Proof that the Book of Mormon is a fraud!!!

[Apex]

God is the AUTHOR of the Bible...that is the point. It was inspired by his Spirit.

So was the Book of Mormon

Exactly...the Bible TEACHES God's teachings...so if you take away from it or ADD to it then you stand to be condemned as the book of Revelation states. It doesn't get any plainer than that.

The Book of Mormon also contains God's teachings.

Is God NOT ALL POWERFUL? Inspired of the Holy Spirit, the Bible was written as a guide for us in life. God is God...he can make men do whatever he wants.

For once we agree.

I'm sorry that you feel God is changing. The God of the BIble is NEVER changing. Yes God may add to them...but he doesn't. It was COMPLETED in the Bible.

If God is never changing then why dont we live by the law of Moses? That was changed with the New Testament, so did God contradict himself... I dont think so.

That is what the problem is with the world today...so many gods have been created in the minds of people so that he is what THEY want him to be.

I agree.

 

[A New Dawn]

Your comparisons of the translation processes of the BoM and Bible are invalid. First, the Bible is not translated by 1 person alone. All the translations I am aware of were done by a group of Biblical scholars, inlcuding the KJV that lds and rlds use. Second, not one translator or translation group of the Bible has ever claimed to stick their face in a hat to see what to write down in the translation process. Nor has any one of these translators ever stated that they could not move on until they had it written it correct. Lastly, if mistakes were made in the translation process of a Bible, there were Hebrew/Greek texts for someone to check their work by. Not so with the BoM.

And probably no one claimed that the Bible was ever translated by the gift and power of the Holy Spirit. The translations are works of men, who went into the process with an agenda in mind (which was described in one of Serapha's posts.) If there were manuscripts that were used and could be checked for verification, why weren't they? Why are there still extremely awkward statements, statements that do not make sense, in the Bible?

 

[CrownCaster]

I think you're having trouble perceiving LDS theology, Fit4. The Father and the Son both qualify as "God" in LDS theology. However, they don't qualify as the same being or person. Just as Stephen saw Jesus "standing on the right hand of the Father" Joseph Smith saw two persons. As far as LDS theology specifying that Jesus is God, try these verses:



THUS saith the Lord your God, even Jesus Christ, the Great I AM, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the same which looked upon the wide expanse of eternity, and all the seraphic hosts of heaven, before the world was made; The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes; I am the same which spake, and the world was made, and all things came by me. (D&C 38:1-3)



There are lots of passages throughout LDS scripture indicating that Jesus is God. The claim that he is only "a god" comes from critics of Mormonism not Mormonism.



Alma

Okay, but even still this means you believe and worship more then one God and that is strictly forbidden.

 

[CrownCaster]

Apex- I screwed up and mixed two threads in my mind. Earlier you had stated that I must watch the godmakers too much because I posted about early LDS belief and teaching that God had physical union with Mary to produce Jesus. I posted the following in reply. Would like to hear your thoughts on these.... Sorry about the confusion, sometimes my brain dont work so good




The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully. (Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)



SON OF GOD: God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the son of God, and that designation means what it says.—Bruce R. McKonkie



ONLY BEGOTTEN SON: These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in He same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers. Bruce R. McKonkie

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost" (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg.7).

"Now, we are told in scriptures that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. Well, now for the benefit of the older ones, how are children begotten? I answer just as Jesus Christ was begotten of his father ...Jesus is the only person who had our Heavenly Father as the father of his body" (Family Home Evening Manual, 1972, Joseph F. Smith, pp.125,126).

 

[jezusfreak]

Doc, come on. No need to try and be sneaky with your words. LDS theology is that Jesus is A god, not God the Father or the "main" god of Mormonism. If Mormon belief was that Jesus is actually their God, then they would be praying to him and worshiping him in church, not just God the father. LDS do not believe they are the same God that are of the same essense, they believe they are 2 seperate gods that are one in purpose.

