What PRECEPTS?

[ByGrace]

The mormon church teaches that the book of mormon is the "most correct book on earth" and that man will get closer to God by abiding by its PRECEPTS then any other book.

Please tell me what precepts those are.

The book of mormon says NOTHING of all of the rituals and things done in the temple which mormons say are of absolute necessity to live with God so it cant be that. What exactly is it?

 

[Wrigley]

The mormon church teaches that the book of mormon is the "most correct book on earth" and that man will get closer to God by abiding by its PRECEPTS then any other book.

Please tell me what precepts those are.

The book of mormon says NOTHING of all of the rituals and things done in the temple which mormons say are of absolute necessity to live with God so it cant be that. What exactly is it?

I've looked thru the other mormon "scriptures" looking for the description of the secret/sacred temple ceremonies. Can't seem to find them in those either. Or have I overlooked them?

 

[ByGrace]

I've looked thru the other mormon "scriptures" looking for the description of the secret/sacred temple ceremonies. Can't seem to find them in those either. Or have I overlooked them?

No, they are not there. That is part of the problem. The only "doctrine" that is in the book of mormon is the stuff taken from the Bible. Statements have been made stating that not even one word in the Bible came away uncorrupted but then thousands of those words were plagiarized in exact form into the book of mormon. Nowhere do they even give hint about

baptism for the dead
washings and anointings
endowment ceremony
eternal marriage
becoming a god
etc.

And, even the book of mormon rejects many of their practices like

polygamy
secret rituals
multiple gods
denial of the Trinity

They really need to read their "most correct book on earth"

 

[fatboys]

No, they are not there. That is part of the problem. The only "doctrine" that is in the book of mormon is the stuff taken from the Bible. Statements have been made stating that not even one word in the Bible came away uncorrupted but then thousands of those words were plagiarized in exact form into the book of mormon. Nowhere do they even give hint about

baptism for the dead
washings and anointings
endowment ceremony
eternal marriage
becoming a god
etc.

And, even the book of mormon rejects many of their practices like

polygamy
secret rituals
multiple gods
denial of the Trinity

They really need to read their "most correct book on earth"

FB:So you believe the Book is of God?

 

[Wrigley]

FB:So you believe the Book is of God?

You can't make that conclusion from the statement. You're assuming too much.

From the context of the first post, my question and the answer to my question, the conclusion you should come to is that if the mormons really believed what their extra scriptures states, you wouldn't have all those practices that can't be supported from your scriptures.

 

[Living4Him03]

I'm assuming that the extra practices not mentioned in the BOM or other Mormon scripture are due to the latter day revelation from their prophets, so they might argue that they don't need those things in their scripture because their prophet will add what practices, or has added practices, he sees fit/"feels" their god wants him to reveal.

Correct me if i'm wrong.

 

[TOmNossor]

Some Precepts taught in the BOM:

• Jesus Christ is our personal savior. He is the Son of God. He suffered and died for our sins that through Him we might have eternal life. Jesus Christ is mentioned far more frequently in the BOM than he is in the Bible.
• All are called to accept Him, be born again, and continue to follow Him all our lives.
• We should be Baptized by those with authority, but only when we choose to accept Christ (not as an infant).
• God loves all of us and he has prepared this world so that we might have joy and return to him.
• Pride is frequently the cause of turning away form God.

ByGrace,

Since LDS believe that it is possible to have vicariously preformed ordinances for the dead, it technically cannot be said that without these ordinances one cannot return to the fullness of God. This is in contrast to many in the Catholic Church pre-Vatican II who believed that those who were not Baptized Catholic were dam*ed. Since within a LDS framework those who do not participate in these ordinances while living will choose/receive every possible post-mortal kingdom including the fullness, based upon their mortal time; it must be true that those things that those things that have salvic efficacy are not solely linked to ordinances.



Living4Him03,

If I understand what you are saying you are correct. However since the D+C is scripture, the outline of all our beliefs seems to be contained in the 4 standard works.



Charity, TOm

 

[ByGrace]

Some Precepts taught in the BOM:

• Jesus Christ is our personal savior. He is the Son of God. He suffered and died for our sins that through Him we might have eternal life. Jesus Christ is mentioned far more frequently in the BOM than he is in the Bible.
• All are called to accept Him, be born again, and continue to follow Him all our lives.
• We should be Baptized by those with authority, but only when we choose to accept Christ (not as an infant).
• God loves all of us and he has prepared this world so that we might have joy and return to him.
• Pride is frequently the cause of turning away form God.

Charity, TOm

None of these things you claim are anything new except your idea of one having authority to baptise. Please tell me when John the Baptist was given the priesthood you claim in all of his wilderness wanderings eating locusts and honey.

You say the book of mormon is the most correct book on earth but then it says nothing new. as far as the book of mormon mentioning Jesus more then the Bible that is just ludicrous. The entire Bible is pointing to the arrival and the work of Messiah. Your book of mormon just goes to unreal places and calls Him by name long before He was revealed by name in the Bible even.

Please, as I ask, show me these more correct precepts your book of mormon teaches that are not taught in the Bible and therefore required an un-biblical account to be written.

