can we trust the book of Mormon?

this is a bad assumption. if you really want me to go into, i will, but this is not the place. suffice to say that there is no reason at all to think god wrote ANY of the bible let alone all of it. the bible is a collection of books. the books are often collections of works by separate authors (see the books of psalms: there's five of them). more over, they were all written and collected and canonized at different times. parts of the tanakh (ot) are still not considered holy (such as the book of psalms)i have another thread here talking about the date of the writing of deuteronomy, and how it MAY be during the time the book of kings is set.there is also no reason to assume those verse are refering to the bible has a whole. much of the bible as we know it today didn't exist when those words were written. some of it existed, but was collected together or canonized by then. the verses are most likely refering JUST TO THE BOOKS THAT CONTAIN THEM.i actually have a separate thread here debating

well, reading skills help.

quote:

---

Luk 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

---

luke 1:1 says that there are MANY gospels at the time of his writing. luke admits that he wasn't there in verse 2. verse 3 seems to claim some kind of divine understanding.what luke is doing is looking at these gospels, and copying bits he agrees with or can verify in other gospels, and fitting them all into one story. it's attempt to make one solid gospel out of a mess of gospels that were floating around. luke-acts is the first real attempt at a christian canon.sound like the work of god to you? sounds like the work of an editor to me. but, you know, that's just what luke says of himself.you have to actually look at and read the books. paul's letters -- did god write them? no, paul did. each book has a different form, intended audience, context, and author(s). you can't look at psalms and say with any reasonable intelligence that it was the work of god. it credits david as writing half of them TO god.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 11-10-2004 02:46 AM

You missed my point. You are working on the assumption that the Bible, as we know it, is the Word of God. You have decided this to be so and are comparing the BoM to it, based on this assumption.I'm making no assumptions. Here are two books, both claiming to be the word of God. How can you reject one and accept the other without a priori assumptions?What criteria have you applied to the Bible when you decided it's the word of God? Have you applied the same criteria to the BoM and if yes, how did the BoM fail ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

I've got a leaflet from the local nutter preching down the road, claiming that it's the word of God. Its unambiguous and I've got the reading skills to understand it clearly. Does that mean it is the word of God ?!You seem to be implying that the Bible doesn't claim to be the word of God. If that's the case then we're debating a moot point.If, however, you think that the Bible is and the BoM isn't, I have to ask you how do you know without prior assumptions? Please see my post to PecosGeorge above.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

Thank you.

Isaiah 8:20 takes care of my needs. I miss loads of points, sorry it was yours this time.

quote:

---

What criteria have you applied to the Bible when you decided it's the word of God? Have you applied the same criteria to the BoM and if yes, how did the BoM fail ?

---

I will first start with a few ideas that DO NOT prove that the Bible is the word of God, but they do keep it from being ruled out and adds to the body of evidence of its authenticity.
Historical accuracy — Again, a book can be accurate historically but not be inspired by God. (Can be discussed further if needed)Consistency of the message from book to book — The whole of the Book is about events leading up to, during and the meaning of Jesus’ death.No Contradictions — I know you are laughing now. It is even clear to me that there are contradictions in the bible. Just look at Mat 10:9-10, Mark 6:8-9 and Luke 9:3 all state different things about what to take on the disciples journey (sandals and staff). There are explanations for these contradictions that can be discussed further if anybody wants.The first reason that I know the Bible is the word of God is the hundreds of prophecies that have come true.One example is in Isaiah 13:19-20, he predicts the destruction of Babylon and that it will never be built upon again.Another are all the messianic prophesies throughout the Old Testament. One remarkable prophesy is in Daniel 9:25 where he predicts when Jesus presents himself as the Messiah to the day. The prophecy states that 69 weeks of years (173,880 days) after the command goes forth to restore and rebuild the city of Jerusalem the Messiah will come. If we count forward 173,880 days from March 14th 445 B.C. we arrive at April 6th 32 A.D.! In another thread we can confirm/debate the dates March 14th 445 BC and April 6th 32 AD.If all the prophesies of the Bible have come or will come true, then the only reasonable explanation is that they were divinely inspired.
God says in Isaiah 41:21-23:

quote:

---

21 "Present your case," says the LORD . "Set forth your arguments," says Jacob's King.22 "Bring in your idols to tell us what is going to happen. Tell us what the former things were, so that we may consider them and know their final outcome. Or declare to us the things to come, 23 tell us what the future holds, so we may know that you are gods. Do something, whether good or bad, so that we will be dismayed and filled with fear.