You are going to have to try harder than that to fool those of us who actually know what Mormons believe about God.

Grace....

You are very right in saying that Doc appears to be being sneaky with his words. The LDS faith never has believed that God the Father and God the Son are the same God. They are polytheistic not monotheistic. I'm surprised that Doc even said such a thing. Jesus to them was once like us and he was exhaulted into a god....just like the Father was once a man. The LDS doctrine teaches that man (when they have been good enough) will become a god of their own planet and populate it with all their wives...having eternal sex.

 

[CrownCaster]

[/color]
If God is never changing then why dont we live by the law of Moses? That was changed with the New Testament, so did God contradict himself... I dont think so.
.

Actually, the law has never changed. It had a purpose and that was to show us what it would require for us to earn Heaven. Since we cannot ever do that nor did even one of the Jewish people, it is to point us to the senselessness of relying on it and instead help us to fall on our faces in desperation for the Messiah. The law is the same and if anyone wants to earn Heaven, he must perfectly follow it.

 

[jezusfreak]

[/color]
So was the Book of Mormon

NOPE!!!

The Book of Mormon also contains God's teachings.

Not the God of the Bible!!

For once we agree.

If God is never changing then why dont we live by the law of Moses? That was changed with the New Testament, so did God contradict himself... I dont think so.
I agree.

As I already stated in another thread....the law of Moses was given to show man his need for a savior. To convict your conscience of the sin...it wasn't created so that we could earn our way to heaven. God knew that we would NEVER be able to keep the commandments...so that is why HE had to save us by coming to this earth to be the FINAL perfect sacrifice for the sins of those whom apply his blood to cover their sins....those of us who make him Lord and savior...those who ADMIT that they are sinners and doomed and WORTHY of nothing but hell. God didn't change....he fulfilled the law and the prophets in walking this earth as a man, Jesus...but he was and is STILL God!! The only thing that contradicts itself is the Mormon docrtine and teachings!!! Sorry to burst your bubble.

Also could you please answer me this question as I have asked it of so many other LDS and NOBODY will give me an answer? If you were to deny that JS was a prophew of God and that the church of JC of LDS in NOT the true church would you still be able to be with the Father in heaven?

 

[jezusfreak]

Why are there still extremely awkward statements, statements that do not make sense, in the Bible?

Jenda...Could you please give me one of those extremely awkward statements from the Bible that make no sense? I would really (honestly) like to see what it is that you are talking about.

Thank You
Sandy

 

[Apex]

Apex- I screwed up and mixed two threads in my mind. Earlier you had stated that I must watch the godmakers too much because I posted about early LDS belief and teaching that God had physical union with Mary to produce Jesus. I posted the following in reply. Would like to hear your thoughts on these.... Sorry about the confusion, sometimes my brain dont work so good




The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully. (Orson Pratt, The Seer, page 158)



SON OF GOD: God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the son of God, and that designation means what it says.—Bruce R. McKonkie



ONLY BEGOTTEN SON: These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only, begotten means begotten, and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in He same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers. Bruce R. McKonkie

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the most literal sense. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was sired by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost" (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg.7).

"Now, we are told in scriptures that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. Well, now for the benefit of the older ones, how are children begotten? I answer just as Jesus Christ was begotten of his father ...Jesus is the only person who had our Heavenly Father as the father of his body" (Family Home Evening Manual, 1972, Joseph F. Smith, pp.125,126).

Could you please provide quotes from OFICIAL Church doctrine? I simply am tired of people stringing quotes together from unofficial sources to criticize the Church. And I dont see anything in there that specificly says God had sex with Mary. If you want an in depth answer go here.

 

[A New Dawn]

Jenda...Could you please give me one of those extremely awkward statements from the Bible that make no sense? I would really (honestly) like to see what it is that you are talking about.

Thank You
Sandy

Here is one. It is not heavy, but it is awkward.

