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

[Serapha]

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!




Does Isaiah quote from the Book of Mormon? That would be "proof" that the bom was known to Isaiah.



~serapha~

 

[Serapha]

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.

Hi there!



I am going to be "kind" here... but I must burst your bubble. The statement that "this fits quite well" doesn't mean that it is an accurate rendering of a translation.... after all, Nibley did note that "mountains" could be translated "borders" and thus, that qualified the Wadi Tayyib as Ism as the Valley of Lemuel, and therefore, the book of mormon must be supported by archaeology and therefore... true.

NOT!

"this fits quite well" is just another term for the "pick and chose" form of translation.



~serapha~

 

[CrownCaster]

There is that problem again.

Just because Mormonism (LDSism) contradicts "Christianity" doesn't mean the Book of Mormon does. Y'all have to stop insinuating that. The BoM totally supports Christianity.

Obviously you have not read it then. I have, several times, and it does contradict. Where again was Jesus born? How are you saved? Is it by faith alone or faith, after all you can do? When exactly were the people FIRST called Christians? Just a couple little problems there.

 

[CrownCaster]

Maybe if you understood that verse you would understand that our "joy" is to give glory to God. If man hadn't fallen, we would not be able to do that.

And how could God save us if we didn't fall????

I am sure that God would be given much more glory if you followed His Word and not a man made religion.

Also, while God knew that the fall would happen, He could have done just fine without it. Had sin not entered into the world, Jesus would not have had to die. God being omnicient does not mean He wanted man to make such a choice.

 

[Nossa-the-Lame]

Ok, why does the BoM talk about creatures that either: A)Don't extist or B) will not exist untill europeans come to North AMerica? Why haven't anyone from either the Mormon chruch and other organizations find any archeologoical evidence to support anything in the BoM?

 

[Der Alte]

Hello Der Alter,

The boards were actually wooden "trays" that held wax, but they were used primarily on a temporary basis... recording tax receipts or store receipts for the month, and then being transferred to a more permanent form of written record. The wax forms were also used for temporary court recording until they could be record and for land transfers, etc.

But, as we all know, the heat in Israel would melt the wax, therefore, it could only be a temporary form of written record.. and certainly, it would never be in a bound form as a permanent type of record.

~serapha~

Hi welcome back.

I was not aware of that. But I think my statement that such a wax tray would not be called etz is still correct.

 

[skylark1]

I read John Gill's commentary for Ezekial 37:16, and thought that it was worth posting.

Ver. 16. Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick[size=+1],.... Or "wood" {a}; a stick of wood; or table, as the Targum; a board or plank. The Septuagint version renders it a "rod"; and so the Arabic; an emblem of a kingdom or government, as this was:[/size]
[size=+1][/size]
[size=+1]and write upon it[size=+1]; the following words:[/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1]for Judah, and the children of Israel his companions[size=+1]; for the tribe of Judah, and the tribe of Benjamin, which adhered together, and as many of the other tribes which joined them; the godly and religious of the rest of the tribes, who could not give into the idolatry of Jeroboam:[/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1]then take another stick[size=+1]; like the former:[/size][/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][/size][/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1]and write upon it[size=+1]; these words:[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]
[size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1][size=+1]for Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions[size=+1]; for the tribe of Ephraim, and the other nine tribes, which together made up one kingdom. It should be observed, that in the times of Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, there was a division in the kingdom of Israel; ten tribes revolted from him, and only the two whole tribes of Judah and Benjamin continued with him; and from that time to the captivity, and even during that, as it seems, there were continual animosities and bickerings between the two kingdoms, on account both of their political and religious affairs, especially the latter; and an union between them this emblem is designed to signify, as will hereafter appear. Jeroboam, the first king of the ten tribes, was of the tribe of Ephraim; and Samaria, the metropolis of the kingdom, was in that tribe; hence Ephraim often stands for all the ten tribes, for the kingdom of Israel, as distinct from that of Judah. Writing words on sticks or rods seems to be in allusion to what was done Nu 17:2[size=+1].[/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size][/size]
​

One thing that Gill noted that I found interesting and relevant to the Ezekial passsage is that the two sticks were a reference to the tribal rods which are mentioned in Numbers 17:2:

Speak unto the children of Israel, and take of every one of them a rod according to the house of their fathers, of all their princes according to the house of their fathers twelve rods: write thou every man's name upon his rod.
​

 

[A New Dawn]

Obviously you have not read it then. I have, several times, and it does contradict. Where again was Jesus born? How are you saved? Is it by faith alone or faith, after all you can do? When exactly were the people FIRST called Christians? Just a couple little problems there.

We are not saved by faith at all, whether alone or after all we can do. We are saved by grace. As far as that verse not being interpreted correctly, we won't go into it, but you believe you are saved by grace, after all you can do, also, so don't get on any BoM believer for it.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Maybe if you understood that verse you would understand that our "joy" is to give glory to God. If man hadn't fallen, we would not be able to do that.

And how could God save us if we didn't fall????

It doesn't change the fact that it contradicts the Bible, rather than support it.

In the Bible, God told Adam and Eve to multiply the earth, before they even sinned against Him by eating the fruit. Now, unless you believe that God gave them a commandment that they had to sin against Him to follow, this means that they were capable of having children before the fall.

The BofM scripture that says that "Adam fell that man might be and men are that they might have joy" goes against Bible teachings. The Bible teaches that the fall of Adam was a bad thing, not a good thing. It also teaches that God told Adam and Eve to multiply the Earth before they ever even sinned and like I said before, unless you believe that God would give them a command and then make it so they had to first sin against Him to keep that command, it just doesn't measure up.

Sin seperated man from God. Adam's fall was not a good thing at all.

