|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Does the Book of Mormon contradict the Bible? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Peg.
Peg writes: quote: If the spirit of them lived on, then surely the spirit would be going elsewhere and not to the dust. By my reading, that scripture doesn't say anything about spirits going to the dust: when it says "both," it is referring to man and beast, not body and spirit. But, no matter: curiously enough, Mormons also believe that spirits die:
quote: From the LDS perspective, the Book of Mormon clarifies those things in the Bible that are meant to be taken as metaphors, but are most commonly taken as literal fact. In this case, "spiritual death" is being cut off from the presence of God, and this happens to the wicked after they die. This is the Mormon definition of Hell. ----- So, I've defeated your argument on two fronts:
----- Obviously, I have a bit of an advantage in this topic, since I read both the Bible and the Book of Mormon on a regular basis. So, to even the playing field, let me provide you with my sources:
Here is an online version of the Book of Mormon (the link goes to the Table of Contents). You can read it for yourself, if you'd like: then you'd know what it actually says, rather than what somebody else told you it says. Also, here is a link to the Topical Guide, which is an index in the back of the Mormon KJV that lists scriptures that relate to specific topics. For instance, look up the term "Death, Spiritual" (under "D"), and you'll come up with a list of scriptures from the Bible, the BoM, the D&C and the Pearl of Great Price that are related to the topic of spiritual death, as defined within Mormonism (there’s quite a large number of them). A simple reading of these materials would answer any questions anyone might have about what Mormon doctrine is. -Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Peg.
Peg writes: I think you've just proved my point about the mormon church not using the bible. I quoted you a scripture from the bible, and you chose to use the BOM to contradict it rather then use the bible to show me why I am wrong. Please enlighten me as to how else I can argue the point that the BoM doesn't contradict the Bible, if not with scriptures from the BoM. -----
Peg writes: Q. What is the difference between the Father, the Son & God?quote: "Father" is just a title. Jesus and God are two distinct beings. Jesus earned the title "Father" because He was the one who actually created the Earth (under God's direction).
quote: -----
Peg writes: Q. When & Where did/does this take place? quote: This is talking about the gathering of the Lost Tribes of Israel. Since some of your quotes have the footnote letters in them, I’m assuming you copied and pasted from lds.org? The footnotes there are hyperlinked, and you can find the answers to these questions pretty easily. Incidentally, foonote c from that scripture takes you to Genesis 49:10 (that’s in the Bible, by the way):
quote: -----
Peg writes: Q. How does this resurrection take place? In flesh or in spirit? Was Jesus resurrected in flesh or in spirit?By definition then, shouldn’t our resurrection be the same? -----
Peg writes: Q. What was the original image of God? Spiritual or Fleshly? Spiritual. All things were created spiritually before they were created physically (D&C 29:32). We interpret Genesis 2 (all things created before they were on the earth) as referring to this spiritual creation (that’s two references to the Bible so far). -----
Peg writes: Q. Is this referring to the BOM or the Bible?
quote: Neither one: it’s referring to Jesus Christ. ----- I'd like to write more, but I've got to go to class, and it's my wife's birthday tonight. I'll talk to you again later. Thanks, Peg. -Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
ochaye writes: Ok then, why don't Mormon Christians just make do with Genesis? I'm pretty sure you're just being deliberately dense (or "intellectually dishonest", as Taz would have it) at this point. Your question has been answered at least four or five times, by Michamus (a Mormon) and by Rahvin and by Perdition (not Mormons): you have so far decided to ignore their answers in favor of asking your stupid question again. I am also a Mormon. Here is the answer you've already been given: you can learn something new without contradicting something you learned before. We do not believe that all the teachings of Christ are to be found in Genesis, or even in the entire Bible, so the Book of Mormon is needed to provide us the missing pieces. Here is another answer, in case you decide to ignore the first again: the Book of Mormon serves as a second witness. If you are a district attorney, and you have one witness to a crime, would this be enough? What if there were two witnesses to the crime? Wouldn't you want both to testify, to make the case better? -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
Ochaye writes: But does [the Bible] give an indication that there is more to come? John 10:16 says:
quote: There are others, Jesus says. Why wouldn't these others also write scriptures? -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
ochaye writes: The priest in the order of Melchizedek was defined as incorruptible. Where does this definition appear?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: At the time when Mt 16:18 was spoken, had Christ's church begun or not? The Bible says "no" but the Book of Mormon says "yes," a contradiction. The church of God in the BoM had fallen apart by the time of Christ's ministry:
quote: When they say the "thirtieth year," they mean, "the thirtieth year since the sign of Christ's birth." Some Lamanites continued to follow the teachings of the Church, and some had the priesthood authority, but the Church itself was decentralized and disorganized. My personal understanding is that the Church is essentially gone by this time. So, by the time of Jesus's ministry, it is correct that there is no Church. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
No where in Hebrews 5 is it said that all priests of the order of Melchizedek are inccoruptible. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
ochaye writes: Other sheep. I can't help but think that you consider this to be a point somehow, but I'm not sure what, exactly, you think the point is. You can't expect me to take a two-word post seriously. Edited by Bluejay, : I didn't preserve his formatting. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: So do you propose that there was three hours of darkness in Palestine and three days of darkness in the Americas? Yep, that's what it says. Do you have a problem with this?If so, why? -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Ochaye.
