LDS LDS: The Book of Mormon

Ironhold · Nov 19, 2015

gradyll said:
because if books are not official because they are lacking publishing from LDS avenues,

Your argument is akin to claiming that Zondervan and Tyndale can determine what is and isn't canon for mainline Christianity.

The official standard is what I explained to you: if the copyright isn't from church HQ itself, then it means that the work is not officially sanctioned. It's on the individual church member to determine if they wish to accept a work from there.

then BYU, and all their degrees, diplomas, and other peer review are officially not withing the pale of orthodoxy for a Mormon to engage in.

This does not follow from your initial argument.

createdtoworship · Nov 19, 2015

Brigham young on extra terrestrials, and little green men.

Journal of Discourses Vol. 13, Pg. 271 ©1870, Brigham Young

“I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us. We are called ignorant; so we are: but what of it? Are not all ignorant” I rather think so…

…Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed “the man in the moon,” and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized.”

Ibid.

createdtoworship · Nov 19, 2015

Ironhold said:
Your argument is akin to claiming that Zondervan and Tyndale can determine what is and isn't canon for mainline Christianity.

The official standard is what I explained to you: if the copyright isn't from church HQ itself, then it means that the work is not officially sanctioned. It's on the individual church member to determine if they wish to accept a work from there.

This does not follow from your initial argument.

book publishers do not actually establish canon, in christian orthodoxy.

that's unique to you guys, and perhaps some other christian unorthodox sects.

createdtoworship · Nov 19, 2015

Jane_Doe said:
I'm not sure how anything is "self-defeating" here.

Official LDS books are published via the official LDS publishing venue. Other books use other venues. It's very straight forward. Other books about Mormon beliefs or people may be of high quality and may have much truth in them, but they're simply not official. Again, pretty straight forward.

it's self defeating because BYU would become strictly a secular college at that point.

since it's not,

then it must have church endorsement.

and since they are a separate entity from LDS,

then other groups must have the stamp of approval from LDS officials, than you say.

for example I graduated with a master of arts in religious education from BYU,

the religious diploma would not be endorsed by the religioun it embraced because of your technicalities here.

seee:

https://religion.byu.edu/religious-education-ma

in order for it to embrace it the diploma, as well as all textbooks must be printed at LDS facility and stamped with official LDS lingo.

createdtoworship · Nov 19, 2015

mmksparbud said:
Well, the bible has many manuscripts which have been unearthed over the centuries. And the translations of these scrolls can all be checked. Many scholars have worked to translate them, and there are several translations of the bible. The scrolls themselves can be seen and examined and the words researched as there are many, many, many other manuscripts that contain the same language. As to whether the BOM is an accurate translation, how can anyone know that it even existed? There are no original plates to examine, there are no other manuscripts found that has any such language written on them to compare with. If the bible were so undocumented, unexamined, with no other pieces of material found with such a language, only had a couple people say they saw the originals, but the originals no longer exists, if only one or 2 persons can claim to have translated this book which required a magic rock in a hat to translate---there would be no Christianity today. All the Mormon church has to do is produce the original golden plates to have them examined, just like the bible has had to be. God has hidden only 2 of His hand written pieces. The original 10 commandments and the writing on the Babylonian wall. The ceremonial ark and Noah's ark are not written artifacts. And even they were around for a very long time and seen by many. Everything else that God inspired men to write, has been left on this earth. The men He spoke to did not have to translate what was said to them by God, He spoke to them in the language they understood. Moses did not have to peer into some rock in a hat to translate what God said. The only translations needed were those messages God gave to unbelievers in dreams (like Nebuchadnezzar and the Pharaoh and other dreams to unbelievers that a believer translated. A believer never had to translate anything from God.

what evidence do you have the the BOM is geologically, historically, and otherwise accurate in regards to events, places, and people groups.

do you have archaeology?

withwonderingawe · Nov 19, 2015

gradyll said:
Author Bruce R McConkie of the work Mormon Doctrine, which is accepted in most all mormon seminaries is a third party publication.

secondly,

the author of the mormon book "the church and the negro " thanks staff of BYU for helping him with the work. So you would have to disqualify many many mormon books, and BYU by this rule.

again bookcraft is the holder of one of the books "Mormon Doctrine."

and lastly all these books were purchased through mormon bookstores locally.

in conclusion, I will include a scan with a brief quote from the book that in fact quotes the founder of the Mormon Churches:View attachment 166105

This is one of those quote which is always taken out of context

“Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I
replied, they came into the world slaves, men- The pro h t ,
tally and physically. Change their situation view of the
with the whites, and they would be like them.
They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into
Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who
rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen
by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of re-
spectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined
than many in high places, and the black boys will take the
shine off many of those they brush and wait on.

Elder Hyde remarked, "Put them on the level, and they
will rise above me." I replied, if I raised you to be my
equal, and then attempted to oppress you, would you not
be indignant and try. to rise above me,…
Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization.
Because faith is wanting ……Faith has been wanting, not only among the heathen, but in professed Christendom also, so that tongues, healings, prophecy, and prophets and apostles, and all the gifts and blessings
have been wanting…. “

I take it to mean that because we as men lack faith in Christ we will never treat each other with the Christ like love we should.

withwonderingawe · Nov 19, 2015

would be nice to stick to the subject at hand, it's easier to follow the line of thought

mmksparbud · Nov 20, 2015

gradyll said:
what evidence do you have the the BOM is geologically, historically, and otherwise accurate in regards to events, places, and people groups.

do you have archaeology?

