussion is the theological continuity between different eras, but anyway...)

So as a non-Mormon, I have to ask: Who is right -- you or the other Mormon? You seem to be saying that we cannot make the kinds of distinctions that would pit later 'prophets' against earlier ones based on what era they belong to, as all learn from Christ. I actually agree with that, but I note that according to other Mormons, this cannot be the case, because the Great Apostasy has to have happened in order to give your religion a reason to exist. So it happened by 200 AD...wait no, by 150-170...wait no...

(Etc. etc. You see where I'm going here.)

Your ecclesiology relies on doing just the thing that you say it is improper to do. On the one hand, Mormonism says "All prophets learn from Christ, not just the twelve", and on the other, "You cannot prove that your doctrine is continuous with the early Church if your references are not coterminous with the earliest Christians" (which they are, in the form of the Apostolic Fathers, but anyway...), which at least seems to place a priority on earlier sources relative to later ones...even thought Mormonism is found in neither...

Please explain this some more. How can you say "We don't make distinctions between eras of prophets" when you absolutely do push for those distinctions (that presumably don't exist...) when fighting against traditional Chrsitianity?

It would be as though I said "We reject Mormonism because we don't accept any other scripture than the Holy Bible", but then in another conversation mentioned books outside of the Holy Bible which we receive as scripture. That's inconsistent, or at best suspicious.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Here's why I am suspicious of this kind of thinking:

There are other Mormons on this website who in other threads make a big deal out of some sort of division between this group of early Christians and another of a later era, thinking that if they can pin one or another to differing theologies it will substantiate the Mormon religion's 'Great Apostasy' theory, whereby Mormonism is shown to be the continuation of the earliest, most pure Christianity there ever was.

When it is pointed out (as it was in the linked thread) that this is not actually how things work, the reason they tell me that this does not matter is because I have not quoted early enough sources. (Which is weird when the entire point of the discussion is the theological continuity between different eras, but anyway...)

So as a non-Mormon, I have to ask: Who is right -- you or the other Mormon? You seem to be saying that we cannot make the kinds of distinctions that would pit later 'prophets' against earlier ones based on what era they belong to, as all learn from Christ. I actually agree with that, but I note that according to other Mormons, this cannot be the case, because the Great Apostasy has to have happened in order to give your religion a reason to exist. So it happened by 200 AD...wait no, by 150-170...wait no...

(Etc. etc. You see where I'm going here.)

I see exactly where you're going: you misunderstand LDS doctrine. You're train got add apples and oranges together here, and such doesn't make any sense. Hence your resulting confusion.

Please explain this some more. How can you say "We don't make distinctions between eras of prophets" when you absolutely do push for those distinctions (that presumably don't exist...) when fighting against traditional Chrsitianity?

You're mixing up concepts. Yes there are different dispensation of time (Adam, Moses, etc). Yes, Christ still teaches all.

It would be as though I said "We reject Mormonism because we don't accept any other scripture than the Holy Bible", but then in another conversation mentioned books outside of the Holy Bible which we receive as scripture. That's inconsistent, or at best suspicious.

Christian do that all the time on here! Aka the Creeds- you must agree with the extra-scrptirual documents in order to be a "Christian" and yet they claim sola biblia.

 

[Evan Briggs]

Please watch...