ochaye writes: How is it that people have problems? Mares eat oats and does eat oats and I'll be home for Christmas.
I'll tell you what I'm talking about if you tell me what you're talking about. Edited by Bluejay, : Formatting -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: According to the Book of Mormon, God's grace is sufficient to save us only if we clean up our lives and live righteously first. The Bible teaches the opposite. We are unable to clean up our lives or to live righteously until after God saves us, and He saves us on the basis of His mercy and grace alone. quote: The LDS Church does not use the NIV, but I like the wording for this particular chapter. It seems that you've done a good job exposing a situation in which the Bible contradicts itself. But, there is a biblical precedent for the LDS belief in works, so I'm afraid Mormonism passes this test easily. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: So how do you reconcile your position with this passage from the Book of Mormon?
quote: What Samuel prophesied didn't happen exactly the way Samuel prophesied it. What you've exposed is a prophet making a minor mistake in his prophecy. This is akin to Moses smiting the rock when he was supposed to speak to it (Numbers 20: 7-12). The BoM contains a scripture that covers such problems, too:
quote: But, it didn't actually cover the entire earth, and the BoM doesn't say that it did, so you've got no contradiction with actual events. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: You are in good company if you think that James contradicts Paul. Martin Luther thought something similar. But I disagree. Ah, but, right there, you admit that the epistle to James can be interpreted to support the Mormon view. So, what you're saying is that the BoM only contradicts the Bible if James 2 is interpreted the way you interpret it? So, why do you think the interpretation of James 2 is off-topic? -----
kbertsche writes: Note that James does not use the word "saved," he uses the word "justified." Note also that the epistle to James includes this:
quote: Faith is made complete by works. This puts the operative power on works. Thus, works are an active part of salvation. On a related note: why did God give commandments if works don't matter? -----
kbertsche writes: It clearly does [contradict the Bible], as you seem to admit. Okay, so what you're saying is that, since the Bible contains two contradictory statements, if the BoM contradicts either one of these, it is false. I say the BoM teaching on this matter is clearly based on biblical precedent, despite your whining that you disagree with the interpretation. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: You are forced to the position that a prophecy in the Book of Mormon is wrong. Uncomfortable? What's so uncomfortable about it? I am equally comfortable with the belief that the Flood did not cover the entire Earth, despite what it says in the Bible. If I were a Nephite, and I saw all those cities being destroyed, and experienced the vapor of darkness for three days, do you really think it would cause a religious crisis for me if I found out that only my half of the planet was covered, instead of the whole thing? What if it were later revealed that Jesus had actually broken six loaves, or that he had really only fed 1000 people, instead of 4000? Would that shake your faith? Besides, as far as Samuel the Lamanite (or anybody he told) ever knew, the darkness did cover the entire earth. -----
kbertsche writes: And you have the odd situation of three hours' darkness in Palestine and three days' darkness in the Americas. Do Mormons propose a reason for the different lengths of time? We're talking about miracles, Kbertsche: the reason we propose is, "Goddidit." What else needs to be explained? -----
kbertsche writes: It seems much more likely to me that Joseph Smith simply mis-remembered the story, substituting "day" for "hour." Joseph Smith did have his own Bible, you know, and he spent a lot of time reading it (you've heard of the Joseph Smith Translation, I assume?). Edited by Bluejay, : little dashes between segments -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Kbertsche.
kbertsche writes: According to the Bible, prophets of God were not allowed any errors in their prophecy. You're not going to get far with this one. The Book of Mormon was an abridged compilation of many hundreds and hundreds of records that the Nephites had written. It's entirely possible that it wasn't Samuel's mistake, but the mistake of one of the abridgers, Mormon or Moroni. I meant for that to be in my last post, but I guess I thought the quote from Moroni about the possibility of faults in the BoM covered that, so I didn't explicitly state it. ----- At any rate, people are humans, and all humans make mistakes, even prophets. It was meant to be a sign for the Nephites, and it fulfilled its purpose. Thus, in my mind, the prophecy was fulfilled. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024