dzheremi
Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
- Aug 27, 2014
- 13,546
- 13,698
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Private
They are definitely related to Christianity. The Book of Mormon is about Jesus Christ's dealings with the ancient people who lived on the American continent and His visit to them as he stated:
By that standard (the "this book talks about Jesus" standard), then the Qur'an should be a part of the Christian canon just as much as the Book of Mormon or any other Mormon book. Yet it isn't, and what's more I know from talking to Mormons on this board who have made the same argument in the past as you are making now that Mormons will reject this comparison, because the Islamic faith is clearly outside of Christianity, and furthermore the content of the Qur'an is out of whack in a major way with what is claimed about Jesus Christ in the Holy Bible. You don't say.
But for the Christian, that is precisely the level at which the comparison is most apt: They both (the Qur'an and the Mormon literature) make up fables about their own "Jesus" figures which they then claim to be the same the Christian figure of Jesus Christ, and then their partisans act incredulous when these fables and the books which contain them are not put on the same level as holy scripture within Christianity.
It is most curious...and self-serving. Another iteration of it from you will not change the response already given (in the above-linked thread, and I guess again here), which is the Mormonism is rejected based on the content of its beliefs, and because of that the books that it has produced (the BOM, the D&C, the POGP, and anything else you can come up with) are considered to be outside of Christianity.
(New Testament | John 10:16)
16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
Yeah, this verse is about the preaching of the Good News to the gentiles. It has nothing to do with Mormon anything except that Mormons say it does, which is no kind of standard that anyone who is not Mormon should be expected to go by.
The Doctrine and Covenants are revelations given to latter day prophets by Jesus Christ.
No, they're not. I understand that this is your view of them as a Mormon, but I am a Christian, not a Mormon, so I don't think there is anything wrong with rejecting them outright, since they're not what your religion says they are. Your prophets have never received any revelation from God in any sense, whether codified within your religion or otherwise. Mormonism is not Christians and its writings have no bearing on anything in the Christian world.
Sorry to have to be so blunt, but that's kinda the most straightforward way to put it.
The Pearle of Great Price was translated from ancient Egyptian papyrus.
No it wasn't. I'm not even sure that the LDS church itself still teaches that. On their website, they state:
Many people saw the papyri, but no eyewitness account of the translation survives, making it impossible to reconstruct the process. Only small fragments of the long papyrus scrolls once in Joseph Smith’s possession exist today. The relationship between those fragments and the text we have today is largely a matter of conjecture.
We do know some things about the translation process. The word translation typically assumes an expert knowledge of multiple languages. Joseph Smith claimed no expertise in any language. He readily acknowledged that he was one of the “weak things of the world,” called to speak words sent “from heaven.”1 Speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Lord said, “You cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.”2 The same principle can be applied to the book of Abraham. The Lord did not require Joseph Smith to have knowledge of Egyptian. By the gift and power of God, Joseph received knowledge about the life and teachings of Abraham.
We do know some things about the translation process. The word translation typically assumes an expert knowledge of multiple languages. Joseph Smith claimed no expertise in any language. He readily acknowledged that he was one of the “weak things of the world,” called to speak words sent “from heaven.”1 Speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Lord said, “You cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.”2 The same principle can be applied to the book of Abraham. The Lord did not require Joseph Smith to have knowledge of Egyptian. By the gift and power of God, Joseph received knowledge about the life and teachings of Abraham.
In other words, it's not really a translation of anything, but is now understood as being more of a spiritual exercise whereby Joseph received knowledge from God somehow connected to the papyri without reflecting the actual contents of it. Which for our purposes is as good as saying that they do not affirm that it actually comes from the papyri -- because it doesn't.
They are accepted by over 16 million members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
So what? The Baghavad Gita is accepted as scripture by over a billion Hindus. What does that tell us about anything?
Upvote
0