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

[pyro457]

Skylark, you are right!

Romans 11:25
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Romans 16:24 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
27 To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.

Collosians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:
29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

PYRO PLEASE READ THESE REPLIES, THEY ARE THE TRUTH! Dont let those "teachers" keep you from hearing the truth by rolling Joseph Smiths religion into the bible! I know you "want" to believe it , and it "tastes" good, but in the end it is sour!

I dont see why this should make me abandon my belifes. And as for what skylark said that is only an interpretation as was mine. I did not say that "you absolutly" had to belive what I said, I was just saying what interpretation makes the most sense to me.

 

[pyro457]

I know people have asked me to find a reference for the use of the work "sticks" in Ezekiel 37, it just took me a little while becuse Ive been really busy but any way here is an excerpt from an article which talks about the subject and has some more refferences in it if you want them. I also posted the end notes for this section.

​

A Seemingly Strange Story Illuminated
Review of The Book of Mormon and Other Hidden Books: by John A. Tvedtnes
Reviewed By: Kevin L. Barney
Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2001. Pp. 1—20
​

Finley would like to be able to follow Torczyner in taking deleth in Ostracon IV.3 merely as a sheet of papyrus or parchment, precisely as the term is used in Jeremiah 36:23.22 But the scholarly literature forces him to acknowledge the view of many scholars, based on Uga ritic and Phoenician parallels, that deleth here may refer to some sort of writing tablet.23 Finley does not seem to fully appreciate that the conclusion of the scholarship he cites is the very basis of Nibley's conjecture. He concludes this part of his argument, "It is unlikely that the wax notebooks used by the ancient scribes ever amounted to anything like an �ancient codex form' with �joined pages of wood, ivory, or metal.'" Here, though, he simply displays his ignorance of the construction of ancient wooden writing tablets. Such tablets were indeed joined together by leather or metal hinges (and in fact were put together very much like doors). The outer edge of the boards was raised so that the wax writing surface on the face of the boards would not be affected when the leaves were brought together into the closed position (precisely the way one would close a modern book along its spine). And while it is true that most such writing tablets were made of wood, they could also be made of ivory or metal, as Nibley indicates.24 I would freely concede that Nibley's argument is based on "scant evidence" and is a "speculation," as he himself stated. Never the less, Nibley's argument remains a distinct possibility, and Finley's failure to fully grasp Nibley's argument seems to have been based on his own fundamental ignorance of ancient writing tablets.25

22. In my view, Finley is correct (contra Nibley's tentative suggestion) that a scroll is involved in the Jeremiah text. Three or four columns were cut from the scroll at a time, which then burned in the fire; this does not suggest anything other than a papyrus or parchment roll (notwithstanding Nibley's focus on the use of a knife to do the cutting). Conversely, I believe that Nibley (contra Finley's preference) is correct that deleth in Lachish Letter IV.3 most likely refers to some sort of writing tablet. Note in this case that the writing was "on the deleth" (>al ha-deleth), which does not work if deleth means "column" here. There would be no reason to call a roll of papyrus or parchment itself a deleth; the word only works in that context if it is a reference to one or more columns. Finley cites A. Baumann as taking deleth as "columns of a scroll" for Jeremiah but a "slate" or "board covered with writing" for the Lachish Letter; I agree with the distinction in usage Baumann draws here.

23. In addition to the sources noted by Finley, note also that Semitic deleth comes into Greek as deltos, "writing tablet." The triangular capital letter delta was in the shape of a certain type of ancient writing tablet.

24. For a basic explanation of the construction of wooden writing boards, see Keith Meservy, "Ezekiel's &#65533;Sticks,'" Ensign (September 1977): 22-27, and "Ezekiel's Sticks and the Gathering of Israel," Ensign (February 1987): 4-13. Brian E. Keck, "Ezekiel 37, Sticks, and Babylonian Writing Boards: A Critical Reappraisal," Dialogue 23/1 (1990): 126-38, rejects both (1) the Septuagint tradition that translates the Hebrew word >&#65533;ts in Ezekiel 37 with Greek rabdos ("rod"), as well as (2) the targumim, which translate that word with Ara maic luha< ("tablet, writing board"). Keck would take >&#65533;ts in that passage as literally referring to a "stick" one would pick up off the ground, seeing this as a highly symbolic action. While I would agree with Keck's rejection of Meservy's Akkadian linguistic argument, I nevertheless would follow the targumic tradition as a much more meaningful symbol of the reunification of the divided kingdoms (i.e., the folding together of the leaves of a wooden writing board). This would enable the two sticks actually to become "one stick" [le>&#65533;ts <ECHÅD]< i>in Ezekiel's hand in the presence of the people. No similarly symbolic effect would be possible with two twigs.

25. Finley writes, "My understanding is that the &#65533;notebooks' to which he refers were covered with wax." While this is a correct statement, it is hardly controversial, so his qualification with the words "my understanding" appears to reflect some uncertainty on his part as to how these tablets worked and were assembled. Finley quotes Baumann, who described "the common folded double boards" as being "very similar in appearance to a double door." Finley was apparently unable to conceptualize what Baumann was describing, which was no doubt the basis for Nibley's allusion to the "ancient codex form."