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

 

[Doc T]

You are very right in saying that Doc appears to be being sneaky with his words. The LDS faith never has believed that God the Father and God the Son are the same God. They are polytheistic not monotheistic. I'm surprised that Doc even said such a thing.

I am equally disappointed that you, jezusfreak, and Grace would think that I am being sneaky with my words. Secondly I am disappointed that both of you as well as Crown Caster are so ignorant of LDS teachings of God. Alma quite clearly spelled out that we believe Christ to be God. And what was the reply, "Okay, but even still this means you believe and worship more then one God and that is strictly forbidden."

No we do not worship more than one God. I think the problem everyone is having here is you are trying to understand LDS theology with your EV glasses on or are simply accepting our critics assumptions about us.

In an interview with Dr. David Paulsen, BYU professor of Phliosophy, Modern Reformation, an Evangelical Christian magazine explained it best:

MR: Please briefly explain to our readers how the LDS Church's doctrine of God is similar to or different from the traditional Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

DP: Our first Article of Faith affirms our belief in the New Testament Godhead. It states simply: "We believe in God the Eternal Father, in his son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost." We reject the traditional, but extra-biblical, idea that these three persons constitute one metaphysical substance, affirming rather that they constitute one perfectly united, and mutually indwelling, divine community. We use the word "God" to designate the divine community as well as to designate each individual divine person. Thus our understanding of the Godhead coincides closely with what is known in contemporary Christian theology as "social trinitarianism." This, we believe, is the model of the Godhead portrayed in the New Testament.

MR: Christian theologians from all the major traditions (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) are united in their belief in monotheism (only one God in this and any other universe, existing beyond time and space). Is LDS theology monotheistic or is it polytheistic?

DP: As indicated above, Latter-day Saints, like other Christians and New Testament writers, affirm that there is a plurality of divine persons. Yet, at the same time, we witness (as our scriptures repeatedly declare) that "the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one God." Given the plurality of divine persons, how can there be but one God? In at least at least three ways: (1) there is only one perfectly united, mutually indwelling, divine community. We call that community "God" and there is only one such. (2) There is only one God the Father or fount of divinity. (3) There is only one divine nature or set of properties severally necessary and jointly sufficient for divinity.

In his explanation of the unity of God, LDS Apostle James Talmage, wrote:

"This unity is a type of completeness; the mind of any one member of the Trinity is the mind of the others; seeing as each of them does with the eye of perfection, they see and understand alike. Under any given conditions each would act in the same way, guided by the same principles of unerring justice and equity. The one-ness of the Godhead, to which the scriptures so abundantly testify, implies no mystical union of substance, nor any unnatural and therefore impossible blending of personality. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are as distinct in their persons and individualities as are any three personages in mortality. Yet their unity of purpose and operation is such as to make their edicts one, and their will the will of God." [James Talmage, "A Study of the Articles of Faith" (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Company, 1988), p 37.]​

So when I write that within LDS theology that Christ is God as well as the Son of God, I am not using "sneeky wording", but I am speaking the truth. Now perhaps some of you former LDS did not have a correct understanding of God when you were memebers of the Church, or you had a distorted understanding of LDS teachings. Either way, you misunderstandings does not constitute "sneeky words" on my part. I know of no LDS members who are aware of the 1830 version of the BofM and the present versions who think the change from "God" to "Son of God" constituted a change in doctrine, but only a clarification of the same thing.

Doc

~

 

[jezusfreak]

Here is one. It is not heavy, but it is awkward.

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

I may be missing something here as this doesn't seem to be awkward to me. Adam and Eve had always had fellowship with the Lord...Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They were unstained from sin up until the time of satan tricking them and appealing to their flesh. AFTER they ate of the forbidden fruit and fell into sin....they were ashamed of themselves and was hidding thinking that God couldn't find them. God can't be in the presence of sin so this is why they were banished from the garden. If there is something else about it that confuses you or that I am not seeing, please tell me what it is. I would also like to know what other scriptures that you think are awkward. Please...