 

[bruiser]

They really need to read their "most correct book on earth"

The Book of Mormon is a history of the people, brought forth for:

1. show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers

2. and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever

3. And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD, manifesting himself unto all nations (Book of Mormon Title Page)

The Doctrine and Covenants is where you'll find information about

baptism for the dead
washings and anointings
endowment ceremony
eternal marriage
becoming a god
etc.

Will it spell out details and wording of the ordinances and covenants of the temple? No, but that's for people who are willing to make those covenants to receive. But the principles of each one of those items you listed are in the D&C in plainess, which outlines the administration of the Lord's kingdom on the Earth. The BoM and D&C were written for different purposes, and so you may not find those Doctrines spelled out in the same way in the BoM as they are in the D&C. Please do not misconstrue: I am NOT saying that either book is less true for this reason.

As for the [apparent] plagiarism, let me give you an example from the same article I have referred you to in the past regarding translation.

http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1977.htm/ensign%20september%201977.htm/by%20the%20gift%20and%20power%20of%20god%20.htm?fn=document-frameset.htm$f=templates$3.0

And I'm paraphrasing quite a bit: If Joseph Smith were translating the Book of Mormon, by whatever means you'd like to consider, and he came across a passage that was familiar, would it not be logical for him to consult the Bible and copy the already translated text (from Isaiah for instance), checking it to make sure it was consistant with the work he was translating? After all, what better way to check your work than with God's word from the Bible? We know from the Nephites' records that they had access to OT writings from before they left Jerusalem, so it is entirely plausible that they would insert some writings from earlier prophets.

~b

 

[bruiser]

None of these things you claim are anything new except your idea of one having authority to baptise. Please tell me when John the Baptist was given the priesthood you claim in all of his wilderness wanderings eating locusts and honey.

As for when and who see http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/84/27-28#27 ... I would say well before the locusts and honey

He was a literal descendant of Aaron... remember who his father was and where he worked.

~b

 

[TOmNossor]

None of these things you claim are anything new except your idea of one having authority to baptise. Please tell me when John the Baptist was given the priesthood you claim in all of his wilderness wanderings eating locusts and honey.

You say the book of mormon is the most correct book on earth but then it says nothing new. as far as the book of mormon mentioning Jesus more then the Bible that is just ludicrous. The entire Bible is pointing to the arrival and the work of Messiah. Your book of mormon just goes to unreal places and calls Him by name long before He was revealed by name in the Bible even.

Please, as I ask, show me these more correct precepts your book of mormon teaches that are not taught in the Bible and therefore required an un-biblical account to be written.

ByGrace:

None of these things you claim are anything new except your idea of one having authority to baptise. Please tell me when John the Baptist was given the priesthood you claim in all of his wilderness wanderings eating locusts and honey.



TOm:

John the Baptist was a descendant of Aaron from both his mother’s and father’s side of the family. In the Old Testament (the time of importance here) the Aaronic priesthood was withheld from all but the descendants of Aaron (remember Moses originally said that all would receive the priesthood).



ByGrace:

You say the book of mormon is the most correct book on earth but then it says nothing new. as far as the book of mormon mentioning Jesus more then the Bible that is just ludicrous. The entire Bible is pointing to the arrival and the work of Messiah. Your book of mormon just goes to unreal places and calls Him by name long before He was revealed by name in the Bible even.



TOm:

I personally find that the BOM and the Bible really have very similar messages. In fact I would say virtually identical in many respects. I would also say the entire BOM is pointing to Jesus Christ. The BOM is Another Testament of Jesus Christ. I do not wish to tell you that you cannot follow the Bible and return to the fullness of God. I just say that many people who didn’t follow the Bible have come to God by following the BOM and the Bible. If you say that God has called you out of the CoJCoLDS, I am not one to tell you that you are on the path to destruction. If you left the CoJCoLDS thinking that it was a church that pointed to Joseph and not Christ, then you missed the point. But again, this does not mean in my mind that you are necessarily on the path to destruction. I hope to one day follow God in ever way. To have my will swallowed up in the will of God. I believe you can do this and never choose to be a LDS or return to the CoJCoLDS. I believe there is some danger in believing or promoting lies about the CoJCoLDS because if this is done for human reasons, this would not be following God. For ME, following God is being a LDS.



ByGrace:
Please, as I ask, show me these more correct precepts your book of mormon teaches that are not taught in the Bible and therefore required an un-biblical account to be written.



TOm:

I believe the BOM and the Bible complement each other. I believe that the apostasy is clearer in the BOM. I believe restricting Baptism to those accountable is clearer in the BOM. I believe that the call to be born again is clearer in the BOM.

Interestingly enough, I believe that the Bible is still quite vague, but it points to the result of following its teachings a little clearer than the BOM. The Bible is slightly clearer on deification than is the BOM, but even the Bible requires clarification by modern prophets (or the Early Church Fathers) to understand this truth.

And of course I would reject the statement that the BOM is unbiblical.



Charity, TOm

 

[TruthPreacher]

The mormon church teaches that the book of mormon is the "most correct book on earth" and that man will get closer to God by abiding by its PRECEPTS then any other book.