​

​

​

​

​

​

You may find the whole article on the FARMS web site. ​

​

 

[Lifesaver]

The only passage of the Bible that tells us what we ought to do if we ever encounter the Book of Mormon or similar is Galatians 1,8-9.

 

[pyro457]

The only passage of the Bible that tells us what we ought to do if we ever encounter the Book of Mormon or similar is Galatians 1,8-9.

Galatians 1:8-9 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, prach any OTHER gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."
"As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any OTHER gospel unto you than that ye have recieved, let him be accursed."

This says other gospel not the gospel which has been taugh. If you were familiar with LDS teachings, and not what other people say is LDS teaching, you would know it is not a "other" gospel but the same gospel.

 

[unbound]

I dont see why this should make me abandon my belifes. And as for what skylark said that is only an interpretation as was mine. I did not say that "you absolutly" had to belive what I said, I was just saying what interpretation makes the most sense to me.

I dont want you to take MY word for it, thats why I try to list scripture with every post I make. I do realize some context is taken out when listing pieces of scripture, but short of posting the whole bible, its the best I can do.

I just pray that you will read the bible so you wont be mislead by false doctrine such as the "sheep of another fold" bit. The answers are all contained within those pages.

Anyone can make up addendums to an existing book and make it seem to harmonize so it looks good. I can make Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings fit in to the bible with a little plot changing, but that doesnt make it true. But like I said earlier, just because it tastes good to you, doesnt mean it is true. You gotta know the Bible frontwards and backwards, then you can tell when a man is trying to deceive you. This is all I wish for you.

 

[unbound]

Pyro, do you see any conflict with this scripture and LDS doctrine?

1 Corinthians 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

How can we have bodies of flesh and bones being glorified in heaven, when we have passages like this in the bible? Dont you see a problem here?

 

[pyro457]

Pyro, do you see any conflict with this scripture and LDS doctrine?

1 Corinthians 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

How can we have bodies of flesh and bones being glorified in heaven, when we have passages like this in the bible? Dont you see a problem here?

This pasage could mean that no body of flesh will have glory in his presence untill they are judged and found worthy after the second comming.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

This pasage could mean that no body of flesh will have glory in his presence untill they are judged and found worthy after the second comming.

Where does the passage say anything to that effect?

 

[A New Dawn]

I am happy to end this discussion too at this point but I am a bit confused about your above statement. I do not believe that anything in the BofM is a commandment from God because I believe it is a work of fiction. Did you mean, "I don't see what was said in the Bible scripture as a commandment and you do"?

It was more that you felt that the BoM contradicted the Bible in that, in order to read it the way you do, God is commanding people to sin in the BoM scripture. I don't read it that way. I understand that the Bible says to go forth and multiply while they were still in the Garden, but for whatever reason, they didn't. I just don't see what is written in the BoM as a commandment, but you stated that that is why you feel it contradicts the Bible. At least, that is what I am getting out of your remarks.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

It was more that you felt that the BoM contradicted the Bible in that, in order to read it the way you do, God is commanding people to sin in the BoM scripture. I don't read it that way. I understand that the Bible says to go forth and multiply while they were still in the Garden, but for whatever reason, they didn't. I just don't see what is written in the BoM as a commandment, but you stated that that is why you feel it contradicts the Bible. At least, that is what I am getting out of your remarks.

No, I see the BofM as saying that it was a good thing that Adam fell and that without Him falling (sinning against God) then man would not exist.

 

[A New Dawn]

No, I see the BofM as saying that it was a good thing that Adam fell and that without Him falling (sinning against God) then man would not exist.

OK. That is about what I was thinking, was just having a hard time putting it into words.

 

[unbound]

Yes Pyro, it could mean that. But what if it doesnt? Lets glean some information from the rest of the bible.

Genesis 6:3
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Genesis 6:13
And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Matthew 16
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Luke 24:39
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

John 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Romans 8:5
For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

1 Peter 1
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

 

[skylark1]

I know people have asked me to find a reference for the use of the work "sticks" in Ezekiel 37, it just took me a little while becuse Ive been really busy but any way here is an excerpt from an article which talks about the subject and has some more refferences in it if you want them. I also posted the end notes for this section.

Pyro,

Did you happen to read my earlier post concerning the tribal rods that are mentioned in Numbers? If so, I am curious what your thoughts are concerning the possibility of these two sticks referring to these tribal rods.

Thanks.

​

​

 

[Der Alte]

More information on wooden tablets. Note, that when a tablet is meant the word daleth or luah not etz is used.

Wax Tablets

Another medium developed during this period ( 2d century BC) was wax tablets. Greeks and Romans are known to have used this method for common correspondence because of its relative ease of use and inexpensive materials. They used a stylus with two ends; one sharpened for writing and the other broad and flat for smoothing out corrections in the wax tablets.