Thanks
Sandy

 

[happyinhisgrace]

I am equally disappointed that you, jezusfreak, and Grace would think that I am being sneaky with my words. Secondly I am disappointed that both of you as well as Crown Caster are so ignorant of LDS teachings of God. Alma quite clearly spelled out that we believe Christ to be God. And what was the reply, "Okay, but even still this means you believe and worship more then one God and that is strictly forbidden."

No we do not worship more than one God. I think the problem everyone is having here is you are trying to understand LDS theology with your EV glasses on or are simply accepting our critics assumptions about us.

In an interview with Dr. David Paulsen, BYU professor of Phliosophy, Modern Reformation, an Evangelical Christian magazine explained it best:

MR: Please briefly explain to our readers how the LDS Church's doctrine of God is similar to or different from the traditional Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

DP: Our first Article of Faith affirms our belief in the New Testament Godhead. It states simply: "We believe in God the Eternal Father, in his son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost." We reject the traditional, but extra-biblical, idea that these three persons constitute one metaphysical substance, affirming rather that they constitute one perfectly united, and mutually indwelling, divine community. We use the word "God" to designate the divine community as well as to designate each individual divine person. Thus our understanding of the Godhead coincides closely with what is known in contemporary Christian theology as "social trinitarianism." This, we believe, is the model of the Godhead portrayed in the New Testament.

MR: Christian theologians from all the major traditions (Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) are united in their belief in monotheism (only one God in this and any other universe, existing beyond time and space). Is LDS theology monotheistic or is it polytheistic?

DP: As indicated above, Latter-day Saints, like other Christians and New Testament writers, affirm that there is a plurality of divine persons. Yet, at the same time, we witness (as our scriptures repeatedly declare) that "the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one God." Given the plurality of divine persons, how can there be but one God? In at least at least three ways: (1) there is only one perfectly united, mutually indwelling, divine community. We call that community "God" and there is only one such. (2) There is only one God the Father or fount of divinity. (3) There is only one divine nature or set of properties severally necessary and jointly sufficient for divinity.



In his explanation of the unity of God, LDS Apostle James Talmage, wrote:

"This unity is a type of completeness; the mind of any one member of the Trinity is the mind of the others; seeing as each of them does with the eye of perfection, they see and understand alike. Under any given conditions each would act in the same way, guided by the same principles of unerring justice and equity. The one-ness of the Godhead, to which the scriptures so abundantly testify, implies no mystical union of substance, nor any unnatural and therefore impossible blending of personality. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are as distinct in their persons and individualities as are any three personages in mortality. Yet their unity of purpose and operation is such as to make their edicts one, and their will the will of God." [James Talmage, "A Study of the Articles of Faith" (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Company, 1988), p 37.]​

So when I write that within LDS theology that Christ is God as well as the Son of God, I am not using "sneeky wording", but I am speaking the truth. Now perhaps some of you former LDS did not have a correct understanding of God when you were memebers of the Church, or you had a distorted understanding of LDS teachings. Either way, you misunderstandings does not constitute "sneeky words" on my part. I know of no LDS members who are aware of the 1830 version of the BofM and the present versions who think the change from "God" to "Son of God" constituted a change in doctrine, but only a clarification of the same thing.

Doc

~

Doc, if what you have said and quoted above is correct, then there would have been no need to change the BofM passages from "God" to "Son of God". However, they were changed and it did change the meaning of the passage.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Here is one. It is not heavy, but it is awkward.

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Why do you think this passage is "awkward"?

 

[CrownCaster]

Could you please provide quotes from OFICIAL Church doctrine? I simply am tired of people stringing quotes together from unofficial sources to criticize the Church. And I dont see anyting in there that specificly says God had sex with Mary. If you want an in depth answer go here.

