If The Book of Mormon is false then why does the Bible make reference to it?

[A New Dawn]

Perhaps I misunderstood you. Weren't you claiming that one of the two stickes was a reference to the BoM?

His reference to my reference could be that just because the "stick" mentioned in Ezekial might not represent a scroll or book, it doesn't mean it is not a true connection, nevertheless. If it refers to the unity of the tribes of Israel/Judah (as stated in this commentary provided for us by happyinhisgrace), it would take into consideration all of Israel, not just a portion of it. The purpose of the BoM and the restoration is to the uniting of Judah/Israel, and the BoM is to bring to remembrance of those remnant portions of Israel that God made covenants with their fathers that he intends to keep and has blessings that He wants to pass on to all those who are of the House of Israel.

 

[pyro457]

Jenda answered it for me.

 

[Serapha]

Has anyone taked about this verse yet? It says that there would be "a book that is sealed." The Bible never refers to itself as a book, so it cant be talking about itself (also when was the Bible sealed?). But the Book of Mormon was a sealed book. Infact when Joseph Smith translated it 2/3 of it remained sealed and he was not permited to translated that section, (for reasons known only by God). The Book of Mormon was also a book from a destroyed civilization. These verses seem to talk about a time of aptosasy when the "book that is sealed" would come and it says that in that time many men would "draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me" It says that they are taught by the traditions of men, by their precepts.

Isaiah 29:10-14, 18-19, 24, contains several references to The Book of Mormon.This chapter talks of a time of apostasy when prophecy would cease (v. 10, also v. 13), followed by a revelation containing a "vision of all" that would be in "a book that is sealed." Several details in verses 11 and 12 correlate well with the history of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon (with Prof. Charles Anthon as the learned man and Joseph Smith as the unlearned man). I see the book being involved in the process of restoration, the "marvelous work and a wonder" (vs. 13 and 14), for "the words of the book" would bring truth to the ears and eyes of those who had been deaf and blind (spiritually) (v.18, see also v.24). This book from a lost and destroyed civilization would "whisper out of the dust" (v. 4) to future generations. To me this says that The Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was known by Isaiah.

Hi there!



Interestingly enough, the Islam faith also claims that this passage is speaking of the Qur'an.



But concerning the bom and the reference in Isaiah...

http://www.equip.org/free/DM197.htm



ISAIAH 29:11-12

Mormonism teaches this passage was fulfilled when Joseph Smith received the ‘Gold Plates’ and Martin Harris took a copy of some of the ‘caractors’ to Professor Anthon. A portion of this event is recorded in the Pearl of Great Price, JS 2:63-65.



These events do not fit Isaiah 29:11-12 because the text shows



1) this is a parable and the subject is a vision and not a book,

2) the vision of the prophets of that day had become as meaningless to the people as the words of a book that was sealed. Isaiah was referring to the condition of the people at that time and not a book of some ‘future time,’

3)according to Harris, the professor said the translation was correct. Anthon could have said this only if he read it. But Isaiah said the learned man could not read the book because it was sealed! The only way the professor knew the plates were ‘sealed’ was because Harris, “Told him they were.”



In our passage of Scripture, in Isaiah, the Book went to the learned man first–then to the unlearned. But the Mormon story has the book of gold delivered first to the “unlearned” Smith who copied some of the ‘caractors’ of his translation on a piece of paper which was taken to the “learned” Anthon. In Isaiah the same sealed book was taken to both the learned man and the unlearned man. But Anthon did not receive any book–sealed or unsealed, and in Isaiah the book was delivered to the unlearned and he simply said, “I am not learned,” and he made no effort to read or translate it. But Smith claimed he (Smith) did read the book, even though unlearned.



The Mormon Apostle LeGrand Richards said, “Professor Anthon did not realize that he was literally fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah.” (op. cit., p.50) But the professor didn’t believe he was fulfilling Mormon prophecy, because in a letter to E.D. Howe, a Painsville, Ohio newspaper editor, he (Anthon) relates the events as a hoax and a scheme to ‘cheat’ the farmer (Harris) out of money. Instead of fulfilling prophecy he (Anthon) became somewhat of a prophet himself, in that Harris actually did lose money.



Let no one tell you what a passage or portion of Scripture says without checking it yourself with what the Holy Spirit says to your heart. And when you do read a Scripture, read all of the passage in context. Remember – “A text taken from its context, becomes a pretext.”