When considering all these mediums, we often think of papyrus as the forerunner of paper; however, paper is made of wood or cotton fibers and was invented in China.

http://www.usu.edu/anthro/origins_of_writing/writing_medium/

An ancient hinged writing tablet consisting of two tablets of wood, ivory or metal, having wax in the hollowed inner surfaces, on which writing could be done with a stylus. The hinges were generally metal rings or thongs threaded through the holes. Near the outer edge on the inside of one tablet as a small trench designed to hold the stylus, which was a small bone or metal instrument pointed at one end for writing and flat at the other end for removing writing in the wax. In the middle of each inner side a small knob protruded to keep the wax surfaces apart. Ordinary diptychs were generally made of beech, fir, or citron wood, but those made for ceremonial use, or for important recipients, were often made of ivory, sometimes beautifully carved, and fitted with gold or jewels. The most lavishly embellished specimens belong to the Byzantine period, 530 to 560. Because they were small enough to hold in one hand, in Latin they were sometimes called "pugillaria." The diptych is interesting because it is both a manuscript and a binding.

http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/don/dt/dt1028.html

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.-Tablet

The technical Hebrew word for tablet, &#1500;&#1493;&#1468;&#1495;, lu¯ah&#803;, is generally translated in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) as “table.” This is used for stone, wood or metal plates or tablets with or without writing. In Isaiah (Isa_30:8) where the Revised Version (British and American) translates “tablet,” it is contrasted with the “roll” and probably means the wood or waxed tablet. In Habakkuk (Hab_2:2, the American Standard Revised Version “tablet,” the King James Version and the English Revised Version “table”) it perhaps refers to a metal tablet to be erected on a wall, but more likely it refers to the wooden tablet. It is also used in Proverbs (Pro_3:3; Pro_7:3, the American Standard Revised Version “tablet,” the King James Version and the English Revised Version “table”) and in Jeremiah (Jer_17:1) figuratively of the writing upon the tablets of the heart, the word being rendered in the Septuagint by the same word (pla´x) used by Paul (2Co_3:3, “tables” in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)) in the same figure. In other cases (Exo_24:12, etc.) it is used of the tablets of stone containing the Decalogue.

The word &#1490;&#1468;&#1500;&#1468;&#1497;&#1493;&#1503;, gilla¯yo¯n (Isa_8:1), which is translated in the Revised Version (British and American) “tablet” and in the King James Version “roll,” is elsewhere (Isa_3:23) translated “mirror,” and is thought to mean a blank polished surface for writing, particularly because in later use it means the blank margin of a roll. See ROLL.

“Daleth” (da¯leth or deleth), the Semitic (Phoenician) original from which the generic Greek word for tablet (deltos) is derived (Gardthausen, p. 124, note 1), is perhaps not found strictly in this meaning in the Old Testament. The word is used, however, of two kinds of written documents and in such a way as to suggest that one is the original of, and the other derived from, the “daleth”-tablet. In Deu_6:9 and Deu_11:20 it is enjoined that the laws of Yahweh shall be written upon the gates of the houses, and in each case the “daleths” (doors) are meant, since the door-posts are also mentioned, and in 1Sa_21:13, where David “scrabbles,” it is expressly said to be upon the “doors” (“daleths”) of the gate. This practice of writing upon house doors and city gates corresponds to the modern posting of notices on church doors and scoring of tallies on a door by the rural innkeeper; and the name seems to have passed from this great door tablet to the portable tablet. On the other hand Jeremiah (Jer_36:23) uses “daleths” (English Versions of the Bible “leaves”) for the columns of a roll, obviously transferring the term from the panel form of the folding tablets.​

​

 

[pyro457]

Pyro,

Did you happen to read my earlier post concerning the tribal rods that are mentioned in Numbers? If so, I am curious what your thoughts are concerning the possibility of these two sticks referring to these tribal rods.

Thanks.

​

​

Look at the first page and the statement by Jenda.

 

[skylark1]

Look at the first page and the statement by Jenda.

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

 

[fatboys]

No, I see the BofM as saying that it was a good thing that Adam fell and that without Him falling (sinning against God) then man would not exist.

FB: Because Adam fell without sin, the fall could be good because without it we would not have come to be. Satan thought was allowed to tempt Adam, but did not change the outcome since Adam had no knowledge of Good or evil. In summary, sin came into the world through innocent disobedience. Justice does not see any difference in how a law was broken. The it requires the same payment, and gives the same punishment. Since Adam disobeyed they were kicked out of the Garden and the world fell along with Adam into mortality. Sin then entered the world.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

FB: Because Adam fell without sin, the fall could be good because without it we would not have come to be. Satan thought was allowed to tempt Adam, but did not change the outcome since Adam had no knowledge of Good or evil. In summary, sin came into the world through innocent disobedience. Justice does not see any difference in how a law was broken. The it requires the same payment, and gives the same punishment. Since Adam disobeyed they were kicked out of the Garden and the world fell along with Adam into mortality. Sin then entered the world.

Biblical support, please.

 

[ST:DS9]

Biblical support, please.

There is no Biblical support, but modern day revelation.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

There is no Biblical support, but modern day revelation.

Then that "modern day revelation" contradicts the Word of God because the Word of God says otherwise.