Isnt this answer just a little too convenient and tired? The fact is that the quotes given are from people your church sustained as "prophets, seers, and revelators" and to say that they are not "official doctrine" is just silly. It is things that have been taught to the members and therefore you are telling me that your leaders throughout the church history that were, again, prophets, seers and revelators did not know what they were talking about. Cant bring out the official doctrine card every time the water gets cloudy then quote things that are not canonized to support your views.

And as far as it not saying "He had sex with Mary" I think you are mature and intelligent enough to see that it was said without being so crass. We really dont need to pretend that you dont see the forest for the trees, do we?

 

[CrownCaster]

I am equally disappointed that you, jezusfreak, and Grace would think that I am being sneaky with my words. Secondly I am disappointed that both of you as well as Crown Caster are so ignorant of LDS teachings of God. Alma quite clearly spelled out that we believe Christ to be God. And what was the reply, "Okay, but even still this means you believe and worship more then one God and that is strictly forbidden."

No we do not worship more than one God. I think the problem everyone is having here is you are trying to understand LDS theology with your EV glasses on or are simply accepting our critics assumptions about us.

I am quite offended at the lack of honesty and integrity you display with such outright twists of truth as this one and then pretend to be disappointed. I truly thought you had more backbone then to say such blatantly dishonest things. The mormon church has ALWAYS taught Jesus to be a seperate God from God the Father and you can deny it all day long but it only makes you dishonest. I was mormon. I know the teachings. Funny, when I left, my Bishop was very disgusted with my choice and said "So I guess you believe that tripe about God and Jesus being the same person now?" At least he was honest. I am trying so hard to be respectful in these threads and to show genuine concern and caring for the LDS posters but you make it so difficult with your soapbox dishonesty.

 

[CrownCaster]

I may be missing something here as this doesn't seem to be awkward to me. Adam and Eve had always had fellowship with the Lord...Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They were unstained from sin up until the time of satan tricking them and appealing to their flesh. AFTER they ate of the forbidden fruit and fell into sin....they were ashamed of themselves and was hidding thinking that God couldn't find them. God can't be in the presence of sin so this is why they were banished from the garden. If there is something else about it that confuses you or that I am not seeing, please tell me what it is. I would also like to know what other scriptures that you think are awkward. Please...

Thanks
Sandy

Yeah, I was confused as to what was awkward about that passage as well. Nothing awkward at all imo.

 

[jezusfreak]

I am quite offended at the lack of honesty and integrity you display with such outright twists of truth as this one and then pretend to be disappointed. I truly thought you had more backbone then to say such blatantly dishonest things. The mormon church has ALWAYS taught Jesus to be a seperate God from God the Father and you can deny it all day long but it only makes you dishonest. I was mormon. I know the teachings. Funny, when I left, my Bishop was very disgusted with my choice and said "So I guess you believe that tripe about God and Jesus being the same person now?" At least he was honest. I am trying so hard to be respectful in these threads and to show genuine concern and caring for the LDS posters but you make it so difficult with your soapbox dishonesty.

To refrain from saying something that I know I will regret...I want to say thank you to you for posting in "KINDER" words what I was thinking. If I had responded I'm quite sure that I would be on my knees right now repenting. Talk about a split tongue. I guess that he doesn't realize that a HALF truth presented as a WHOLE truth is still a LIE. Therefore he has just sinned according to the ten commandments. It is so sad to think that anyone would for a minute think that we are to "TRY" to keep these...if you break just ONE of them EVER..you are doomed. The whole point of them was to show us our need for a Saviour and how truly "UNWORTHY" we are. It is very hard to remain civil when presented with post's such as this one.

God Bless
Sandy

 

[A New Dawn]

Why do you think this passage is "awkward"?

I guess it is the fact that the voice of the Lord was walking in the garden.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

I guess it is the fact that the voice of the Lord was walking in the garden.

sounds travels.