Why are you directing this question at me?? Did you read my post??

createdtoworship · Nov 20, 2015

mmksparbud said:
Why are you directing this question at me?? Did you read my post??

my apologies, I saw the part about golden plates.

and I thought, how are we to know they even existed, or if egyptian heiroglyphics were suitable for that location and era.

createdtoworship · Nov 20, 2015

withwonderingawe said:
This is one of those quote which is always taken out of context

“Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I
replied, they came into the world slaves, men- The pro h t ,
tally and physically. Change their situation view of the
with the whites, and they would be like them.
They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into
Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who
rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen
by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of re-
spectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined
than many in high places, and the black boys will take the
shine off many of those they brush and wait on.

Elder Hyde remarked, "Put them on the level, and they
will rise above me." I replied, if I raised you to be my
equal, and then attempted to oppress you, would you not
be indignant and try. to rise above me,…
Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization.
Because faith is wanting ……Faith has been wanting, not only among the heathen, but in professed Christendom also, so that tongues, healings, prophecy, and prophets and apostles, and all the gifts and blessings
have been wanting…. “

I take it to mean that because we as men lack faith in Christ we will never treat each other with the Christ like love we should.

but your interpretation is an opinion.

and since you are not authorized LDS publications, or other wise authorized.

then your opinion is not official.

as the conversation was heading.

but what we know are the facts, what was stated numerous times, and what is quoted by bringham young, the elders, and joseph smith.

our twistings of their intentions is arbitrary.

SeekerOfChrist94 · Nov 20, 2015

Jane_Doe said:
Being a follow Christ IS work- lots of it. God did not send His son to die for us so we can say "thanks" and continue on sitting on our butts all day. No-- God gave many commandments throughout scripture: to love your neighbor, help each other, preach the Gospel, etc. I would suggest that any person whom claims Christ and just sits on their butt all day is NOT a follow of Christ at all, because as James said: "Faith without works is dead".

Would you say that being a follow of Christ doesn't involve work?

Works are a result of faith, works will not grant you salvation. Salvation isn't like a paycheck. Just because you do so many good things doesn't get you so much salvation. It's by grace and faith alone.

Ironhold · Nov 20, 2015

gradyll said:
Brigham young on extra terrestrials, and little green men.

Journal of Discourses Vol. 13, Pg. 271 ©1870, Brigham Young

“I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us. We are called ignorant; so we are: but what of it? Are not all ignorant” I rather think so…

…Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed “the man in the moon,” and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized.”

Ibid.

This one's yet another dead horse.

IIRC, in the early 1800s, a hoax hit the newspapers. According to the hoax, a prominent astronomer had declared that there was life on the moon. Newspapers all over America fell for this, boldly proclaiming the news. Given this, it's no surprise that a lot of folks thought that the moon really did have inhabitants.

Ironhold · Nov 20, 2015

gradyll said:
book publishers do not actually establish canon, in christian orthodoxy.

that's unique to you guys, and perhaps some other christian unorthodox sects.

Copyright = "The person or entity who owns the text."

One would think that the church would own its own materials...

Ironhold · Nov 20, 2015

gradyll said:
it's self defeating because BYU would become strictly a secular college at that point.

BYU is allowed to do pretty much whatever it pleases. It's given a wide degree of latitude in many areas, such that it can publish whatever works it sees fit. Doesn't mean that anything BYU publishes is official.

and since they are a separate entity from LDS,

Actually, the church owns BYU lock, stock, and barrel. This is why BYU is organized as a private college instead of a public college: it allows the church to use tithing money to subsidize the cost of tuition.

in order for it to embrace it the diploma, as well as all textbooks must be printed at LDS facility and stamped with official LDS lingo.

The church actually hires printing presses from other entities to help publish everything, and so there's no "official printing press".

createdtoworship · Nov 20, 2015

Ironhold said:
This one's yet another dead horse.

IIRC, in the early 1800s, a hoax hit the newspapers. According to the hoax, a prominent astronomer had declared that there was life on the moon. Newspapers all over America fell for this, boldly proclaiming the news. Given this, it's no surprise that a lot of folks thought that the moon really did have inhabitants.

the fact that your beloved prophet fell for the same hoax, does your position no justice.

if anything, this is a tell all of your position.

namely that any evidence, factual or non can be thrown in the basket and used as an argument in favor of LDS inspiration.

be it men on mars, the moon, the sun, or other hoaxes.

In fact a colleage was a christian on an all mormon basketball team in college in utah. They attempted to give the testimony of the burning in the bosom. It actually happened. He started to question his faith, then while at barnes and nobles, he picked up a satanic Bible just for curiousity, and the same burning happened. apparently the devils forgot which book they were selling that day.

true story, I tell it alot.

there are alot of psychological manipulation, and some demonic manifestation that can occur when we are dealing with unorthodox literature and in the deep of something we should not be in.

it's a hoax of the enemy.