Please tell me what precepts those are.

The book of mormon says NOTHING of all of the rituals and things done in the temple which mormons say are of absolute necessity to live with God so it cant be that. What exactly is it?

Why is so much time wasted on the Mormons You might as well build a Mormon Section on this site just dedicated to them.

 

[bruiser]

Why is so much time wasted on the Mormons You might as well build a Mormon Section on this site just dedicated to them.

I'm sorry that you feel that talking about doctrine is a waste of time, or that Mormons are a waste of time, or both, but that's what CF is about... communication.

~b

 

[TruthPreacher]

I'm sorry that you feel that talking about doctrine is a waste of time, or that Mormons are a waste of time, or both, but that's what CF is about... communication.

~b

I never said it was a waste of time. Don't place words in my mouth. I said make them their own area since the discussions are taking up so much room. Catholics get their own section why not mormons? It was a simple point I made that was all.

In the sense that the people are a waste However the religion is a waste.

In Truth,
Joshua

 

[TruthPreacher]

Furthermore is being a muslim a waste of time? How about a voodoo worshipper? How about a satanist? Of course these are complete wastes of time. ANything that is false is vain. The mormon religion is false therefore it is vain and a waste of time. Now discussing doctrine that is a wonderful endeavor. Obviously I don't think doctrine is a waste if it is true doctrine of the true church. But most of what I see here is not. And the Mormon discussions take up way too much space in this forum. Let them have a subdivision for all those that feel inclined to study unbiblical writings.

In Truth,
Joshua

 

[ByGrace]

The Book of Mormon is a history of the people, brought forth for:

1. show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers

2. and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever

3. And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD, manifesting himself unto all nations ~b

Oh, thanks for that. I sure can see now why we need the book of mormon. None of that is even mentioned in the Bible.

Again I ask; please show me these new and wonderful precepts that the book of mormon brings about that shows it is the most correct book on earth and will bring a person closer to God then any other. Regurgitating the ramblings of the front page does not cut it.

As far as the d and c. Please, give me a break. Before you start referencing them, lets at least take out all of the failed prophecies and mistakes in there before you call them revelations. That book is almost as laughable as the pearl of great price.

 

[ByGrace]

And I'm paraphrasing quite a bit: If Joseph Smith were translating the Book of Mormon, by whatever means you'd like to consider, and he came across a passage that was familiar, would it not be logical for him to consult the Bible and copy the already translated text (from Isaiah for instance), checking it to make sure it was consistant with the work he was translating? After all, what better way to check your work than with God's word from the Bible? We know from the Nephites' records that they had access to OT writings from before they left Jerusalem, so it is entirely plausible that they would insert some writings from earlier prophets.

~b

Is this how you explain that joe included the italicized words in the Bible that show words that man included to make the text flow and called it revelation from God?? If it was a translation it would not have had those words included as the original manuscripts did not have them but, again, were of man. At least he could have italicized them so we didnt see how ignorant he was of what they meant.

 

[ByGrace]

TOm:

John the Baptist was a descendant of Aaron from both his mother’s and father’s side of the family. In the Old Testament (the time of importance here) the Aaronic priesthood was withheld from all but the descendants of Aaron (remember Moses originally said that all would receive the priesthood).




Charity, TOm

Since we are on the topic of the aaronic priesthood, please show me where it was extended to others outside of whom it was originally intended. It is a Jewish priesthood and for a specific tribe. Also, it says that deacons are to be specific things and all of them rule out 12 year old boys. It also does not teach of any role of "teacher" as an office.

 

[ByGrace]

Furthermore is being a muslim a waste of time? How about a voodoo worshipper? How about a satanist? Of course these are complete wastes of time. ANything that is false is vain. The mormon religion is false therefore it is vain and a waste of time. Now discussing doctrine that is a wonderful endeavor. Obviously I don't think doctrine is a waste if it is true doctrine of the true church. But most of what I see here is not. And the Mormon discussions take up way too much space in this forum. Let them have a subdivision for all those that feel inclined to study unbiblical writings.

In Truth,
Joshua

Yeah, your right joshua, spreading the Gospel to those who are without is just a waste of time. It wasnt a command of the Savior or anything.

 

[TOmNossor]

Since we are on the topic of the aaronic priesthood, please show me where it was extended to others outside of whom it was originally intended. It is a Jewish priesthood and for a specific tribe. Also, it says that deacons are to be specific things and all of them rule out 12 year old boys. It also does not teach of any role of "teacher" as an office.

ByGrace,



When you say “it” I presume you mean the Bible. Or perhaps you mean the Bible and the BOM.

When the Priesthood that is named Aaronic (but is not identical to the old testament Aaronic Priesthood) was extended was during the restoration.

Also, the D+C explains the offices and ages.

Also, we really do not know if this was the Priesthood that Moses thought would be for “all” the Jews, because that seems to have not manifested itself in the Old Testament. Perhaps it would have been more similar than we might expect, but the Laws of Moses were given when the chosen people rebelled. The priesthood was only given to Aaron and his descendants when the people rebelled. Who knows what it would have been like had it been given to all Jews?



Charity, TOm