 

[A New Dawn]

It doesn't change the fact that it contradicts the Bible, rather than support it.

In the Bible, God told Adam and Eve to multiply the earth, before they even sinned against Him by eating the fruit. Now, unless you believe that God gave them a commandment that they had to sin against Him to follow, this means that they were capable of having children before the fall.

The BofM scripture that says that "Adam fell that man might be and men are that they might have joy" goes against Bible teachings. The Bible teaches that the fall of Adam was a bad thing, not a good thing. It also teaches that God told Adam and Eve to multiply the Earth before they ever even sinned and like I said before, unless you believe that God would give them a command and then make it so they had to first sin against Him to keep that command, it just doesn't measure up.

Sin seperated man from God. Adam's fall was not a good thing at all.

You are equating necessary with good, and that is not necessarily correct.

Sin separated man from God, and it was bad, but it was necessary for us to be redeemed. God could not redeem us in an unfallen state.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

You are equating necessary with good, and that is not necessarily correct.

Sin separated man from God, and it was bad, but it was necessary for us to be redeemed. God could not redeem us in an unfallen state.

Where does the Word of God say that sin is nessesary?

If man had never sinned, there would be no need for redemption. If you can show me even one place in the Bible where God says that sin is nessessary, I will listen.

The BofM still condradicts the Bible on this topic.

 

[A New Dawn]

Where does the Word of God say that sin is nessesary?

If man had never sinned, there would be no need for redemption. If you can show me even one place in the Bible where God says that sin is nessessary, I will listen.

The BofM still condradicts the Bible on this topic.

If God wanted us for eternity the way we were in the Garden, then there would have been no reason to put the temptations there that He did. He put them there specifically so we would fall. He created us, He knew our nature. And He knew we would succumb to the temptation. He is not stupid.

God wanted us to become sons of God, and that could not have happened without the fall and the redemption.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

If God wanted us for eternity the way we were in the Garden, then there would have been no reason to put the temptations there that He did. He put them there specifically so we would fall. He created us, He knew our nature. And He knew we would succumb to the temptation. He is not stupid.

God wanted us to become sons of God, and that could not have happened without the fall and the redemption.

Biblical support for these claims, please

 

[A New Dawn]

Biblical support for these claims, please

It is through receiving Christ as our savior and believing on His name that we become sons of God. If we never had the chance to do that, we would not be able to become sons of God.

Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
Jhn 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

It is through receiving Christ as our savior and believing on His name that we become sons of God. If we never had the chance to do that, we would not be able to become sons of God.

Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
Jhn 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This is not Biblical support for sin being nessesary. We can only become children of God through Christ because of the fall of Adam. If there had never been a fall, man never would have been seperated from God and we would not have to be "redeemed" for our sin because sin would not have even entered the world.

Do you have any scripture that shows that the fall was nessessary and that God commanded man to sin in order to be "saved"?

 

[skylark1]

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

Do you honestly believe that Jesus only came for the Jews? He came for all, first the Jews then the Gentiles.

John 10
1"I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep. 3The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice."
​

Are you suggesting that if we did not hear Christ's voice before He ascended to heaven, that we are not one of His sheep? I hear His voice and follow Him. He is my Shepherd.

John 10
9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.
11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
​

I hope that you noticed that the Good Sheperd lays down His life for His sheep. Jesus did not only die for the Jews, but for whosoever that believes in Him. He died for both Jew and Gentile. He gave His life for His sheep.

 

[A New Dawn]

This is not Biblical support for sin being nessesary. We can only become children of God through Christ because of the fall of Adam. If there had never been a fall, man never would have been seperated from God and we would not have to be "redeemed" for our sin because sin would not have even entered the world.

Do you have any scripture that shows that the fall was nessessary and that God commanded man to sin in order to be "saved"?

You have not answered the question of why God deliberately put temptation in our way if He knew that without the temptation we would not fall.

We have limited numbers of scripture, and the most we can do is pray to God for an interpretation of them. Even without the BoM, this is what I would believe because any other interpretation takes away the mercy of God. I mean, why would God do that unless He had something better for us than life as a puppet in the Garden?

 

[CrownCaster]

If God wanted us for eternity the way we were in the Garden, then there would have been no reason to put the temptations there that He did. He put them there specifically so we would fall. He created us, He knew our nature. And He knew we would succumb to the temptation. He is not stupid.

God wanted us to become sons of God, and that could not have happened without the fall and the redemption.

No, and the idea is sick. God never wanted us to fall but also did not want robots. He gave us a choice and the ability to exercise it.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

You have not answered the question of why God deliberately put temptation in our way if He knew that without the temptation we would not fall.

We have limited numbers of scripture, and the most we can do is pray to God for an interpretation of them. Even without the BoM, this is what I would believe because any other interpretation takes away the mercy of God. I mean, why would God do that unless He had something better for us than life as a puppet in the Garden?

Where does the Word of God say that God tempted man in the Garden, Satan is the one who tempted man. There is your answer.

 

[A New Dawn]

Where does the Word of God say that God tempted man in the Garden, Satan is the one who tempted man. There is your answer.

I am not sure if I am missing something.

God created everything, so that means He created Satan, who tempted Eve.

God created Adam and Eve and put them in the Garden. Also in the Garden was the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge between good and evil. Then he told Adam and Eve, even knowing their weaknesses, don't eat of those trees.

Before He created the heavens and the earth (and man), He created the Son.

If God didn't want man to fall, he would either not have created Satan, or He would not have put those trees in the Garden. And He would not have given man the freedom to choose if He didn't expect (and prepare for) the consequences.

If God didn't want man to fall, why would He have created the Son, whose purpose was to redeem man?

Maybe someone else can come up with a more logical interpretation.