---

God wants you to see that prophesies prove the authorship of the Bible.The second reason is that I have applied it to my life and have seen the results. You may reject this as non scientific or subjective but you asked why I beleive the Bible is the word of God. I have accepted Jesus as my savior and have been able to change my life and love others as never before. I have put God’s word to work in my life and have seen the promises of the Bible fulfilled as well as in others that have done the same. I have seen marriages get back together, illnesses cured for no other reason, and have seen my resources stretched and multiplied to help others in need with no other explanation that I can think of, except for prayer to God. I have not experienced any other self help book, theory or idea’s that can do that.Applying these to the other two books claiming God's inspiration the BoM and Koran, they do not hold up as well.*Edited to correct bible passage.This message has been edited by Robb, 11-10-2004 10:04 AM

The parts about Biblical confirmation could certainly be debated, but this is not the thread for that. I can say though, as a Christian, you will find it very hard to support any of those contentions. Okay, but that is only an unsupported assertion. Unless you can give specific examples it has no weight.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Robb, do you believe that there is one Christian Bible?

---

I beleive there is one message from God known as the Bible.

quote:

---

Robb, do you believe that there is one Christian Bible?

---

I beleive there is one message from God known as the Bible.

But is that entity, the Bible, the same book for all Christians?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Isaiah 13 says that the Medes will destroy Babylon.They didn't. The Persians conquered the Medes, and then took Babylon peacefully - even making it a seat of rule. Babylon was still there in the days of Alexander - it was only abandoned in the Seleucid period.The Daniel prophecy is not as you say either - it is not even true that we know exactly when Jesus presented himself as Messiah, so how can we say that Daniel predicted it to the day ?Why would God want me to be convinced by false claims of fulfilled prophecies ?This message has been edited by PaulK, 11-10-2004 10:45 AM

quote:

---

But is that entity, the Bible, the same book for all Christians?

---

No, Christians use different books, most Catholics use AKJV, Mormons use the Book of Mormon as well as the Bible (I think the use the AKJV as well). Jehova Witnesses use their own translation. These translations are debated as to which is the best translation or, as some beleive, that the AKJV is the only word of God and other translations are wrong. I know that all translations have led people to Christ and therefore think that they are all valid.I am sorry if I am not answering your question. If I have not answered it with this post let me know.Just for the record I am not trying to bash Mormons or anyone else with different christian beleifs than my own. I beleive that if a denomination teaches that Jesus is the only way to salvation, then they are saved and are fellow Christians. We do and will differ over doctrine and what scripture means, but we all must realize that Jesus is the center of what we beleive and not religion.

Hi Robb,let's go through your points one by one:* Historical accuracy I agree with you that the Bible is better supported historically than the BoM. But historically accuracy in itself doesn't prove divine origin or accuracy of content. The latest Steven Pressfeld novel I read is historically very accurate, but it describes a fictional story. If you disagree with this, we can open a new thread and discuss it further.* Consistency of the message from book to book. I strongly disagree. There are huge dogmatic inconsistencies between the O.T and the N.T. In the O.T we have a vengeful, petty deity who smites people who oppose his chosen ones. In the N.T we have a hippy, all loving, deity who doesn't directly interfere in human affairs but sends his 'son' to die so he can comply with his sacrificial 'rules', though no such rules have been mentioned before. For some very thorough arguments on this go here : Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins* No Contradictions . ...what can I say? I'm not laughing but this has been covered to death here. There are tons of factual errors ( how many legs do insects have?), mistranslations (7000 or 70000 soldiers?) and internal contradictions (compare Matthew's resurrection account against the others ). They can all be 'explained' away, but very few can be satisfactorily answered. I think there may be some active threads on this already, but if there aren't feel free to open a new one and I'll join you.* Biblical Prophecy . My favourite subject. Sadly, this is not the thread to discuss this, but -guess what- I've already started a new thread
Here . Hopefully I'll see you there.* Personal experience . I totally believe you when you say your life has improved as a result of your faith. But you have to realise that if that was the result of believing in the Bible, then only Christians would have their lives improved in similar ways. Mormons, Muslims, etc. all have their owm personal experiences that they atrribute to their faith. I don't think you can claim this as proof of the divine origin of the Bible over the BoM.So, overall, Personal Experience and Historical Accuracy are irrelevant. Consistency of message doesn't even apply in the BoM case (it's only one book by one author). That leaves us with the Contradictions and Prophecy issues.Prophecy, we can discuss Here . like I said.Do you know of any contradictions in the BoM? If there weren't any, would you accept it as the word of God ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

If you are prepared to assume that the Book of Mormon is genuine then it contains far more impressive prophecies than the Bible. (Of course if you acvcept that it is a 19th Century creation the after-the-fact "prophecies" are rather less convincing)Try this: Scriptures(as an example verse 4 states:
" Yea, even six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem, a prophet would the Lord God raise up among the cJewseven a Messiah, or, in other words, a Savior of the world."
) The setting is the reign of Zedekaiah (stated in chapter 1)