 

[Petr]

In Ezekiel 37:15-17, Ezekiel prophesied about the joining of two "sticks" from different parts of the House Israel, one from the tribe of Judah and one from the tribe of Ephraim (from Joseph). These "sticks" refer to two volumes of scripture. The Hebrew word used in Ezekiel 37 is not the usual word for stick, but is "etz", which means a wooden tablet. Wooden tablets, based on modern archaeological data, were used as a writing tablet on which a layer of wax was coated for writing with a stylus. These tablets appear to have been a major medium of writing in the ancient world, though few survived because wood rots. The tablets were like pages of a book that could be bound together to make a book. Based on the Hebrew and based on what we now know about the use of "etz" as a writing medium, Ezek. 37:15-17 makes sense as a prophecy of two volumes of scripture that would be united in the last days. These volumes are the Bible (from the tribe of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (from the tribe of Joseph, for the founders of the Nephite people who came out of Jerusalem were descendants of Joseph). Now I know there are probally other translations of this verse (there always are) but this one makes a lot of sense and includes historical data to back it up.

Complete rubbish taken out of context:
saying, And you, son of man, take one stick to yourself and write on it, For Judah, and for his companions, the sons of Israel. And take another stick and write on it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and all the house of Israel, his companions.

Who is that son of man?
3 And He said to me, Son of man,

3 coming the Word of Jehovah became known to Ezekiel (ch 1)

1) The son of man in this case is meant Ezekiel himself. I don't recall Ezekiel being a writer of any BOM story.

2) It doesn't speak of the end times

3) Bible and BOM will never merge.

Isaiah 29:10-14, 18-19, 24, contains several references to The Book of Mormon.This chapter talks of a time of apostasy when prophecy would cease (v. 10, also v. 13), followed by a revelation containing a "vision of all" that would be in "a book that is sealed." Several details in verses 11 and 12 correlate well with the history of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon (with Prof. Charles Anthon as the learned man and Joseph Smith as the unlearned man). I see the book being involved in the process of restoration, the "marvelous work and a wonder" (vs. 13 and 14)

More taking out of context:
Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David camped. Isaiah 29:1

And the whole vision to you is like the words of a sealed book. Isaiah 29:1

It's saying this vision is to Ariel like a sealed book, not that the sealed book contains visions.

, for "the words of the book" would bring truth to the ears and eyes of those who had been deaf and blind (spiritually) (v.18, see also v.24). This book from a lost and destroyed civilization would "whisper out of the dust" (v. 4) to future generations. To me this says that The Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was known by Isaiah.

Isaiah is referring to the book of Isaiah.

In Isaiah 2:2-5 it says that "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it." (v.2)(KJV). These verses say that after a time of apostasy the Church would be restored "in the top fo the mountains", I recently found out that Utah, taken from the Ute indian tribe, means high "place/mountain tops" this fits quite well in with verse 2. almost ironicly well. And Utahs name was not given by LDS members, it was given by non LDS members.

All this is, is just speculation. Mountain of the Lord has always been referred to Moun Sion, which is in Jerusalem.

Also in John 10:16 "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." Chist is reffering to "other sheep" that would hear His voice and join Him. And He is not reffering to the gentiles, for they (the gentiles) would not hear from Christ directly but from His servents. For Christ was "sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt. 15:24

Well thats not what it really says, it says:
And I have other sheep which are not of this fold. I must also lead those, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock, one Shepherd.
Jesus never left (28:20), Jesus could simply speak to Gentiles in spirit.
In Matt 15:24 the "lost sheep of Israel" He referred to the Canannite woman. A greate example of taking stuff out of context

 

[neocon]

If the Book of Mormon is false, as so many claim it to be, then why does the Bible make reference to another book of scripture which can be resonably judged to be The Book of Mormon?
The Scriptures I am talking about are Ezekiel 37:15-17, Isaiah 29:10-14, 18-19, 24, Isaiah 2:2-5, and John 10:16.

In Ezekiel 37:15-17, Ezekiel prophesied about the joining of two "sticks" from different parts of the House Israel, one from the tribe of Judah and one from the tribe of Ephraim (from Joseph). These "sticks" refer to two volumes of scripture. The Hebrew word used in Ezekiel 37 is not the usual word for stick, but is "etz", which means a wooden tablet. Wooden tablets, based on modern archaeological data, were used as a writing tablet on which a layer of wax was coated for writing with a stylus. These tablets appear to have been a major medium of writing in the ancient world, though few survived because wood rots. The tablets were like pages of a book that could be bound together to make a book. Based on the Hebrew and based on what we now know about the use of "etz" as a writing medium, Ezek. 37:15-17 makes sense as a prophecy of two volumes of scripture that would be united in the last days. These volumes are the Bible (from the tribe of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (from the tribe of Joseph, for the founders of the Nephite people who came out of Jerusalem were descendants of Joseph). Now I know there are probally other translations of this verse (there always are) but this one makes a lot of sense and includes historical data to back it up.

Isaiah 29:10-14, 18-19, 24, contains several references to The Book of Mormon.This chapter talks of a time of apostasy when prophecy would cease (v. 10, also v. 13), followed by a revelation containing a "vision of all" that would be in "a book that is sealed." Several details in verses 11 and 12 correlate well with the history of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon (with Prof. Charles Anthon as the learned man and Joseph Smith as the unlearned man). I see the book being involved in the process of restoration, the "marvelous work and a wonder" (vs. 13 and 14), for "the words of the book" would bring truth to the ears and eyes of those who had been deaf and blind (spiritually) (v.18, see also v.24). This book from a lost and destroyed civilization would "whisper out of the dust" (v. 4) to future generations. To me this says that The Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was known by Isaiah.

In Isaiah 2:2-5 it says that "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it." (v.2)(KJV). These verses say that after a time of apostasy the Church would be restored "in the top fo the mountains", I recently found out that Utah, taken from the Ute indian tribe, means high "place/mountain tops" this fits quite well in with verse 2. almost ironicly well. And Utahs name was not given by LDS members, it was given by non LDS members.

Also in John 10:16 "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." Chist is reffering to "other sheep" that would hear His voice and join Him. And He is not reffering to the gentiles, for they (the gentiles) would not hear from Christ directly but from His servents. For Christ was "sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt. 15:24

(all of these scriptures were taken from the KJV of the Bible)

Hmmmmmmm, nowhere do the words Book of Mormon appear in the above verses- do they? As for the interp- a muslim could make the same claim.

 

[unbound]

...

 

[kiararose]

I have to agree with "A NEW DAWN" That the fall of adam was necessary. I only makes sense to me. Yes it does state in the bible that It was a bad thing but doesnt it also say in the bible that God knoweth all things. I beleive that god knows everything he knows what will happen in our lives and the all the sins we will make and have mad. Jesus suffered for all our sins. He has suffered every hurt every pain. So obviously he knows the sins we will make because he has already suffered them for us so we are able to repent and return to our heavenly father. So obviously he knew that Adam would sin and portake of the fruit. Yes Sin is Wrong in Gods eyes but we would not be here if he hadn't sinned. It just makes sense. Before the earth was even created God had a plan and that was part of the plan. Adam sinned so we can have free agency. Without pain we would not know joy without suffering we would not appreciate..so on and so on witch brings us glory.

"the fall was a necessary, positive event that facilitated the restorative atonement, the progress of humanity, and the final fulfillment of God’s purpose. An official Mormon source explains that this was part of God’s optimistic plan: “When Adam was sent into this world, it was with the understanding that he would violate a law, transgress a law, in order to bring to pass this mortal condition we find ourselves in today.…[The Lord] designed that they should do [this].…The fall of man…was the means of furthering the purposes of the Lord in the progress of man, rather than as a means of hindering them.”2 According to the Book of Mormon, because the chief end of humanity is personal happiness, the purpose of Christ’s atonement was happiness for benevolent recipients.3 The celebrated Mormon scripture declares, “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy” (2 Nephi 2:25).
Mormon scripture elsewhere says, “For behold, this is my [i.e., God’s] work and my glory — to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). Joseph F. Smith, past Mormon president, comments, “Indeed, the whole purpose of God in bringing to pass the earth life of man is to inure to the welfare and enlargement of man as urged in the teaching of the Prophet.”4 This humanistic purpose is in sharp contrast with biblical writings that state that humans were created for the pleasure and glory of God (e.g., Isa. 43:7, 21).5

without opposites a body would be “as dead,” for it would have neither life nor death, corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, sense nor insensibility. It is arguing that a body cannot have life without also having death. Likewise, the first humans could not have had happiness without also having its opposite, misery. Without opposites, the passage says, there would have been no purpose for the creation of humans.

 

[A New Dawn]

This is interesting. I would like to state that this tread is 2 1/2 years old and my position on this discussion (and all others from that time period) has changed. I no longer believe in the Book of Mormon and believe it's teachings to be contrary to those in the Bible (except those portions copied out of Isaiah). If you quote a post of mine, or agree to something I posted back then, please know that I believe it to be a false position without scriptural support. Truth can be found within the pages of the Bible, and I pray that each of you that continues to believe in the BoM and Joseph Smith's teachings comes to the truth.

God bless you all.

 

[Heartbreaker]

from what i read it basically boils down to this: the book of mormon is no different than, say, The Lord of the rings. both are glorious, fictionalized version of history.

and now i am going to bow out before this gets eally ugly.