I think of how UPC, although they outright deny the trinity, and salvation by grace, and multiple thousands have a divine utterance, although it is not of God.

I too believe in those gifts, but not FOR salvation as that is a work. But most research ministries like ICR and others have labeled them non christian.

so you have two christian unorthodox sects, both having manifestations.

but they are not of the Truth as we have seen here.

If satan can possesss hurds of pigs and hurl them over a cliff in the Bible's stories, then he can give someone utterance, and a burning in the bosom, without breaking a sweat.

a burning even fealt when reading the satanic bible.

So these are as we have seen hoaxes.

I am not stating that every mormon, or every UPC does not have faith and thus is not headed for heaven. But only those who accept the opposite of what Christ says.

createdtoworship · Nov 20, 2015

Ironhold said:
Doesn't mean that anything BYU publishes is official.

doesn't mean that it's not either. If anything your next point proves that the church views this institution as official:

Ironhold said:
the church to use tithing money to subsidize the cost of tuition.

makes sense that this would be the case, however you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

on the one hand you say that the church does not view publications from BYU as official.

and on the other hand the same church is dumping loads of money into it.

now at this point it is either a side business or it is a seminary for training future leaders of the church as well as other degrees.

I believe it to be the latter, now that does not mean the church does not gain from it, but the fact that the church is funding a school with religious degrees and those degrees happen to be in the same language and religion as the sponsoring super organization shows that this is official.

I am sure legally it is official, and official in all ways accept where BYU is an embarrasment to them.

and that I am sorry to say is not consistent logically.

it may work for them in the real world, but on debate threads that is simply called changing the bars.

one bar for one thought, and another adjusted bar for another thought.

you need the same logic for both sides.

you have brought facts to the table, but your wiggling and squiggling is evidence that these are things you were not prepared to answer, nor perhaps will be, as I am not so sure this conversation is headed the way you thought it was.

IF I had more time, I would bullet your contradictions here, which I think are a number of two, maybe three, but again I don't have the time to tally the score.

but needless to say, your posts are showing circular reasoning and self refutatation as well as contradictory premesis.

createdtoworship · Nov 20, 2015

Ironhold said:
Copyright = "The person or entity who owns the text."

One would think that the church would own its own materials...

ok a third error in your posts,

equivocation of copywrite and canon authorship,

our canon was finished by the early church fathers, the empirial catholic church existed then. We are technically not any form of catholic anymore (empirial or roman cath), as we have evolved and protested the salvation by works, and other errors of dogma.

secondly, all original canons are gone, and only copies of these exist as scrolls and papyri. So we don't even own the canon, technically speaking

so that is equivocation of two words as being the same, and of
which are two different things.

now if you rephrase your previous statements, or clarify, or otherwise adjust the wording, this would be a fourth error in your posts, that of again "changing the bars."

Ironhold · Nov 20, 2015

You're going way off on a tangent, there.

Let's bring this one back in.

The church is the author and publisher of its own materials, regardless of whose presses are hired to actually produce the physical copies. Because of this, under American copyright law, the church is able to claim a copyright on anything it produces. Not only does this protect the church's material from intellectual property theft (which has, in fact, happened in the past), it also provides members with a quick way of seeing what is or is not official. All they have to do is flip to the copyright info page and see whose name is next to the (c) symbol.

If the church's name, or Intellectual Reserve, is next to that symbol, then it means the material in question is officially produced by the church. Therefore, the material is obviously officially sanctioned and officially accepted.

If you see someone else's name in the copyright, then it means that the church had nothing to do with it, regardless of who owns whatever organization that owns the copyright in question.

You see, just because the church owns something doesn't mean that the church tells it what to do. The church is actually quite demand-side when it comes to meeting the needs of its members, such that over the years it's created numerous corporations to solve problems for everyone. The church has the right to call on these companies if it needs something (for example, Deseret Book handles some of the church's print jobs), but otherwise that company has the right to operate how it sees fit. This includes BYU, which is free to publish whatever it wants to publish.

On top of this, we have organizations that are fully independent but which produce material aimed at Mormon audiences, such as Bookcraft and Halestorm Entertainment. Obviously, these people wouldn't have anything resembling an ability to dictate what is or isn't official.

drstevej · Nov 20, 2015

The Catholic Church (bishop or higher) issues a imprimatur that states that nothing in the publication crosses over doctrinal lines. This certification is located at the beginning of the document. Anything similar for LDS?

Ironhold · Nov 20, 2015

drstevej said:
The Catholic Church (bishop or higher) issues a imprimatur that states that nothing in the publication crosses over doctrinal lines. This certification is located at the beginning of the document. Anything similar for LDS?

Nope.

Just the copyright info.

Your average member knows enough to know this, or at least should.

LDS LDS: The Book of Mormon

Member

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

Grandma ♡ June 26, 1942 - January 10, 2017 5:32 pm

Member

Member

Member

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

In the grip of grace

Member

"The crowd always chooses Barabbas."

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency